Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
favoured by those who have criticised the lack of direction that the prin-
ciple gives on grounds that it may legitimise arbitrary decision-making,
39
or who are sceptical over the possibility of making valid decisions on
precautionary action when a high degree of uncertainty about the risks
involved is present.
40
However, such a narrow understanding of the prin-
ciple is clearly unsuited for addressing situations of uncertainty that are
not capable of easy resolution through scienti
c research, but which, if they
are not addressed, may result in serious and potentially irreversible con-
sequences for ecosystems. For issues that raise more than
,
a conception of precaution is required which recognises the need for
action to prevent harm that goes beyond gathering suf
'
soft uncertainty
'
cient knowledge
to characterise the risks that proposed activities may present.
Trouwborst advises that
has been widely accepted as
a guide for precautionary action in international law.
41
Aproportionate
action is one that would correspond to the probability that harm will
be caused and the likely magnitude of that harm.
42
However, as with
the trigger for the principle
'
proportionality
'
s application, this concept assumes that
enough will be known about a situation to assess what risks of damage
are present. It provides no direction in circumstances where the range of
possible outcomes is unidenti
'
able.
43
Again, it is clear that a new under-
standing of precaution is required to replace expectations that scienti
c
knowledge of cause and effect will reveal the way forwards with a clear
mandate for action to protect ecosystems despite our ignorance of how
human disturbance causes them to fail.
3.2.3 Normative precaution
Reluctance to move away from decision-making based on knowledge of
cause and effect re
ects a prevailing unwillingness to choose between
environmental protection and the pursuit of objectives that are seen to
be economically and socially advantageous. The hope is that scienti
c
39
E. Fisher, J. Jones, and R. von Schomberg,
'
Implementing the Precautionary Principle:
Perspectives and Prospects
inE.Fisher,J.Jones,andR.vonSchomberg(eds)
Implementing the Precautionary Principle: Perspectives and Prospects (Cheltenham:
Edward Elgar Publishing, 2006), pp. 5
'
-
6.
40
A. Kinzig and D. Starrett,
'
Coping with Uncertainty: A Call for a New Science-Policy
(2003) 32 Ambio,330.
41
Trouwborst,
Forum
'
'
The Precautionary Principle in General International Law
'
,189.Seealsode
Sadeleer,
'
Environmental Principles
'
,pp.167
-
70.
42
Trouwborst,
'
The Precautionary Principle in General International Law
'
, 189.
43
de Sadeleer,
'
Environmental Principles
'
, pp. 167
-
8.
