:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 

Featured stories in this issue...

Facing Uncertainty: Local Governments and Precaution
  An excellent new report offers a concise summary of the
  precautionary principle for local governments.
The Right To Healthy Indoor Air: World Health Organization
  "Principle 7 -- Under the precautionary principle, where there is a
  risk of harmful indoor air exposure, the presence of uncertainty shall
  not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to
  prevent such exposure."
Scottish Environment Minister Opposes Genetically Modified Crops
  The Scottish Minister of Environment says environment ministers
  should approach such matters as genetically modified crops with the
  precautionary principle firmly in mind. The principle that, "if an
  action or policy might cause severe or irreversible harm to the public
  or to the environment, in the absence of a scientific consensus that
  harm would not ensue, the burden of proof falls on those who would
  advocate taking the action."
Games, Gambling, and Children: Applying the Precautionary Principle
  Since the potential for both real gambling, addiction, and other
  negative health and social consequences is clear, it should be
  incumbent on those who promote such activities to provide scientific
  evidence that they do not have unintended outcomes-with one or
  repeated exposure. This calls for application of the "precautionary
  principle" -- where the burden of proof is on those who promote
  actions that have the potential to damage the environment or health.
Applying Precaution To Biotechnology
  "The precautionary principle should be applied to biotechnology
  research, activities and products, and a strengthened, enforceable and
  proactive regulatory framework is needed."
WTO Case Over Hormones in Beef Drags on
  In 2003 the European Union said the risk from estradiol and five
  other hormones in beef -- testosterone, progesterone, trenbolone
  acetate, zeranol and melengestrol acetate -- could not be accurately
  determined, "but evidence suggests potential detrimental effects on
  human health." So the EU invoked the precautionary principle and has
  prohibited imports of hormone-treated beef from the U.S. and Canada.
  The fight still rages.
Essential Components of the Precautionary Principle
  This excerpt from an early handbook on the precautionary principle
  summarizes the basic ideas of precaution.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

From: Rachel's Precaution Reporter #174, Dec. 24, 2008
[Printer-friendly version]

FACING UNCERTAINTY: LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND PRECAUTION

By Peter Montague

The National Sea Grant Law Center at the University of Mississippi
(Oxford, Miss.) has published a concise summary of the precautionary
principle for local governments: Facing Uncertainty: Local
Governments and the Precautionary Principle (15 pages; no date
[2008?]).

This excellent, short report can serve as an introduction to the
precautionary principle, its history, its substance, and how it is
being used in half a dozen U.S. municipalities.

The purpose of the report is to help communities -- especially coastal
communities -- incorporate ecosystem-based management and sustainable
development principles into planning and management.

The report fits into the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's (NOAA) 2006-2011 strategic plan, which identified
ecosystem-based management as one of its five goals.

This is excellent work by author Terra Bowling, J.D.

Return to Table of Contents

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

From: Topix.Net, Aug. 24, 2008
[Printer-friendly version]

THE RIGHT TO HEALTHY INDOOR AIR: WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION

[Introduction: This anonymous blog posting offers an interesting set
of principles aimed at establishing a human right to clean indoor air.
It is derived from a report on indoor air published by the World
Health Organization in 2000. The blog post says there is a longer
article available on the web at http://twusea.org/blog/2008/08/2
2/the-right-to-healthy-indoor-air/ but the server at twusea.org does
not respond. In any case, it's an interesting set of principles.]

The principles below derive from the fundamental principles in the
fields of human rights, biomedical ethics and ecological
sustainability, and focus on interactions among them.

Principles

Principle 1 -- Under the principle of the human right to health,
everyone has the right to breathe healthy indoor air.

Principle 2 -- Under the principle of respect for autonomy ("self-
determination"), everyone has the right to adequate information about
potentially harmful exposures, and to be provided with effective means
for controlling at least part of their indoor exposures.

Principle 3 -- Under the principle of non-maleficence ("doing no
harm"), no agent at a concentration that exposes any occupant to an
unnecessary health risk should be introduced into indoor air.

