ABSTRACT

A colleague and I spent 1981 working with the government agency responsible for controlling air pollution in the Los Angeles basin, trying to help them formulate a new strategy after they had exhausted the one that had launched their agency 30 years earlier.3 The first step in thinking about a new strategy was to have a broad understanding of the air pollution problem-not just in scientific or statistical terms, but how the problem was perceived by those who were concerned with its conse-

quences and control. That meant talking to a lot of people-about a hundred interviews, as I recall-who had informed, but diverse view­ points and interests in air pollution control. After the first dozen or so interviews, it was apparent that the views were polarized:

• Some believed that the air pollution problem in the Los Angeles basin was highly exaggerated. To be sure, smog was a public nuisance, like a smelly meat packing plant. It might make the eyes water; but people who complained of health problems were probably overly sensitive or in a minority that would complain no matter where they were. The problem should be treated as a public nuisance and abated through reasonable regulations.