The Politics of Air Bag Safety

A Competition Among Problem Definitions

Dados Bibliográficos

ID6328299
AutoresDavid J Houston (0000-0001-5001-0301, University of Tennessee at Knoxville), Lilliard E Richardson (0000-0003-2716-3101, University of Missouri)
Ano2000
Volume28
Fascículo3
Páginas485-501
Data de publicação2000-08-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoPolicy Studies Journal (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0190-292X • E-ISSN: 1541-0072
EditoraWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/j.1541-0072.2000.tb02044.x
OpenAlexW2031659097
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas17
Referências citadas9

In light of 121 deaths attributed to air bag deployments, mainly to children and adults of small stature, recent policy debate has focused on modifying current Federal automotive air bag regulations. A problem definition perspective is employed to understand the nature of this debate. Utilizing a content analysis of the official record of one U.S. House and two U. S. Senate hearings, it is argued that four problem definitions characterize the debate over air bag safety: behavioral, regulatory, technological, and corporate greed. Furthermore, it is argued that a problem definition perspective offers a better explanation of recent changes to Federal air bag regulations than do pluralist, elitist, and principal‐agent models

Air pollution · Automotive industry · Clean Air Act · Competition (biology · Computer security · Economics · Law and economics · Perspective (graphical · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Principal (computer security · Public economics · Computer Science · Engineering · Law · Policy Transfer and Learning · Public Administration · Regulation and Compliance Studies · Risk Perception and Management