Principle 4 -- Under the principle of beneficence ("doing good"), all
individuals, groups and organizations associated with a building,
whether private, public, or governmental, bear responsibility to
advocate or work for acceptable air qualityfor the occupants.

Principle 5 -- Under the principle of social justice, the
socioeconomic status of occupants should have no bearing on their
access to healthy indoor air, but health status maydetermine special
needs for some groups.

Principle 6 Under the principle of accountability, all relevant
organizations should establish explicit criteria for evaluating and
assessing building air quality and its impact on the health of the
population and on the environment.

Principle 7 -- Under the precautionary principle, where there is a
risk of harmful indoor air exposure, the presence of uncertainty shall
not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to
prevent such exposure.

Principle 8 -- Under the "polluter pays" principle, the polluter is
accountable for any harm to health and /or welfare resulting from
unhealthy indoor air exposure(s). In addition, the polluter is
responsible for mitigation and remediation.

Principle 9 -- Under the principle of sustainability, health and
environmental concerns cannot be separated, and the provision of
healthy indoor air should not compromise global or local ecological
integrity, or the rights of future generations.

Document -- http://www.euro.who.int/document/e69828.pdf

Return to Table of Contents

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

From: The Sunday Herald (Glasgow, Scotland), Dec. 23, 2008
[Printer-friendly version]

ON PRINCIPLE, WE SHOULD BACK PRINCE

By Michael Russell

[Michael Russell, Member of the Scottish Parliament, is Minister for
Environment.]

In recent weeks, the Prince of Wales has reignited the GM [genetically
modified crops] debate. Some people, such as UK environment minister
Phil Woolas, were quick to criticise, but many others have indicated
agreement. The Scottish government also supports his argument. GM is
not the panacea its advocates claim it is, and the dangers of GM crop
cultivation continue to outweigh the advantages.

The criticism from Woolas was particularly strange. We are both
environment ministers and should approach such matters with the
precautionary principle firmly in mind. The principle that "if an
action or policy might cause severe or irreversible harm to the public
or to the environment, in the absence of a scientific consensus that
harm would not ensue, the burden of proof falls on those who would
advocate taking the action."

This makes sense. That is why it is enshrined in European law and is
commanding global respect. Indeed, the Indian Supreme Court is
considering a petition which would ban GM experimental crop
cultivation. It is merely common sense to be careful; once the GM
genie is out of the bottle it would be impossible to get it back in.
advertisement

But for Scotland there is a second principle -- one that I call the
preventative principle. Scotland is lucky -- we enjoy a clean, pure
and sustainable natural environment. This not only attracts many
tourists, but also underpins our ability to sell our whisky, beef,
lamb, salmon and so many natural products. It makes no sense to play
fast and loose with such an asset. Fortunately most people in Scotland
agree, as every poll on the issue has shown.

But, contrary to the pro-GM spin, we are not alone -- not even in
these islands. The government of Northern Ireland agrees, as do many
others across Europe. They share our concerns and, like us, are
prepared to stand up and be counted. Earlier this year I discussed the
issue with European environment commissioner, Stavros Dimas, who has
urged sensible caution on the issue.

There is no evidence GM will feed the world. Conventional plant
breeding techniques -- at which Scots scientists excel -- have a far
better track record in improving yield and protection from disease.
Scotland does not need GM crops, Scotland does not want GM crops and
Scotland should not have GM crops. Scottish agriculture and exporters
are better off without them. And so is the environment right across
our planet.

==============

Michael Russell MSP [Member of the Scottish Parliament] is Minister
for Environment

Copyright 2008 newsquest limited

Return to Table of Contents

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

From: BNET Business Network, Nov. 1, 2008
[Printer-friendly version]

GAMES, GAMBLING, AND CHILDREN: APPLYING THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE

By Adnan A. Hyder and Nicholas H. Juul

TOPIC: We were compelled by the trends of Internet gambling, state-
initiated gambling outlets, and of having gambling social events in
middle schools and high schools in the United States to examine
gambling and its health effects on children and adolescents.

