How Extreme Is the Precautionary Principle?

被引:0
作者
Sven Ove Hansson
机构
[1] Royal Institute of Technology (KTH),Division of Philosophy
来源
NanoEthics | 2020年 / 14卷
关键词
Precautionary principle; Risk; Scientific corpus; Science-policy interface; Mere possibilities; Sound science;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The precautionary principle has often been described as an extreme principle that neglects science and stifles innovation. However, such an interpretation has no support in the official definitions of the principle that have been adopted by the European Union and by the signatories of international treaties on environmental protection. In these documents, the precautionary principle is a guideline specifying how to deal with certain types of scientific uncertainty. In this contribution, this approach to the precautionary principle is explicated with the help of concepts from the philosophy of science and comparisons with general notions of practical rationality. Three major problems in its application are discussed, and it is concluded that to serve its purpose, the precautionary principle has to (1) be combined with other decision principles in cases with competing top priorities, (2) be based on the current state of science, which requires procedures for scientific updates, and (3) exclude potential dangers whose plausibility is too low to trigger meaningful precautionary action.
引用
收藏
页码:245 / 257
页数:12
相关论文
共 108 条
[11]  
Sandin P(2011)Rescuing the strong precautionary principle from its critics Univ Ill Law Rev 2011 1285-1338
[12]  
Peterson M(1997)Can we reverse the burden of proof? Toxicol Lett 90 223-228
[13]  
Hansson SO(2000)The 2000 Cartagena protocol on biosafety: legal and political dimensions Glob Environ Chang 10 313-317
[14]  
Rudén C(2015)Risk and the precautionary principle in the implementation of REACH European Journal of Risk Regulation 6 111-120
[15]  
Juthe A(2017)Multi-case review of the application of the precautionary principle in European Union law and case law Risk Anal 37 502-516
[16]  
Conko G(2019)Reliability and relevance evaluations of REACH data Toxicol Res 8 46-56
[17]  
Som C(2002)Kuhn’s vindication of Quine and Carnap Hist Philos Q 19 217-235
[18]  
Hilty LM(2008)Regulating BFRs – from science to policy Chemosphere 73 144-147
[19]  
Köhler AR(1999)Dimensions of the precautionary principle Hum Ecol Risk Assess 5 889-907
[20]  
Sachs NM(2001)Constructing ‘sound science’ and ‘good epidemiology’: tobacco, lawyers, and public relations firms Am J Public Health 91 1749-1757