MARC Record from marc_columbia

LEADER: 03208fam a2200409 a 4500
001 1609745
005 20220608195759.0
008 920928s1993 dcua b 000 0 eng
010 $a 92035079
020 $a0844738212
020 $a0844738204 (pbk.)
035 $a(OCoLC)26809677
035 $a(OCoLC)ocm26809677
035 $9AKL6605CU
035 $a(NNC)1609745
035 $a1609745
040 $aDLC$cDLC$dDLC$dOrLoB
043 $an-us---$an-us-ca
050 00 $aHF5773.L3$bV57 1993
082 00 $a658.5/64$220
100 1 $aViscusi, W. Kip.$0http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n78095398
245 10 $aProduct-risk labeling :$ba federal responsibility /$cW. Kip Viscusi.
260 $aWashington, D.C. :$bAEI Press ;$aLanham, Md. :$bDistributed by arrangement with UPA,$c1993.
300 $aix, 83 pages :$billustrations ;$c23 cm.
336 $atext$btxt$2rdacontent
337 $aunmediated$bn$2rdamedia
490 1 $aAEI studies in regulation and federalism
504 $aIncludes bibliographical references.
505 0 $aForeword / Christopher C. DeMuth -- 1. Hazard Warnings. Hazard Warnings as a Regulatory Policy. Hazard Warnings and the Federalism Debate. Principal Findings -- 2. State Warnings for Food, Drugs, Cosmetics, and Medical Devices. California's Proposition 65. Summary of State Warnings Regulations -- 3. Policy Scope and Warnings Criteria. Product Coverage of State Labeling Regulations. Thresholds for Warnings. Listed Chemicals in California. Acceptable Warnings Methods. National Market Share Affected. International Trade Repercussions -- 4. Costs of Compliance, Warnings, and Reformulation. Costs of Testing and Litigation. Reformulation Costs. Labeling and Distribution Costs -- 5. Do Consumers Benefit from Informational Costs? Informational Costs. Northwestern University Test Sample -- 6. Conclusion -- Appendix: Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986.
520 $aCalifornia's Proposition 65, the first major state warnings effort, requires that manufacturers inform the public about the risks of cancer or reproductive toxicity that are posed by their products. Now eight other states have bills pending before their legislatures or are considering measures like Proposition 65. This volume asks, Would such warnings benefit the public?
520 8 $aOr would some labeling strategies actually distort consumers' perceptions of relative risks and impair their ability to make informed choices?
520 8 $aThis book examines state regulations for hazard warnings - for foods, for drugs, and for medical devices - and demonstrates why a federal warnings approach would be preferable. Conducted at the national level, product-risk labeling could adopt a standardized warnings vocabulary and avoid the fragmentation of national markets that would be so costly for our economy.
650 0 $aLabels$xLaw and legislation$xCompliance costs$zCalifornia.
650 0 $aConsumer goods$xLabeling$xEconomic aspects$zUnited States.
650 0 $aRisk communication$xEconomic aspects$zUnited States.
830 0 $aAEI studies in regulation and federalism.$0http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n93022429
852 00 $boff,bus$hHF5773.L3$iV57 1993