PURPOSE AND SOURCES: We researched trends in adolescent gambling as
well as its association with negative health and sociological outcomes
through the literature for child and adolescent gambling studies.

CONCLUSION: The literature shows gambling to be associated with many
negative health and socioeconomic effects. The increasing
participation of children and adolescents is of particular concern,
for the earlier a person starts gambling, the more likely that person
is to develop serious gambling problems. We propose the application of
the precautionary principle in this situation. Until it is proven that
adolescents will not be negatively affected by exposure to gambling,
the exposure of adolescents to gambling must be carefully restricted.

Imagine a child arriving at school at an unusual time, the evening, to
see the cafeteria and gymnasium bedecked in glamorous streamers and
signage, tables with cards and felt upon them, teachers and parents
wearing top hats and sequin vests, and bedazzled classmates running
around. The student is given a certain amount of fake money and is
told that at the end of the night, the fake money will buy lottery
tickets for prizes such as Gameboys and iPods. The goal is to play all
of the card games and roulette that she can and earn more fake money
so that she can then buy more lottery tickets for the iPod she has
always wanted. Although she is not holding real money, she feels the
excitement in the uncertainty of gambling, the sophistication of the
feel of risk-taking. All of this with the friendly faces of parents,
teachers, and classmates.

This staking of something of potential financial value on an uncertain
outcome is indeed gambling, and it is a practice that researchers are
finding to be increasingly familiar to children and adolescents in the
United States and Canada. Research conducted between 1984 and 1999
shows a trend of increasing overall gambling, as well as problem
gambling, among adolescents (Jacobs, 2000). While in the late 1980s
and early 1990s the prevalence of pathological adolescent gambling was
about 6%, in 2005, a study conducted in the Midwestern United States
found a prevalence of 10% (Fisher, 1993; Lesieur & Klein, 1987; Magoon
& Ingersoll, 2005; Winters, Stinchfield, & Fulkerson 1993). These
studies were primarily focused on adolescent age subjects, but for
many children gambling starts much earlier. Gupta and Derevensky
reported in 1998 that gambling was a common activity among those even
younger-as early as 8 years of age.

Such a young start is disturbing because researchers have also shown
that the earlier a person starts gambling, the more likely it is that
he or she will develop problematic gambling behavior (Fisher, 1993;
Griffiths, 2003; Gupta & Derevensky, 1998; Huxley & Carroll, 1992;
Winters et al., 1993). It is intuitive that if a person with some
degree of predisposition to addiction is exposed to an addicting agent
at a more vulnerable time (an earlier age), that person will be more
likely to develop a full-blown addiction. Starting earlier along the
path of addiction will not only make one more likely to develop that
addiction, but it will also increase the persistence of the addiction
and the potential severity of the consequences of the addiction (Gupta
& Deverensky; Lynch, Maciejewski, & Potenza, 2004; Vitaro, Wanner,
Ladouceur, & Brendgen, 2004).

Evolutionary pressure has led to most species, humans included, having
some level of risk-taking behavior; an individual who takes some risks
will outcompete one who takes none. This risk-taking behavior, such as
dabbling with potential addictions, varies over the life of a human,
risk-loving being very high in teenage years and leveling out through
a person's 20s (D. Bishai, personal communication, January 21, 2006).
It is this systematic change of personality that justifies society
putting constraints on the risk-taking behavior of teens. When people
have reached their 20s, they can identify better what they may become
addicted to; they are more familiar with the consequences of forming
addictions; and their risk-taking behavior is no longer at that least-
controllable, teenage peak. As a 15-year-old, a person will have no
way of knowing that he or she may, as a 25-year-old, horribly regret
having taken up an addicting behavior at the more vulnerable age of
15.

The social and economic consequences of problem gambling in
adolescence are similar to, but perhaps even more damaging than, those
experienced by adult gamblers. Adolescent problem gamblers are known
to use their lunch money, steal, and sell drugs to finance their
addiction (Arcuri, Lester, & Smith, 1985). Many studies have found a
strong correlation between delinquency and gambling behavior (Barnes
et al., 2005; Chalmers, 2005; Winters et al., 1993). Not surprisingly,
poor academic performance is also highly correlated with gambling
activity (Winters et al.). Hence, a typical gambling addict reaches
adulthood with low grades, a criminal record, and, therefore, little
prospect of attending college. Studies have also found that adolescent
gambling has a connection with crime and unemployment in adulthood
(Borrell, 1999).

