Abstract
AbstractThe 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.
Funder
Royal Institute of Technology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Management of Technology and Innovation,History and Philosophy of Science,Philosophy,Sociology and Political Science,Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
Reference79 articles.
1. Durodié B (2003) The true cost of precautionary chemicals regulation. Risk Anal 23:389–398
2. Nilsson R (2004) Control of chemicals in Sweden: an example of misuse of the ‘precautionary principle’. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 57:107–117
3. Castro D, McLaughlin M (2019) Ten ways the precautionary principle undermines progress in artificial intelligence. Working paper, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. https://itif.org/publications/2019/02/04/ten-ways-precautionary-principle-undermines-progress-artificial-intelligence
4. Graham JD (2004) The perils of the precautionary principle: lessons from the American and European experience. Heritage Letters #818, January 15 2004. Heritage Foundation
5. Wainwright D (1998) Disenchantment, ambivalence, and the precautionary principle: the becalming of British health policy. Int J Health Serv 28(3):407–426
Cited by
19 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献