Le principe de précaution comme norme de l'action publique ou la proportionnalité en question
In France the precautionary principle gave birth to two basic opposite interpretations. The first one, fixed in the French legal framework and developed by the European doctrine, supports an early but proportionate consideration of potential hazards. The second one has been backed by environmental NGOs and disseminated into current use by media and political circles under crisis circumstances. It asks for a proof of no-risk and aims at eradicating all sources of hazards to the possible extent. As a result, a basic confusion arose between two ideas: to take early preventive action, and to accumulate more stringent preventive measures. Firstly, the paper sketches the landscape of competing concepts. It then shows why the "abstention rule" cannot be supported, even when its requirements are attenuated. It also identifies how a wrong framing of the decision problem leads a specific artefact to arise, by which earliness in the scientific time induces an overall inflation of risks through a perception of increased potential damage. To keep the precautionary principle on the right track, two requirements are to be met: enforcing the consideration of potential benefits the same way as potential hazards; proportioning preventive measures to the scientific plausibility of hypotheses of risks, in order to give a lower weight to assumptions deprived of significant evidence.
|Date of creation:||2003|
|Date of revision:|
|Note:||View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00242985|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/|
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.:
- Dixit, A., 1988.
"Entry And Exit Decisions Under Uncertainty,"
91, Princeton, Department of Economics - Financial Research Center.
- 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.
- Miles S. Kimball, 1989.
"Precautionary Saving in the Small and in the Large,"
NBER Working Papers
2848, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Kimball, Miles S, 1990. "Precautionary Saving in the Small and in the Large," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(1), pages 53-73, January.
- Ben S. Bernanke, 1983. "Irreversibility, Uncertainty, and Cyclical Investment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 98(1), pages 85-106.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-00242985. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (CCSD)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.