Research has demonstrated associations between adolescent gambling and
a host of negative health consequences as well. At least one study has
found cigarette smoking to be highly correlated with adolescent
gambling (Fisher, 1993). Alcohol and drug use have consistently been
found to correlate with gambling (Barnes et al, 2005; Chalmers, 2005;
Fisher; Lynch et al., 2004). In 1998, Gupta and Derevensky found
adolescent gambling to be associated with mental health outcomes,
including depressive symptoms, anxiety, and an increased risk of
suicide ideation and attempts.

The early onset of gambling addiction certainly points to its
potential classification as a gateway addiction, yet there is not
nearly the same attention given to the issue as that given to smoking,
alcohol, or drug use (Westphal et al., 1997). The number of
pathological gamblers increases with the accessibility of gambling
activities; the rise in popularity of poker and the constant, voluble
presence of state-run lottery and Internet gambling will continue the
increase in pathological gambling that was seen through the 1980s and
1990s. At a time when gambling is on the rise and there is little
being done in the media and in schools to address the issue, it is
important to limit adolescents' exposure to gambling and protect them
from its potentially devastating effects.

The exposure of children to gambling-like activities, games of chance
with fake money, and play with materials of potential financial value
should be seen as risks that need to be controlled. Whereas it is
difficult to prove that gambling in adolescence leads to other
addictive behavior (i.e., to distinguish causation in the correlations
mentioned above), the research cited in this paper gives reason for
concern that gambling is a gateway addiction or perhaps an enhancer of
existing addictive behavior. Since the potential for both real
gambling, addiction, and other negative health and social consequences
is clear, it should be incumbent on those who promote such activities
to provide scientific evidence that they do not have unintended
outcomes-with one or repeated exposure. This calls for application of
the "precautionary principle" -- where the burden of proof is on those
who promote actions that have the potential to damage the environment
or health (O'Riordan & Cameron, 1994). The precautionary principle has
been applied to many situations in which the public's health has been
at risk, from marijuana use to injury prevention (Irala, Ruiz-Canela,
& MartinezGonzalez, 2005; Pless, 2003). In fact, this is not the first
call to apply this principle to gambling addiction (Borrell, 2001).

While policy-makers may be blinded by the popularity and economic
success of gambling in recent years, we must not let them remain
unaware of what continued open exposure of gambling to adolescents can
mean for future generations. It is in the best interests of the
children and adolescents in our society that we require institutions
and individuals promoting gambling and its precursors to provide clear
evidence that the health and welfare of our children will not be
affected in the short or the long term. Until then, we must strive to
protect our children from potential harm and recognize the links
between games of chance and addictive gambling. Our schools, from
elementary through high school, should discontinue the practice of
having "casino" nights and instead educate their populations about the
potential hazards of gambling as they have educated them about other
addictive behaviors.

==============

Adnan A. Hyder, MD, MPH, PhD, is Associate Professor, Department of
International Health and Berman Institute of Bioethics, fohns Hopkins
Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD; Nicholas H. Juul, is
Research Assistant, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health,
Baltimore, MD.

References

Arcuri, A. F., Lester, D., & Smith, F. O. (1985). Shaping adolescent
gambling behavior. Adolescence, 20, 935-938.

Barnes, G. M., Weite, J. W., Hoffman, J. H., & Dintcheff, B. A.
(2005). Shared predictors of youthful gambling, substance abuse, and
delinquency. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 19(2), 165-174.

Borrell, J. (1999). Values in gambling research and implications for
public policy. eCommunity: International Journal of Mental Health and
Addiction, 1(1). http://www.ecommunity-journal.com/issues/issue/1/1

Borrell, J. (2001). Youth and problem gambling. VLGA Gambling Research
Newsletter, 2(1), 6-9.

