No matter how much it is justified to be of practical approach in decision-making based on ethical and socio-political grounds and/or as a form of rational action, the PP is not adequately applicable (Holm and Harris 1999; Starr 2003; Wildavsky 1996).
3.2 Challenges Faced by Industries by Introduction of the PP
The Precautionary Principle is not a sound approach to risk analysis as it requires extensive assessments and has no basis or measure to give guidance to what level of analysis is deemed compliant for industry, whereas, risk analysis has to do with quality improvements which are quantitative and qualitative, PP lacks measures so it cannot help in risk analysis (Bodansky, 1994).
PP was originally introduced to give Risk/Environmental …show more content…
The application of the precautionary principle especially in industry actually removes the necessity for science and scientific analyses and allows decisions to be made that overrule risk assessments irrespective of the data demonstrating environmental safety. Essentially the precautionary principle is used to tell us not to proceed because there is a threat of environmental harm and this therefore blocks the development of any advancement in theories or technology if there is even the slightest theoretical possibility of harm (Holm and Harris, …show more content…
The final outcome essentially depends on one’s personal values. For those that are money and development driven, ensuring that all risks are completely mitigated without any scientific reason may prove cumbersome and a waste of resources. However to those that have the best interests of the environment and the health of other humans at heart, the precautionary principle is a viable approach. Cameron and Abouchar (1991) indicates that even though not all the scientific evidence has been presented to the world on many environmental issues there is enough evidence for educational mind to act upon. Waiting for all the evidence will result in us waiting forever thus action should be taken now to prevent future disasters as it costs far less in implementing preventive measures. If the PP is to be used in risk analysis criteria must be negotiated for determining what are plausible threats associated with an action. Given a particular type of harm, a minimum probability level can be stipulated (with an agreed value), and if the actual probability of the harm is calculated to be below this probability level, then the harm is disregarded in the decision process (Starr,
3.2 Challenges Faced by Industries by Introduction of the PP
The Precautionary Principle is not a sound approach to risk analysis as it requires extensive assessments and has no basis or measure to give guidance to what level of analysis is deemed compliant for industry, whereas, risk analysis has to do with quality improvements which are quantitative and qualitative, PP lacks measures so it cannot help in risk analysis (Bodansky, 1994).
PP was originally introduced to give Risk/Environmental …show more content…
The application of the precautionary principle especially in industry actually removes the necessity for science and scientific analyses and allows decisions to be made that overrule risk assessments irrespective of the data demonstrating environmental safety. Essentially the precautionary principle is used to tell us not to proceed because there is a threat of environmental harm and this therefore blocks the development of any advancement in theories or technology if there is even the slightest theoretical possibility of harm (Holm and Harris, …show more content…
The final outcome essentially depends on one’s personal values. For those that are money and development driven, ensuring that all risks are completely mitigated without any scientific reason may prove cumbersome and a waste of resources. However to those that have the best interests of the environment and the health of other humans at heart, the precautionary principle is a viable approach. Cameron and Abouchar (1991) indicates that even though not all the scientific evidence has been presented to the world on many environmental issues there is enough evidence for educational mind to act upon. Waiting for all the evidence will result in us waiting forever thus action should be taken now to prevent future disasters as it costs far less in implementing preventive measures. If the PP is to be used in risk analysis criteria must be negotiated for determining what are plausible threats associated with an action. Given a particular type of harm, a minimum probability level can be stipulated (with an agreed value), and if the actual probability of the harm is calculated to be below this probability level, then the harm is disregarded in the decision process (Starr,