Environment & Energy
Related: About this forum"Precautionary Principle" from George Monbiot
Heres something remarkable I stumbled across while researching my column on Monday, but did not have room to include. I hope youll agree that it is worth sharing.
I was trying to understand the context for the new chief scientists cavalier treatment of scientific evidence, in an article he wrote opposing a European ban on neonicotinoid pesticides. These are the toxins which, several studies suggest, could be partly responsible for the rapid decline in bees and other pollinators.
Just one month into the job, Sir Mark Walport has, I believe, disgraced himself: by misrepresenting the science, misinforming the public about risk and uncertainty and indulging in scaremongering and wild exaggeration in support of the governments position. I believe he has seriously damaged his standing and that of the office he holds.
Among the many problems with the article he wrote was the way he defined the precautionary principle. Interpreting and upholding this principle is fundamental to the chief scientists role. Yet he doesnt seem to understand what it means. Heres what he said about it:
This simple idea just means working out and balancing in advance all the risks and benefits of action or inaction, and to make a proportionate response.
Oh yes? Heres how the Rio Declaration, which the UK, with 171 other states, signed in 1992, defines it:
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 difference is critical to an understanding of the governments environmental responsibilities. As if to underline the fact that he hasnt grasped it, Sir Mark used his article to do the opposite: he used a lack of full scientific certainty as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.
The precautionary principle, as defined by the Rio Declaration, has, in the words of the European Commission, become a full-fledged and general principle of international law.
In other words, its not something you would expect a chief scientist to make up as he goes along.
So the question that occurred to me was this. If the governments chief scientist doesnt know what the precautionary principle is, does the government know?
full text at http://www.monbiot.com/2013/05/01/the-providential-principle/
KT2000
(20,576 posts)has defines the US position on hazards - wait until the damage is done and then see if the sick and dead outweigh the profits of huge corporations.
Plain and simple the US RARELY bans known hazardous chemicals.
Addison
(299 posts)How many honey bees will have to die before we ban neonicotinoide pesticides?