Precautionary Tale

The latest environmentalist concept--the Precautionary Principle--seeks to stop innovation before it happens. Very bad idea.

Ronald Bailey from the April 1999 issue

(Page 3 of 3)

This problem--deciding who gets to decide what--is just one of many slippery slopes that the Precautionary Principle teeters over. Of course, it quickly became apparent that, for the AAAS panel, the only democratic decisions that are acceptable are those consistent with environmentalist goals. But other obvious problems were never acknowledged.

For example, democratic decision making concerning any and all environment-affecting actions could have the effect of ratifying extraordinarily conservative choices. That is, a community could use its environmental veto to say, No, we don't want a new store, a new housing development, a new factory, a new road. Basically, it means that the vested interests of the present can strangle the future. After all, as one wag noted, an environmentalist is somebody who already owns his second home in the woods.

Of course, neither the regulators at the meeting nor the environmental activists on the AAAS panel considered a real solution: removing the decisions about resources from the political process entirely. Politics is always win/lose, while market decisions are generally win/win. Give fishermen, loggers, and cattlemen secure property rights to the resources, and that shifts their incentives toward trying to protect and enhance their resource, rather than merely plundering somebody else's resource.

Draconian as the Wingspread proposals are, Jeff Howard doesn't think they are strong enough. He fears that wily capitalists and innovators will find ways around them, so he suggests five additional tenets:

Precaution must become the default mode of all technological decision making.
Even the most fundamental of past decisions must be subject to re-examination and precautionary reform.
The primary mode of regulation and regulatory science should be at the macroscale.
Knowledge of broad patterns trumps ignorance of detail.
Human society must identify and accommodate itself to broad patterns in natural processes.

Consider for a moment the tenet that "even the most fundamental of past decisions must be subject to re-examination and precautionary reform." Actually, the process of technological innovation constantly "re-examines" past decisions, but that's not what Howard has in mind. He wants to create a political process, which he naturally insists would be open, that would eliminate technologies of which he disapproves: nuclear power plants, organochlorines, most plastics, etc. But what I find intriguing is the idea that "even the most fundamental of past decisions" could be "reformed."

How fundamental is fundamental? Decisions like the invention of the automobile? The use of fossil fuels? The development of agriculture? Fire? Look at Howard's last tenet, that society must accommodate itself "to broad patterns in natural processes." What violates the broad patterns in natural processes? Medicine? City building? Farming?

Before the AAAS session ended, Howard offered a third corollary to the Principle: "Precaution requires consideration of the full range of social and technological alternatives" to what is being proposed. It is very much in line with the Wingspread Consensus Statement, which declares that precaution "must also involve an examination of the full range of alternatives, including no action."

Environmentalists often liken technology and economic growth to a car careening down a foggy road. They suggest that it would be better if we slowed before we crashed into a wall hidden in the fog. The Precautionary Principle, its champions believe, "would serve as a `speed bump' in the development of technologies and enterprises."

Unfortunately, these principles and tenets may sound sensible to many people, especially those who live in societies already replete with technology. These people already have their centrally heated house in the woods; they already enjoy the freedom from want, disease, and ignorance that technology can provide. They may think they can afford the luxury of ultimate precaution. But there are billions of people who still yearn to have their lives transformed. For them, the Precautionary Principle represents not a speed bump but a wall.

Should we look before we leap? Sure we should. But every utterance of proverbial wisdom has its counterpart, reflecting both the complexity and the variety of life's situations and the foolishness involved in applying a short list of hard rules to them. For some people in some situations, "Look before you leap" is good advice. Others might be wiser to heed the equally proverbial, "He who hesitates is lost."

People have understood this maxim for millennia, and the chances are that its message will eventually reach even Wisconsin's Wingspread Conference Center. And when it does, I want the Wingspreaders to understand that the moral equivalent of a Federal Anti-Hesitation Commission isn't such a good idea, either.

Page: < 1 23

Reason needs your support. Please donate today!

Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment or disable your ability to comment for any reason at any time.

