Precautionary principle important for decision-makers, new research shows

[Guest guest]

Precautionary principle important for decision-makers, new research shows

The European Environment Agency has published a new report that looks at how

the precautionary principle has, or hasn't been applied to a wide range of

public health hazards over the past century, ranging from chemical

contamination of the Great Lakes and mad cow disease to ozone layer damage.

The report, Late lessons from early warnings: the precautionary principle

1896-2000, looks at problems that have arisen in Europe and the US, and is

intended to help improve mutual understanding between the two regions on the

often-disputed use of the precautionary principle in policy making.

Twelve key lessons for decision-making have emerged from the EEA's analysis

of the 14 case studies in the report, which were contributed by experts.

These showed public policy being set against a background of scientific

uncertainty or surprise developments, or clear evidence of hazards to people

and the environment being ignored.

The case studies highlight regulatory inaction that had costly and

unpredicted consequences for human health and the environment or cases where

early warnings, and even 'loud and late' warnings of problems were ignored.

Further case studies from a range of well-known hazards, several with

environmental implications, include the use of asbestos, CFCs, and the

chemicals benzene, MTBE, tributyl tin and PCBs; and air pollution from

sulphur dioxide.

The consequences range from hundreds of thousands of deaths from

mesothelioma, a cancer caused by inhalation of asbestos, to the

over-exploitation and collapse of fisheries in Canada, California and

Scotland, which had devastating impacts on local communities.

The authors were asked to structure their chapters around four key

questions:

What was the first credible scientific 'early warning' of potential harm?

When and what were the main actions or inactions on risk reduction taken by

regulatory authorities or others?

What were the resulting costs and benefits of the actions or inactions,

including their distribution between groups and across time?

What lessons can be drawn that may help future decision making?

When drawing conclusions about how well the cases were handled, the authors

were asked to look at them from the 'spirit of the times' rather than modern

hindsight. The EEA also tried to research some 'false positives' - case

studies where precautions had later been discovered to be unnecessary, but

could not find any that were strong enough for inclusion. Possibilities for

future examination include the dumping of sewage sludge in the North Sea and

the Y2K Millennium Bug.

The 12 'late lessons' are:

acknowledge and respond to ignorance, as well as uncertainty and risk, in

technology appraisal and public policy-making;

provide adequate long-term environmental and health monitoring and research

into early warnings;

identify and work to reduce blind spots and gaps in scientific knowledge;

identify and reduce interdisciplinary obstacles to learning;

ensure that real world conditions are adequately accounted for in regulatory

appraisal;

systematically scrutinise the claimed justifications and benefits alongside

the potential risks;

evaluate a range of alternative options for meeting needs alongside the

option under appraisal, and promote more robust, diverse and adaptable

technologies so as to minimise the costs of surprises and maximise the

benefits of innovation;

ensure use of 'lay' and local knowledge, as well as relevant specialist

expertise in the appraisal;

take full account of the assumptions and values of different social groups;

maintain regulatory independence from interested parties while retaining an

inclusive approach to information and opinion gathering;

identify and reduce institutional obstacles to learning and action; and

avoid 'paralysis by analysis' by acting to reduce potential harm when there

are reasonable grounds for concern.

" Our central conclusion is that the very difficult task of maximising

innovation whilst minimising hazards to people and their environments could

be undertaken more successfully in future if the 12 'late lessons' drawn

from the histories of the hazards studied in this report were heeded, " said

EEA Executive Director Domingo Jiménez-Beltrán.

" The case studies show how harmful and costly misuse or neglect of the

precautionary principle can be. But over-precaution can also be expensive,

in terms of lost opportunities for innovation and lost lines of scientific

enquiry, " said Poul Harremoës, Professor of Environmental Science and

Engineering at the Technical University of Denmark and chair of the report's

editorial team.

Internet links:

Late lessons from early warnings: The precautionary principle 1896-2000

http://www.edie.net/gf.cfm?L=left_frame.html & R=http://www.edie.net/news/Arch

ive/5062.cfm

Late lessons from early warnings: the precautionary principle 1896-2000

Environmental issue report No 22

This report is about gathering information on the hazards raised by human

economic activities and its use in taking action to protect better the

environment and the health of the species and ecosystems that are dependent

on it. The study aims to contribute to better and more accessible

science-based information and more effective stakeholder participation in

the governance of economic activity so as to help minimise environmental and

health costs and maximise innovation.

© Faversham House Group Ltd 2001. edie news articles may be copied or

forwarded for individual use only. No other reproduction or distribution is

permitted without prior written consent.

http://www.edie.net/gf.cfm?L=left_frame.html & R=http://www.edie.net/news/Arch

ive/5062.cfm