The precautionary principle in environmental science.

Environmental scientists play a key role in society's responses to environmental problems, and many of the studies they perform are intended ultimately to affect policy. The precautionary principle, proposed as a new guideline in environmental decision making, has four central components: taking preventive action in the face of uncertainty; shifting the burden of proof to the proponents of an activity; exploring a wide range of alternatives to possibly harmful actions; and increasing public participation in decision making. In this paper we examine the implications of the precautionary principle for environmental scientists, whose work often involves studying highly complex, poorly understood systems, while at the same time facing conflicting pressures from those who seek to balance economic growth and environmental protection. In this complicated and contested terrain, it is useful to examine the methodologies of science and to consider ways that, without compromising integrity and objectivity, research can be more or less helpful to those who would act with precaution. We argue that a shift to more precautionary policies creates opportunities and challenges for scientists to think differently about the ways they conduct studies and communicate results. There is a complicated feedback relation between the discoveries of science and the setting of policy. While maintaining their objectivity and focus on understanding the world, environmental scientists should be aware of the policy uses of their work and of their social responsibility to do science that protects human health and the environment. The precautionary principle highlights this tight, challenging linkage between science and policy.

[1]  T. Schettler,et al.  In Harm’s Way: Toxic Threats to Child Development , 2002, Journal of developmental and behavioral pediatrics : JDBP.

[2]  Allard E. Dembe,et al.  Protecting Public Health and the Environment: Implementing the Precautionary Principle , 2001 .

[3]  John S. Applegate,et al.  The Precautionary Preference: An American Perspective on the Precautionary Principle , 2000 .

[4]  Susan Maret,et al.  Protecting Public Health and the Environment: Implementing the Precautionary Principle , 2000 .

[5]  Warwick Gullett,et al.  Protecting Public Health and the Environment: Implementing the Precautionary Principle , 2000 .

[6]  B. Goldstein The precautionary principle and scientific research are not antithetical. , 1999, Environmental health perspectives.

[7]  D Malakoff,et al.  Bayes Offers a 'New' Way to Make Sense of Numbers , 1999, Science.

[8]  L. Kuller Invited Commentary: Circular Epidemiology , 1999 .

[9]  S. Schwartz,et al.  The right answer for the wrong question: consequences of type III error for public health research. , 1999, American journal of public health.

[10]  John Harris,et al.  Precautionary principle stifles discovery , 1999, Nature.

[11]  J. Lubchenco Entering the Century of the Environment: A New Social Contract for Science , 1998 .

[12]  Thomas C. Peterson,et al.  Maximum and Minimum Temperature Trends for the Globe , 1997 .

[13]  H. Abadin,et al.  Breast-Feeding Exposure of Infants To Cadmium, Lead, and Mercury: a Public Health Viewpoint , 1997, Toxicology and industrial health.

[14]  S Greenland,et al.  Basic methods for sensitivity analysis of biases. , 1996, International journal of epidemiology.

[15]  H. Pohl,et al.  Breast-Feeding Exposure of Infants To Environmental Contaminants — a Public Health Risk Assessment Viewpoint: Chlorinated Dibenzodioxins and Chlorinated Dibenzofurans , 1996, Toxicology and industrial health.

[16]  Bradley P. Carlin,et al.  BAYES AND EMPIRICAL BAYES METHODS FOR DATA ANALYSIS , 1996, Stat. Comput..

[17]  Jerome R. Ravetz,et al.  Uncertainty and Quality in Science for Policy , 1990 .

[18]  C. Smithers REPORT ON CONGRESS , 1972 .

[19]  M. Tousignant,et al.  Available , 1984 .

[20]  T. Schettler,et al.  Health risks posed by use of Di-2-ethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP) in PVC medical devices: a critical review. , 2001, American journal of industrial medicine.

[21]  I. Cartuja ON SCIENCE AND PRECAUTION IN THE MANAGEMENT OF TECHNOLOGICAL RISK , 2000 .

[22]  Ortwin Renn,et al.  On science and Precaution in the Management of Technological Risk - An ESTO Project Report - Prepared for the European Commission - JRC Institute Prospective Technological Studies Seville , 1999 .

[23]  A. Johnsson,et al.  Fifty-Hertz magnetic field exposures of premature infants in a neonatal intensive care unit. , 1996, Biology of the neonate.

[24]  S Greenland,et al.  Empirical-Bayes and semi-Bayes approaches to occupational and environmental hazard surveillance. , 1994, Archives of environmental health.

[25]  Brian Wynne,et al.  How science fails the environment. , 1993 .

[26]  T. Colborn,et al.  Chemically-induced alterations in sexual and functional development : the wildlife/human connection , 1992 .

[27]  FROM THE COMMISSION on the precautionary principle , 2022 .