By Robert J. Wilder
Department of Political Science, University of
Massachusetts, Dartmouth
N. Dartmouth, Massachusetts 02 74 7 USA
An innovative principle is emerging in international
environmental policies of northwest Europe and Scandinavia. The precautionary
approach is encouraging new thinking through its emphasis on clean production
methods and prevention of environmental contamination in the belief that it is
cheaper, easier and more practical to prevent pollution in the first place than
to try to clean contaminated systems later on (2). As M. MacGarvin observes
(3), the precautionary ideal arises from recognition that scientific
understanding of ecosystems is complicated by a host of factors, including complex
and cascading effects of human activities and uncertainty introduced by
naturally chaotic population dynamics.
Precaution also serves as a progressive policy tool. The
principle addresses a key question for environmental managers: how should policies
be decided in the face of scientific uncertainty? The response from science is
to engage in further rigorous studies better to understand the hidden workings
of nature. But a similar response is not available within the culture of
policy; in a setting that must cope with demands for economic growth, the
pressures for resource extraction are immense. So important policy decisions
(including continuing the status quo) are made despite poor knowledge of the
ultimate effects of anthropogenic activities; this situation is proving
increasingly problematic for modern environmental management.
Precautionary thinking counters traditional regulatory
emphasis on 'end of pipe' pollution control technologies. Moreover, precaution
fundamentally rejects assimilative capacity-for instance of the coastal
oceans-as a convenient means of (hoped-for) dilution. Vague definitions of
precautionary action are evolving as it is increasingly applied. Initially the
principle was put forward in an international setting at the first ministerial
conference on North Sea pollution in Bremen in 1984 (ref. 4); it was strengthened
at the second North Sea conference in 1987 (London) and further reinterpreted
at the third conference in 1990 (The Hague) (1-4). The approach now appears in
non-marine applications such as regulating pesticides in Africa (Bamako Convention,
1990), and efforts to reduce atmospheric contamination (Second World Climate
Conference, 1990) (5).
In sum, the emerging precautionary principle could become an
important new link between science and policy. When first suggested,
precautionary action was intended mainly to reduce marine contamination due to
synthetic chemicals and heavy metals, and to halt dangerous activities such as
ocean incineration because the burden of suspicion made it prudent to prevent such
activities (3). In only a few years, preventive thinking behind this principle
has spread to broader matters (2), and may yet become an eloquent step in
achieving greener paths of development. Significantly, the United States has so
far resisted the precautionary concept (1); whether the US position evolves
towards acceptance of precautionary action will surely have much to do with the
eventual fate of this rising principle.
References
Stairs, K. & Taylor, P. in International Politics of the
Environment (eds Hurrell, A. & Kingsbury, B.) 110-141 (Oxford University
Press, 1992).
Dethlefsen,V., Jackson, T.& Taylor, P. in Clean
Production Strategies: Developing Preventive Environmental Management in the
Industrial Economy (ed Jackson, T.) 41- 62 (Lewis, Boca Raten, 1993).
MacGarvin, M . Helgolander Meeresunter, Vol 49, in the press
(1994).
Guendling, L. Intl. J. estuarine coastal Law, Vol 5, 23-30
(1990).
Weintraub. B. A. N. Y. U. envtl. Law J., Vol l, 173-223
(l992).
About the author:
Dr. Rob Wilder, School of Environmental Science &
Management, University of Science & Management, University of California,
Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USA