From general policy to legal rule: aspirations and limitations of the precautionary principle.

Marchant, Gary E.

doi:10.1289/ehp.6197

Cited by 61 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(22 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The precautionary principle is an approach where actions are taken to anticipate and avert serious or irreversible harm, such as for example extinction of species for the case of biodiversity preservation, or prevention of an irreversible climate change, in advance of or without a clear demonstration that such action is necessary. Marchant (2003) states that he PP prescribes how to bring scienti…c uncertainty into the decision-making processes by explicitly formalizing precaution and bringing it to the forefront of deliberations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Model Uncertainty, Ambiguity and the Precautionary Principle: Implications for Biodiversity Management

Vardas

Xepapadeas

2008

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We analyze ecosystem management under 'unmeasurable' Knightian uncertainty or ambiguity which, given the uncertainties characterizing ecosystems, might be a more appropriate framework relative to the classic risk case (measurable uncertainty). This approach is used as a formal way of modelling the precautionary principle in the context of least favorable priors and maxmin criteria. We provide biodiversity management rules which incorporate the precautionary principle. These rules take the form of either minimum safety standards or optimal harvesting under precautionary approaches.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Model Uncertainty, Ambiguity and the Precautionary Principle: Implications for Biodiversity Management

Vardas

Xepapadeas

2008

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even the two famous formulations of the Principle, namely the Rio Declaration and the Wingspread Statement appear to differ in critical aspects. Marchant (2003) points out that the Rio Declaration aims at environmental degradation while the Wingspread Statement is wider to include harm to human health. More importantly, the Rio Declaration is phrased as a guiding principle while Wingspread appears to impose an obligation to act.…”

Section: Precautionary Principlementioning

confidence: 99%

Liability and Redress of Trans-Boundary Movement of Genetically Modified Organisms and the Biosafety Law in Malaysia

Talaat¹,

Tahir²,

Husain³

2011

JSD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biosafety refers to the efforts taken in ensuring the safety of the application of biotechnology, which necessitates for proactive steps to be taken to "reduce and eliminate the potential risks resulting from biotechnology and its products". Modern biotechnology has enabled scientists to genetically and biochemically modify plants, animals as well as microorganisms. In the effort to increase crop production for the purpose of securing global food supply, the application of biotechnology in the agricultural sector must be carried out in a safe and sustainable manner. The recognition of the potential risks to human health and the environment must not be discounted and countries looking towards the application of biotechnology must ensure its safe application. The need for further regulations on biosafety was discussed in 1992, when the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) was adopted. Article 19(3) of the Convention requires its members to consider the need for a protocol on "the safe transfer, handling and use of any living modified organism resulting from biotechnology that may have adverse effect on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity." This consequently led to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (CPB), which primarily regulates the trans-boundary movement of living modified organisms (LMOs) or alternatively known as genetically modified organisms (GMOs). In Malaysia, the Biosafety Act 2007 (BSA) was passed to regulate the release, importation, exportation and contained use of GMOs in order to protect inter alia human, plant and animal health as well as the environment and biological diversity. This paper highlights the issues pertaining to liability and redress, which provides for the legal obligation to compensate the damage especially to the environment accruing from the trans-boundary movement of the GMOs, as well as the position of the present Malaysian biosafety law.

show abstract

“…In other words lack of evidence of harm does not imply safety. While there are a number of definitions of the precautionary principle (Marchant, 2003), the most widely accepted definition of the precautionary principle is from Wingspread Conference in 1998.…”

Section: Ethical and Social Responsibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…And finally, there is an emphasis on management of risks rather than prevention of harm. Limitation of the precautionary principle should be considered (Marchant, 2003) and risk analysis is certainly useful, but it is essential to have a sound philosophical approach to decision-making (Hrudey and Leiss, 2003).…”

Section: Ethical and Social Responsibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues: Our Children's Future

Gilbert¹

2005

NeuroToxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A convergence of issues suggests that protecting child health is not so much a matter of research, but rather a matter of policy and advocacy. First, we have well-articulated views of a vision for child health. Second, we have experience and toxicological research findings demonstrating the adverse health effects of hazardous chemicals on children and recognize that children are more sensitive than adults to chemical exposures. Results from toxicology research have motivated many regulatory and legal actions, and public policy decisions, including the banning of some pesticides, reducing exposures in the workplace, and lowering of acceptable blood lead levels in children. We also know that childhood disabilities from chemical exposure during developmental are often not treatable and therefore must be prevented. Finally, we have an increasingly well-defined framework for discussing social and ethical responsibility to our children. New discoveries in the basic biological and toxicological sciences have challenged our bioethical thinking and societal decision-making. This paper will explore the ethical, legal, and social issues raised by the toxicological sciences first by examining some hard lesson learned about childhood effects of chemicals and then by examining the difficult policy and research decisions that must be made as we address our need for additional information about the health effects of chemicals on adults and children and the impact of having this information. The precautionary principle will be considered as an alternative decision-making approach as well as exploring the concept of the citizen toxicologist (CT). As Garrett Hardin pointed out many years ago, the problems we face often have no technical solutions, but rather require a policy-based approach. This paper will be of interest to the public and health professionals concerned about the broader impact of toxicological research on bioethical and societal decision-making.

show abstract

From general policy to legal rule: aspirations and limitations of the precautionary principle.

Cited by 61 publications

References 20 publications

Model Uncertainty, Ambiguity and the Precautionary Principle: Implications for Biodiversity Management

Model Uncertainty, Ambiguity and the Precautionary Principle: Implications for Biodiversity Management

Liability and Redress of Trans-Boundary Movement of Genetically Modified Organisms and the Biosafety Law in Malaysia

Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues: Our Children's Future

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About