Introduction to the Precautionary Principle Carolyn Raffensperger Science and Environmental Health Network

Questioning Technology “It is a truism that humans have and will always use tools. Just as obvious… is that technology--the use of tools--occurs in a social, political, cultural, and economic context, and is never neutral. Tools are always shaped by their use, by the people or institutions which control their production and distribution, and by a culture which validates, circumscribes, or discourages their creation and/or use...” (T. L. Hill 1991)

Questions What criteria should society use to evaluate technology? Do we have a right to say “no” to a technology? Are there wise ways to say “yes” to a technology? Can we increase our skill in predicting the consequences of a technology?

Laws of Technology “The bigger the technological solution, the greater the chance of extensive, unforeseen side effects.” (Stephen Schneider, 1976) “The greater the rapidity of human-induced changes, the more likely they are to destablize the complex systems of nature.” (Leopold 1949)

The Precautionary Principle Wingspread Statement: “When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically.”

History of Precaution and Development 1972 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment. Stockholm. Sustainable development “elevated” to a global ethic. First pairing of the moral principles of social justice and environmental responsibility.

The Bruntland Report, “Our Common Future” 1987 Poverty is a cause and effect of environmental degradation. Present policies encourage environmental deterioration and deepen economic and social disparities.

1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development Rio Declaration on Environment and Development Persistent Organic Pollutants Treaty Convention on Biological Diversity Biosafety Protocol

The Rio Declaration: “Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.”

The Precautionary Principle has been characterized as: Ethical Directive, Belief or Philosophical guide Treaty Preambles German word for precautionary principle means literally “forecaring” Regulatory tool Risk management (rather than prevention?) Administrative Agency activity Overarching principle guiding the research agenda, legislation, regulation and judicial action

Common elements of the precautionary principle Plausible threats of harm Lack of scientific certainty Precautionary action to prevent harm

Harm To whom or what? Environment Public Health Cultural, Social Magnitude and kind Serious Cumulative Irreversible easily avoidable?

Scientific uncertainty Uncertainty about cause or magnitude Uncertainty, indeterminacy, ignorance Value of more data Unpredictability of complex systems Asking the right questions

Precautionary Action Anticipatory and preventive Increases rather than decreases options Can be monitored and reversed Increases resilience, health, integrity of whole system Enhances diversity (one size does not fit all)

Components of implementation 1. Establish goals. 2. Locate responsibility in the system. The burden of proof lies with the proponents, not with the public. 3. Examine a full range of alternatives. Choose the least harmful. 4. Make decisions through an open, informed, democratic process. Include affected parties. ”

Can We Say “Yes” to New Technologies What is our yardstick for environmental predictions? Proposal: evolutionary biology. What does nature do? Example: Biomimicry

Can we Say “yes” to New Technologies Shifting the Burden of Proof Proposal: Performance Bonds Ex. Mining companies post bonds before mining public lands.

Can we Say “yes” to New Technologies Keeping mistakes little (if we’ve said yes and we are wrong) Proposal: Monitoring at multi-levels of the system Example: NASA and space shuttles Example 2: Labeling for biotech foods

A Little Digression: Einstein taught us that Thought Experiments are useful in science. What thought experiments can we use to imagine where things might go awry in the system? Example: What would an emergency room M.D. need to diagnose an allergenic response to a biotech food?

Precautionary questions for pharming What are society’s goals for Agriculture Medicine Environment

Pharming questions cont. What alternative methods do we have for meeting our goals? What harms are relatively certain if we proceed with pharming? What harms are uncertain?

Pharming questions cont. Who or what will benefit? Who or what will be harmed?

Pharming questions cont. What early warning systems can we create? Are there any events that would result in a total ban? What monitoring systems need to be in place?

Pharming questions cont. Who needs to be at the table making decisions: Goals Research agenda Agriculture Medicine What constitutes harm? What early warning systems are needed? Remedies for harm Alternatives to harmful activities

Lessons Learned about the Precautionary Principle Prevention is wiser and less costly than repairing damage.

Lesson 2 Consider worst case scenarios carefully. Low probability, high risk events not only follow Murphy’s law, they follow statistical probability. If we regularly truck shipments of high level radioactive waste across the United States, there will be an accident, some time, some place.

Lesson 3 Put certainty on a sliding scale rather than treating it as an absolute. If the potential harm is serious we need to take action even if we are less certain about the probability or magnitude of the harm.

Lesson 4 Foster the conditions that encourage foreseeability (openness, free-flowing information, protecting minority- view science). We failed to predict some problems like CFCs damaging the ozone layer, but that doesn’t mean they were unforeseeable.

Lesson 5 Timing is everything. The higher the stakes, the more important it is to take precautionary action sooner rather than later. Speed up democracy. Slow down large scale deployment.

Lesson 6 Science isn’t the only way to know something. Aesthetics and ethics are useful guides when the way forward is uncertain. If it’s a beautiful solution, its more trustworthy than an ugly solution. If it’s a respectful, compassionate solution, its more trustworthy than a disrespectful, hostile solution.

Lesson 7 Concentrating precious things (people) or harmful things (radioactive waste or hog manure in lagoons) increases the chances for major damage in the event of an unexpected problem. Scale determines whether a problem will be a minor disturbance or a catastrophe. Large scale activities (monocropping of corn, large consumption of fossil fuels) will cause trouble some time, some place.

Lesson 8 Favor actions that keep options open. Favor actions that allow for experimentation. Favor actions that can be monitored and reversed if there are unintended consequences.

Lesson 9 When the science is uncertain, switch sciences: map relationships rather than measure things or move from toxicology to evolutionary biology, pharmacology and physiology. Rigid dependence on one discipline or scientific tool blinds us to the clues in other disciplines.

Lesson 10 Honor and protect information and wisdom. Adopt policies of openness rather than secrecy. Secrecy is the tool of tyrants.

Lesson 11 Connect the dots. Search for pattern. Emerging patterns provide new hypotheses and opportunities to avoid harm.

Lesson 12 Act out of love rather than fear or hate. Hate is extremely powerful, breeding revenge, damage and loss. Love is more powerful, breeding restoration, healing and protection.