Various parties relate to the precautionary principle with various understandings, claims and hopes. One of the ways to comprehend this multiplicity of meanings is to examine the composition of this problematic norm in the societal and institutional settings where it occurs. In this paper, I address its elaboration on the European Union institutional terrain with the European Commission's Communication on the Precautionary Principle. This effectuation of the precautionary principle embraces a number of issues of transnational or multilevel governance, expertise, legitimacy and sovereignty. The crucial matter that this paper engages in initially is that of risk analysis, the procedural framework that the precautionary principle confronts with its innovative articulations of science and policy-making, but to which I argue that it succumbs in part. Also explored, in turn, are further framings of the precautionary principle: science versus policy, a given policy domain-environment-in relation to others, as well as action versus inaction (whereas I argue that the precautionary principle ought to be about acting and doubting). These are further evaluated in the conclusions, together with the predicament of establishing a common understanding or defining the precautionary principle. I show that, complementary to drivers of divergence, one finds support for a common approach, though there is no radial symmetry in these tangled stakes, and any 'diffusion' of the precautionary principle has to be actively carried out for a shared understanding to be more widely shared. In this process, Europe, the European Commission, its Communication, and the precautionary principle are being shaped into diverse compositions of unity in diversity.
The Ebola epidemic in West Africa between 2014 and 2015 was the deadliest since the discovery of the virus four decades ago. With the second-largest outbreak of Ebola virus disease currently raging in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, (DRC) it is clear that lessons from the past can be quickly forgotten—or be incomplete in the first instance. In this article, we seek to understand the health challenges facing marginalised people by elaborating on the multiple dimensions of marginalisation in the case of the West Africa Ebola epidemic. We trace and unpack modes of marginalisation, beginning with the “outbreak narrative” and its main components and go on to examine other framings, including the prioritisation of the present over the past, the positioning of ‘Us versus Them’; and the marginalisation—in responses to the outbreak—of traditional medicine, cultural practices and other practices around farming and hunting. Finally, we reflect on the ‘lessons learned’ framing, highlighting what is included and what is left out. In conclusion, we stress the need to acknowledge—and be responsive to—the ethical, normative framings of such marginalisation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.