Pingback| 12.23.09 @ 2:08PM

Is Global Warming Unstoppable? - Page 89 - PriusChat Forums links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…will not appreciate turning the principle around and examining the reverse idea of doing nothing if you can't prove a good reason for doing it. So, I'll be helpful in that regard as well. Precautionary Tale - Reason Magazine ...Environmentalists often liken technology and economic growth to a car careening down a foggy road. They suggest that it would be better if we slowed before we crashed into a wall hidden in…

Pingback| 12.31.09 @ 9:54AM

The constant economy « dw2 links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…Pacific Ocean. Other parts, however, made me think, “ Hang on, there’s another side to this story ” – for example, for some of the incidents described in the chapter about the Precautionary Principle, and for the section about nuclear power. This book is like a manifesto. Mixed in with real-world anecdotes and analysis, each chapter contains a list of “Voter Demand Box” items. For…

Pingback| 1.15.10 @ 1:15PM

Magenta Approaches to Biotechnology « No Hidden Magenta links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…when it comes to banning various proposed and actual biotechnological interventions. Both conservatives and progressives endorse the application of the so-called precautionary principle to bioethics. A profound attack on new technologies, the precautionary principle requires innovators to prove that their new technologies are totally safe before they are allowed to introduce them into the marketplace. And actually …

Pingback| 3.1.10 @ 5:51PM

The American Conservative » Ron Unz On Hispanic Crime: Nice Going, But So What If He’ links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…less safe. On immigration, the Precautionary Principle must govern. I can already hear worldly libertarian pundits deriding this position. Hasn’t the Precautionary Principle been debunked as incoherent? As Cass Sunstein writes in his book Worst-Case Scenarios, the Precautionary Principle condemns both action (“Even if we don’t know whether immigration increases crime, so long as there is at…

Jeff|9.8.10 @ 2:49PM|#

Brilliant article Ron. I did a college paper on "fringe environmentalists" and all of them seem to have the same fundamental hatred for innovation. Where those interested in human technological progress daydream of a future with flying cars and talking robots, environmentalists see bicycles and the return of de facto human slavery to a "benevolent" central power; think Demolition Man. Almost without exception environmentalists hate science fiction... I've always found that to be a revealing character trait.

nfl jerseys|11.15.10 @ 3:44AM|#

cxjyfhgfhc

Sheepskin Boots Sale|11.22.10 @ 2:32AM|#

Cheap Womens Uggs, the ability to be possible in children's sizes, auctionUggs Australia Outlet affidavit enforce its presence to get to know and admired by the best individuals of the variety of ages and vocations.

Sheepskin Boots Sale|11.22.10 @ 2:35AM|#

You can purchase Sheepskin Boots Sale boots similar to the anniversary and all, and the margin around each room for punishment accoutrements to create Sheepskin Ugg Boots updated so absorbing and polished. Moreover, the implementation of the clothes one allegory

دردشة|1.27.11 @ 12:31AM|#

thank you a lot's man see this website too
http://www.a6rbna.com
http://www.m-arabi.com

منتدى العرب|3.9.11 @ 7:03PM|#

Thank you

منتدى العرب|3.9.11 @ 7:40PM|#

دردشة عراقنا |4.25.11 @ 6:02AM|#

thnx you

دردشة عراقية|5.1.11 @ 6:10PM|#

Thank you, my dear on this important topic You can also browse my site and I am honored to do this site for songs
http://www.iraq3.com
This website is for travel to Malaysia
http://www.iraq3.com/vb

حجز فنادق مكة|5.7.11 @ 10:08AM|#

thanks alot

ايجار سيارات مصر|5.16.11 @ 7:19AM|#

thanks

دردشة العراق|5.21.11 @ 4:17PM|#

منتديات العراق|8.7.11 @ 10:58PM|#

thank you man

قبلة الوداع|8.12.11 @ 10:59PM|#

thank u man

Air Jordan Ol School|8.13.11 @ 8:33AM|#

That's cool!

دردشة عراقنا|8.16.11 @ 5:42AM|#

thnx u

مهرجان|10.17.11 @ 3:08PM|#

http://www.mhragan.com
http://www.mhragan.com/vb

Reason.com