Please help me in my writing assignment

CHE 320 Safety, Engineering Ethics and

Professionalism Fall 2016

The Precautionary Principle

“The” Precautionary Principle

• Decision-making framework used in risk management and legal/policy conflicts around the world • Often a formal part of legislative process (EU) • Embraced internationally since 1982 (UN World

Charter for Nature)

• Justification for making decisions that may (or may not) cause harm, in the absence of indisputable information.

• Formalism of traditional “cautionary” aphorisms: • “Look before you leap.” • “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” • “Better safe than sorry.”

“The” Precautionary Principle

• Many definitions exist, but basically follow this outline: • Suppose a possibly risky action or policy (e.g. using a

new, untested pesticide) is being considered. • There is a possibility of harm to the public or the

environment (e.g. toxicity to people, birds, animals). • Experts disagree about whether or not the pesticide

is more toxic than other alternatives. • The proponents (i.e. those who want to use the

pesticide) bear the burden of proof to demonstrate that the action is not harmful.

• Formalizes a moral responsibility to protect the public and environment from a potential exposure to harm.

“The” Precautionary Principle

• All (14!) formulations are based on two major concepts: • A need to anticipate harm before it can occur.

 Proponent must establish that no harm can occur. • Recognition of potential risk vs. cost and feasibility.

 Cost-benefit of not acting vs. seeking information.

• Strong vs. Weak Formulations • Strong = regulation of any potentially averse activity,

regardless of quality of evidence and economic cost • “No regrets” (Nothing is safe unless proved so)

• Weak = take preventive action, despite a lack of good

evidence, if risk is serious or irreversible (seat belts)

“The” Precautionary Principle

• Non-Preclusion PP • Scientific uncertainty does not preclude regulation (or

abandonment) of potentially unsafe activities.

• Margin of Safety PP • Regulation should enforce a margin of safety below the

minimum observed or predicted adverse effect.

• Best Available Technology PP • Uncertain activities should use the best available technology to

minimize the harm arising from any potential risk.

• Prohibitory PP • Uncertain activities should not be allowed until the proponent

has demonstrated a lack of appreciable risk or harm.

“The” Precautionary Principle

• Arguments against precautionary principle: • “Strong” PP’s may prevent innovation and adoption of

beneficial new technologies. • Current technologies often cause harm or risk, or

leave the evolving needs of society unmet. • Application of the PP thus unnecessarily exposes

society to risk, by enforcing a deficient status quo.

• “The precautionary principle, properly applied, forbids the [application of the] precautionary principle.”

- Michael Crichton, State of Fear

“The” Precautionary Principle

• Arguments against precautionary principle: • Application of PP’s can block innovation and progress.

• Positive benefits of a potential technology are often not considered (availability and negative halo effects).

• Concerns over vagueness and plausibility. • PP’s call for inaction except when that action is “safe”. • The exact threshold value for “safe” vs. “harmful” is rarely

specified (or difficult to quantify). • Any potential harm, no matter how unlikely, is sufficient to

prevent adoption of a technology or policy

Case Example: Pesticide Spraying

• Your company grows barley for the brewing industry. There is a growing problem of insects destroying the barley, so your supervisor suggests spraying the fields with a newly-developed insecticide. There is considerable scientific disagreement about the environmental fate of the new chemical. The acute and long-term health hazards of exposure or ingestion of the pesticide (as well as any impurities or breakdown products) have only been studied using simple, qualitative assays.

• Analyze this situation using the concept of the Precautionary Principle.

Adapted from “The Precautionary Principle in Action: A Handbook”, 1st ed. 1998. Tickner, Raffensperger and Myers. The Science and Environmental Health Network. http://www.sehn.org/rtfdocs/handbook-rtf.rtf