Chalmers, H. (2005). A comprehensive examination of adolescent
gambling. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The
Sciences and Engineering, 66(3-B), 1710.

Fisher, S. (1993). Gambling and pathological gambling in adolescents.
Journal of Gambling Studies, 9(3), 277-288.

Griffiths, M. D. (2003, October). Instant-win products and prize
draws: Are these forms of gambling? Electronic Journal of Gambling
Issues, Issue 9.

Gupta, R., & Derevensky, J. L. (1998). Adolescent gambling behavior: A
prevalence study and examination of the correlates associated with
problem gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 14(4), 319-345.

Huxley, J., & Carroll, D. (1992). A survey of fruit machine gambling
in adolescents. Journal of Gambling Studies, 8(2), 167-179.

Irala, J., Ruiz-Canela, M., & Martinez-Gonzalez, M. A. (2005). Causal
relationship between cannabis use and psychotic symptoms or
depression. Should we wait and see? A public health perspective.
Medical Science Monitor, 11(12), 355-358.

Jacobs, D. F. (2000). Juvenile gambling in North America: An analysis
of long term trends and future prospects. Journal of Gambling Studies,
16(2-3), 119-152.

Lesieur, H. R., & Klein, R. (1987). Pathological gambling among high
school students. Addictive Behaviors, 12, 129-135.

Lynch, W. J., Maciejewski, P. K., & Potenza, M. N. (2004). Psychiatric
correlates of gambling in adolescents and young adults grouped by age
at gambling onset. Archives of General Psychiatry, 61(11), 1116-1122.

Magoon, M. E., & Ingersoll, G. M. (2005). Parental modeling,
attachment, and supervision as moderators of adolescent gambling.
Journal of Gambling Studies, 30, 1-22.

O'Riordan, T., & Cameron, J. (1994). Interpreting the precautionary
principle. London: Earthscan.

Pless, I. B. (2003). Expanding the precautionary principle. Injury
Prevention, 9, 1-2.

Vitaro, F., Wanner, B., Ladouceur, R., & Brendgen, M. (2004).
Trajectories of gambling during adolescence. Journal of Gambling
Studies, 20(1), 47-69.

Winters, K. C., Stinchfield, R., & Fulkerson, J. (1993). Patterns and
characteristics of adolescent gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies,
9(4), 371-386.

Copyright Nursecom, Inc.

Return to Table of Contents

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

From: Rachel's Precaution Reporter #174, Dec. 24, 2008
[Printer-friendly version]

APPLYING PRECAUTION TO BIOTECHNOLOGY

By Robert H. Richmond

Article: "Environmental protection: Applying the precautionary
principle and proactive regulation to biotechnology," Trends in
Biotechnology Vol. 26, No. 8 (August 1, 20098), pgs. 460-467.

Abstract

Biotechnology is a broad field encompassing diverse disciplines from
agriculture to zoology. Advances in research are occurring at a rapid
pace, and applications that have broad implications socially,
economically, ecologically and politically are emerging. Along with
notable benefits, environmental consequences that affect core quality-
of-life issues for present and future generations are materializing.

The precautionary principle should be applied to biotechnology
research, activities and products, and a strengthened, enforceable and
proactive regulatory framework is needed. The environmental impacts of
agriculture, aquaculture, genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and
even pharmaceuticals are raising public concerns and demonstrate the
need for guidance from a variety of social, economic and scientific
disciplines to insure the benefits of biotechnology are enjoyed
without unacceptable and irreversible environmental costs.

Full article here.

Robert H. Richmond, Kewalo Marine Laboratory, University of Hawaii at
Manoa, 41 Ahui Street, Honolulu, HI 96813, USA

Copyright 2008 Elsevier Inc.

Return to Table of Contents

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

From: Alberta Farmer (Winnipeg, Manitoba), Dec. 23, 2008
[Printer-friendly version]

WTO CASE OVER HORMONES IN BEEF DRAGS ON

Observers of the years-long trade dispute between Canada, the U.S. and
the European Union, over the EU's block on the two other countries'
beef, now wonder if the World Trade Organization [WTO] can ever make
it all stop.

