Precautionary approaches

First, the Ecodesign Directive is a possibility to implement more precautionary approach against risks posed by hazardous chemicals. 

The Role of Science and Discourse in the Application of the Precautionary Approach... 

The precautionary approach (PA) is an important element of environmental law that is used to address a potential risk whether or not that risk can be demonstrated or its consequences identified. The static use of a sole, generally accepted definition of the PA is extremely difficult, since this cannot meet the multitude of needs in important legislative tools introduced in many conventions designed to protect biodiversity. The way out will be a more discursive model, a model that allows for adaptation to specific conditions and which enforces solution-oriented procedures. 

In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by the States according to their capabilities. 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. ... 

Other Roots to Problems with the Precautionary Approach I 293... 

The considerable inherent uncertainty in our understanding of the way that chemicals interact with the environment means that there will continue to be a risk of serious effects, as a result of the use of chemicals products, that we cannot predict on the basis of our current or foreseeable understanding of these processes. This requires a precautionary approach to chemicals management, and this is best implemented through substitution. ..We recommend that the UK Government adopt substitution as a central objective of chemicals policy." UK Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, 2003 ... 

The two most contentious aspects of REACH have been the registration requirements and the authorization process. While no one has argued that substances should not have to be registered, there have been many arguments about the amount of data that must be submitted in the registration dossiers and about how to deal with substances contained in manufactured articles imported from outside the EU. The public availability of information has also been an issue. The focus of the debate about authorization was whether authorizations should be granted where an alternative was available. The debate here can be seen as an argument between risk-based and precautionary approaches. 

Chemicals, so industry and many in government insist, must be regulated on the basis of risk, specifically the risk of specifiable types of physical harm. As discussed in the last chapter, in debates about regulation this risk-based approach is contrasted with a precautionary approach. 

Proponents of the risk-based approach emphasize that decisions should be made on the basis of what is known. There must be clear evidence that harm of a specified nature may be caused by a technology, harm of sufficient severity to justify the proposed restrictions on that technology. In contrast, it is less clear what a precautionary approach involves.1 2 It is often presented as being the taking of restrictive action when there is a lack of clear evidence or of scientific certainty. Principle 15 of the 1992 Rio Declaration on the Environment and Development puts it as follows ... 

Instead of assessing risk, I suggest that we should try to assess riskiness in the everyday sense of this term, where it refers to the epistemic possibility of harm, not merely probabilities of identified types of harm. Whereas risk relates to outcomes, riskiness is a property of a thing, situation or activity and is relative to our knowledge about it. I suggest that what are normally termed precautionary approaches are concerned with riskiness, rather than just risk they are concerned with whether, for all we know, there is a possibility of harm, not just with the probabilities of known, specifiable types of harm. 

Some of the less adverse pollutants (called secondary pollutants) have been addressed with guidelines but the present knowledge on quantification of exposure, health data, etc makes it difficult to set official guidelines. Major research is needed on these secondary pollutants before recommendations or guidelines can be established. In the interim period, a precautionary approach should lead to an ALARA principle for these secondary causalities. 

Government of Canada. 2001. A Canadian perspective on the precautionary approach/ principle discussion document. Ottawa Government of Canada, 20 p. http //www. pco-bcp.gc.ca/raoics-srdc/docs/precaution/Discussion/discussion e.htm (accessed December 28, 2007). 

A complementary way to classify standards (Table 3.1) is to consider how uncertainty over the true value of the standard might be related to whether it is used as a screening tool (where uncertainty is high and a precautionary approach to the uncertainty has been taken) or as a legally mandatory pass or fail threshold (for which there is little doubt) (Figure 3.3). 

Preventive Measures Unless voluntary measures are proven sufficient, the precautionary approach requires anticipatory regulation. If a substance can be substituted with a suitable, better known and less hazardous substance or non-chemical option, then that should be the first priority. Secondly, partial or full restrictions can be implemented on substances that are precautionarily classified as being persistent, bioaccumulative, toxic or otherwise hazardous. 

---