Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
unusual. 70 For example, many initiatives for enhanced energy ef
ciency
will require resource consumption to provide new equipment and insulat-
ing material. Many of the examples that the UK Government
s guidance
document gives of options that would avoid major infrastructure develop-
ment would also require construction to provide better local facilities. 71
Accordingly, I do not propose that preference for options which would
obviate development should be a separate principle for policy-making.
Instead, the ecological consequences of ef
'
ciency measures would fall to
be assessed alongside those of other options for meeting demand.
3.3.2.3 Substitution
The second principle for policy-making is that options which are assessed
to present the least threat to ecosystem health should be preferred.
Needs should be met in ways which, comparatively, are judged as being
least likely to erode the resilience of ecosystems or to trigger change in
their states. The principle corresponds with and supports normative
precaution
s aim of risk reduction. Options that are assessed to present
the greatest threat of harm would be ranked lowest amongst alternatives
for meeting policy objectives and their use discontinued if less-harmful
alternatives are available. 72 In addition, it acts as a stimulus for the
development of new technologies and, generally, for the identi
'
cation
of ecologically desirable solutions to policy issues. When coupled with a
requirement for the rolling review of policy, the principle establishes
perpetual movement away from reliance on options that heighten threats
of ecological degradation as a central aim of government. 73
The principle shares parallels with the substitution principle which
has been employed in Swedish chemicals policy to promote the
70 G. Pring et al.,
The Impact of Energy on Health, Environment and Sustainable
Development: the TANSTAAFL Problem
'
in D. N. Zillman, C. Redgwell, Y. O. Omorogbe
and L. K. Barrera-Hernández (eds) Beyond the Carbon Economy (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2008), pp. 13
'
-
15.
71 Of
1.
72 This approach corresponds with that prescribed by the maximin rule for decision-
making under conditions of ignorance. The rule directs that, in such circumstances, a
rational decision-maker should choose the option whose worst possible outcome is not
worse than that presented by any other option
ce of the Deputy Prime Minister,
'
A Practical Guide
'
,pp.70
-
'
s worst possible outcome. For further
discussion of this rule see O. Godard,
The Precautionary Principle and Catastrophism
on Tenterhooks: Lessons from a Constitutional Reform in France
'
in E. Fisher, J. Jones
and R. von Schomberg (eds) Implementing the Precautionary Principle: Perspectives
and Prospects (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2006), p. 77; and C. Munthe, The Price of
Precaution and the Ethics of Risk (Dordrecht: Springer, 2011), pp. 44
'
-
50.
73 Chapter 3, Section 3.4.2.1 .
 
Search WWH ::




Custom Search