The EU on Monday announced yet another request for "consultations" at
the WTO with Canada and the U.S., which for years have put up
retaliatory trade sanctions against EU products in the dispute.

The EU has banned the use of growth-promoting hormones and the import
of meat treated with hormones since the 1980s. Canada and the U.S.,
claiming no valid scientific basis for the EU ban, first took it to
the WTO in 1996.

"We are convinced that our legislation on hormones is fully in line
with WTO law: the restrictions on hormone-treated beef are based on
solid scientific evidence showing risks for human health," said Peter
Power, spokesperson for EU trade commissioner Peter Mandelson, in an
EU release Monday.

"We are thus very confident and hope that the U.S. and Canada will
engage constructively in these consultations and that we can find a
solution to this long-lasting dispute," Power said.

Canada's departments of international trade and agriculture and the
U.S. Trade Representative's office had no immediate comment available
Tuesday.

The U.S. has argued that the human body already generates the hormones
that are subject to the EU's ban, and that said hormones also occur
naturally in foods such as eggs and butter, often at concentrations
higher than those in beef from hormone-treated cattle.

The WTO, in 1999, allowed both Canada and the U.S. to slap retaliatory
duties on imports of certain food products from Europe. In late 2003,
the EU amended its ban -- but the U.S. and Canada didn't lift their
duties, arguing that the EU's changes made no difference to the non-
WTO-compliant part of the ban.

"Precautionary principle"

The EU's 2003 directive maintained that one hormone, oestradiol,
carries a body of evidence showing it causes and promotes cancer and
harms genes.

The 2003 directive further claimed that the risk from five other
hormones -- testosterone, progesterone, trenbolone acetate, zeranol
and melengestrol acetate -- could not be accurately determined, "but
evidence suggests potential detrimental effects on human health."
Thus, the EU said, it invokes the "precautionary principle."

The EU then went back to the WTO, claiming that Canada and the U.S.
should have lifted their duties and filed a new non-compliance
complaint at the WTO if they felt the EU's amended ban was still in
breach.

To that, a WTO panel then ruled in March this year that the EU's
amended ban still didn't comply with international trade rules. The
panel, however, also ruled the U.S. and Canada shouldn't have kept
their duties in place without first getting a WTO ruling on the EU
ban.

The EU, Canada and the U.S. all appealed that decision, which wound up
in October with a WTO appeal body reversing the WTO panel's March
ruling against Canada and the U.S.

But the appeal body in October also recommended the WTO's dispute
settlement body ask Canada and the EU to launch "Article 21.5"
proceedings, to resolve their dispute over whether the EU has actually
removed the WTO-inconsistent part of its ban -- and thus whether
Canada's continued retaliatory duties are still legally valid.

The EU on Monday estimated Canada's continued sanctions as being worth
about C$11.3 million per year, while the U.S. sanctions are worth
about US$116.8 million.

Stretch of jurisprudence

Jonathan Lynn, writing for the Reuters news service, on Monday
described the EU's move as "the latest twist in a complex case which
has stretched WTO jurisprudence to the limits."

The beef hormone case, Lynn wrote, "has also highlighted the
difficulty for the WTO, which umpires world trade and rules on cases
worth billions of dollars, to decide when retaliatory sanctions must
be lifted and to review governments' highly technical food safety
standards."

Copyright 2007 Farm Business Communications.

Return to Table of Contents

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

From: Rachel's Precaution Reporter #174, Dec. 24, 2008
[Printer-friendly version]

ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE

Essential components of the precautionary principle

Excerpted from Joel Tickner, Carolyn Raffensperger, and Nancy Myers,
The Precautionary Principle in Action: A Handbook (Windsor, N.D.:
Science and Environmental Health Network, no date [1998]), pgs. 4-5.
See also Terra Bowling, Facing Uncertainty: Local Governments and the
Precautionary Principle (National Sea Grant Law Center: Oxford,
Miss.: no date [2008?].

