This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

The Paradox of Precaution

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Pauline Barrieu
Bernard Sinclair-Desgagné ()

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In the United States and most industrialized countries, regulatory policies and decision-making pertaining to food safety, occupational health and environmental protection are science-based. The actual pace and complexity of technological innovation, however, make it increasingly necessary to deal with situations where science cannot yet provide a definite picture. In this context, a now widely invoked rule, known as the 'Precautionary Principle', recommends to 'err on the side of preservation' until better scientific information becomes available. We draw a formal representation of this statement, and we show that it exhibits a logical contradiction. This negative result conveys a clarification of the type of actions science-based regulation should consider in the presence of scientific uncertainty.

Aux États-Unis et dans la plupart des pays industrialisés, les règlements et politiques publics relatifs à la sécurité alimentaire, la santé au travail et la protection de l'environnement sont en principe basés sur l'information émanant des scientifiques. L'accélération et la complexité du progrès technologique rendent toutefois inévitable pour le régulateur de devoir prendre des décisions avant que la science puisse fournir une représentation claire du risque. Dans ce contexte, l'approche dite du «Principe de précaution» recommande d'«errer du côté de la prévention» jusqu'à ce que les scientifiques puissent donner le ton juste. Nous produisons une représentation formelle de ce principe, et nous montrons qu'il contient une incohérence logique. Ce résultat négatif permet néanmoins de préciser le type d'actions que la réglementation des risques basée sur la science devrait promouvoir en présence d'incertitude scientifique.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.cirano.qc.ca/pdf/publication/2003s-63.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by CIRANO in its series CIRANO Working Papers with number 2003s-63.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 01 Oct 2003
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cir:cirwor:2003s-63

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 2020 rue University, 25e �tage, Montr�al, Qu�c, H3A 2A5
Phone: (514) 985-4000
Fax: (514) 985-4039
Email:
Web page: http://www.cirano.qc.ca/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Webmaster).

Related research
Keywords: Environmental and health risks; science-based regulation; scientific uncertainty; Precautionary Principle; Risques à la santé humaine et à l'environnement; réglementation basée sur la science; incertitude scientifique; principe de précaution;

Find related papers by JEL classification:
K32 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Environmental, Health, and Safety Law
D70 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - General
D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Robert A. Pollak, 1995. "Regulating Risks," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 179-191, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Christian Gollier, 2001. "Should we beware of the Precautionary Principle?," Economic Policy, CEPR, CES, MSH, vol. 16(33), pages 301-328, October. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Gollier, Christian & Jullien, Bruno & Treich, Nicolas, 2000. "Scientific progress and irreversibility: an economic interpretation of the 'Precautionary Principle'," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 229-253, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Claude Henry & Marc Henry, 2002. "Formalization and applications of the Precautionary Principle," Working Papers hal-00243001_v1, HAL. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  5. Giovanni Immordino, 2003. "Looking for a Guide to Protect the Environment: The Development of the Precautionary Principle," Journal of Economic Surveys, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 17(5), pages 629-644, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? IDEAS was sponsored from 1997 to 2002 by the Université du Québec à Montréal.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-19.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.