Precautionary principle
The precautionary principle is a guiding approach for decision-making, particularly in public policy, that emphasizes minimizing potential harm in situations characterized by uncertainty. It suggests that when there is scientific evidence indicating that an action or policy could cause harm—despite inconclusive evidence—preventive measures should be taken. This principle is often invoked in environmental contexts, such as addressing issues related to climate change, biodiversity, and food safety, as well as in consumer protection and technological development.
The essence of the precautionary principle can be summed up with phrases like "Prevention is better than cure" and "Better safe than sorry." It is utilized by various institutions, including international organizations and national governments, to guide actions that may impact human health, wildlife, or ecosystems. There are varying interpretations of the principle, with stronger formulations advocating for intervention based solely on the possibility of harm, while weaker versions allow for action in the face of uncertainty but impose a heavier burden of proof on those seeking to intervene.
The principle has both advocates and detractors; supporters appreciate its broad applicability and flexibility, while critics argue that it may lead to inaction or premature abandonment of beneficial innovations due to a lack of consensus on what constitutes reasonable evidence of harm. Ultimately, the precautionary principle serves as a complex but important framework for navigating risk in a rapidly changing world.
On this Page
Subject Terms
Precautionary principle
DEFINITION: Heuristic device for judging an action or a policy, usually in the public realm, that stresses the need to minimize harm in the context of uncertainty about the effects of that action or policy
The precautionary principle is usually applied in the decision-making processes of institutions with a responsibility to prevent harm, including international organizations such as the United Nations and the European Union, national governments, and other regulatory bodies. The principle is often used in decisions regarding actions or policies that may have impacts on the environment.
The precautionary principle might be summarized simply as “Prevention is better than cure” or “Better safe than sorry.” The principle is invoked when some scientific evidence arises that a particular action or policy results in harm, but the evidence is inconclusive and there is still time for preventive action. The harm might be to people, the environment, animal life, or plant life, and it might be irreversible, as in the case of species loss. The practical significance of the precautionary principle is its denial that a lack of certainty is adequate reason to refrain from taking preventive action or ceasing a potentially harmful action.
When the principle is applied by decision makers who are considering whether to prohibit, cease, or outlaw an action or policy, several factors are important: the possible severity of the alleged harm; the likelihood of such harm occurring; the costs of preventing such harm; and economic costs in general, including the costs of adopting alternatives. The principle is applied in many areas of public policy, including those concerned with global warming and air pollution, environmental protection and the maintenance of biodiversity, safety issues regarding food and genetically modified foodstuffs, consumer protection law, and technological development. The precautionary principle is incorporated into the 1982 United Nations World Charter for Nature, and it is one of the twenty-seven principles of the Rio Declaration made at the 1992 Earth Summit.
Stronger and weaker formulations of the principle have been expressed. The strongest versions of the principle hold that the mere possibility of harm to human well-being or the environment is sufficient grounds for intervention, even if the evidence is speculative and the potential costs of intervention are high. Weaker versions hold that action in the face of scientific uncertainty is permissible but not required. According to weaker versions, the burden of proof necessary for intervention is greater and tends to fall on those demanding precautionary action.
The precautionary principle has both supporters and critics. Supporters of the principle cite its flexibility and range of applications, but many worry that a lack of political can result in a failure to uphold the principle. Major policy decisions involve many different interest groups, such as corporations, environmentalists, and consumers, and lack of consensus about what counts as harm can lead to the principle being interpreted broadly to excuse inaction. Critics of the principle worry that it is applied too readily, without agreement on what counts as reasonable scientific evidence of harm. As a result, they argue, policies or technologies might be abandoned prematurely. All new innovations carry some degree of risk, critics assert, and this must be considered alongside and offset against the costs of not adopting new innovations and technology, as well as the costs associated with alternatives.
Bibliography
Dinneen, Nathan. "Precautionary Discourse." Politics and the Life Sciences 32.1 (2013): 2–21. Print.
Gignon, Maxime, et al. "The Precautionary Principle: Is It Safe." European Journal of Health Law 20.3 (2013): 261–70. Print.
Goklany, Indur M. The Precautionary Principle: A Critical Appraisal of Environmental Risk Assessment. Washington: Cato Inst., 2001. Print.
Hartzell-Nichols, Lauren. "From 'the' Precautionary Principle to Precautionary Principles." Ethics, Policy & Environment 16.3 (2013): 308–20. Print.
Hopster, Jeroen. "Climate Uncertainty, Real Possibilities and the Precautionary Price." Erkenntnis, vol. 88, Aug. 2023, pp. 2431-2447, doi.org/10.1007/s10670-021-00461-2. Accessed 22 July 2024.
Rodrigue, Majambere. "The Precautionary Principle in Environmental Law." Open Journal of Social Sciences, vol. 11, no. 12, Dec. 2023, doi.org/10.4236/jss.2023.1112037. Accessed 22 July 2024.
Sunstein, Cass R. Laws of Fear: Beyond the Precautionary Principle. New York: Cambridge UP, 2005. Print.
Whiteside, Kerry H. Precautionary Politics: Principle and Practice in Confronting Environmental Risk. Cambridge: MIT P, 2006. Print.