** Taking precautionary action before scientific certainty of cause
and effect. Most of the international treaties stating the
precautionary principle incorporate it as a general duty on states
[nations] to act under uncertainty. This provides a mechanism of
accountability for preventing harm. General duties -- obligations to
act in a certain way even in the absence of specific laws -- are not
uncommon in the United States. For example, the Occupational Safety
and Health Act demands that an employer "furnish each of his employees
employment and a place of employment which are free from recognized
hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious
physical injury."

** Setting goals. The precautionary principle encourages planning
based on well-defined goals rather than on future scenarios and risk
calculations that may be plagued by error and bias. For example,
Sweden has set the goal of phasing out persistent and bioaccumulative
substances in products by the year 2007. The government is now
involving a variety of stakeholders in determining how to reach that
goal. Sometimes called "backcasting" in contrast to the more usual
"forecasting" of an uncertain future, this type of planning creates
fewer miscalculations and spurs innovative solutions.

** Seeking out and evaluating alternatives. Rather than asking what
level of contamination is safe or economically optimal, the
precautionary approach asks how to reduce or eliminate the hazard and
considers all possible means of achieving that goal, including
forgoing the proposed activity. Needless to say, alternatives proposed
to a potentially hazardous activity must be scrutinized as stringently
as the activity itself.

** Shifting burdens of proof. Proponents of an activity should prove
that their activity will not cause undue harm to human health or
ecosystems. Those who have the power, control, and resources to act
and prevent harm should bear that responsibility. This responsibility
has several components:

++ Financial responsibility. Regulations alone are not likely to spur
precautionary behavior on the part of governments or those who are
proponents of a questionable activity. However, market incentives,
such as requiring a bond for the worst possible consequences of an
activity or liability for damages, will encourage companies to think
about how to prevent impacts. Such assurance bonds are already used in
construction projects as well as in Australia to minimize damage from
development projects.

++ The duty to monitor, understand, investigate, inform, and act.
Under a precautionary decision-making scheme, those undertaking
potentially harmful activities would be required to routinely monitor
their impacts (with possible third party verification), inform the
public and authorities when a potential impact is found, and act upon
that knowledge. Ignorance and uncertainty are no longer excuses for
postponing actions to prevent harm.

** Developing more democratic and thorough decision-making criteria
and methods. The precautionary principle requires a new way of
thinking about decisions and weighing scientific and other evidence in
the face of uncertainty. This type of precautionary decision-flow,
addressing both new and existing activities, is described in a later
section. Because difficult questions of causality are in essence
policy decisions, potentially impacted publics must be involved in the
decision process. Thus, structures to better involve the public in
decision-making are required under a precautionary approach.

Return to Table of Contents

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

  Rachel's Precaution Reporter offers news, views and practical
  examples of the Precautionary Principle, or Foresight Principle, in
  action. The Precautionary Principle is a modern way of making
  decisions, to minimize harm. Rachel's Precaution Reporter tries to
  answer such questions as, Why do we need the precautionary
  principle? Who is using precaution? Who is opposing precaution?

  We often include attacks on the precautionary principle because we  
  believe it is essential for advocates of precaution to know what
  their adversaries are saying, just as abolitionists in 1830 needed
  to know the arguments used by slaveholders.

  Rachel's Precaution Reporter is published as often as necessary to
  provide readers with up-to-date coverage of the subject.

  As you come across stories that illustrate the precautionary 
  principle -- or the need for the precautionary principle -- 
  please Email them to us at rpr@rachel.org.

  Editor:
  Peter Montague - peter@rachel.org
  
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

  To start your own free Email subscription to Rachel's Precaution
  Reporter send any Email to one of these addresses:

  Full HTML edition: rpr-subscribe@pplist.net
  Table of Contents (TOC) edition: rpr-toc-subscribe@pplist.net

  In response, you will receive an Email asking you to confirm that
  you want to subscribe.

  To unsubscribe, send any email to rpr-unsubscribe@pplist.net
  or to rpr-toc-unsubscribe@pplist.net, as appropriate.

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::