Precautionary assessment, preventive

Tickner, J. (2003b) Precautionary Assessment A Framework for Integrating Science, Uncertainty, and Preventive Public Policy. In Tickner, J. (ed) Environmental Science and Preventive Public Policy. Washington D.C. Island Press. 

Tickner, Joel is Research Assistant Professor in the Department of Work Environment at the School of Health and Environment, University of Massachusetts Lowell. His scholarly interests include development of innovative scientific methods and policies to implement a precautionary and preventive approach to decisionmaking under uncertainty. His teaching and research focus on regulatory science and policy, risk assessment, and cleaner production. 

The basic premise of the Precautionary Principle is that decision makers should implement regulatory measures to prevent or restrict actions that may harm humans or the environment, even though there is incomplete scientific evidence to assess the significance of the potential harm. It has been used as an underlying rational in several international treaties and declarations. There are various definitions of the Precautionary Principle that are represented as better safe than sorry. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines it as, When information about potential risks... 

Another view explores the limits of the risk assessment-based approach to decision-making and what a precautionary paradigm might look like. The precautionary principle calls for preventive actions when there is reasonable scientific evidence of harm, although the nature and magnitude of that harm may not be fully understood scientifically. While a highly contentious term, proponents of the precautionary approach see this as a means to make better, more health protective decisions in the face of highly uncertain and complex risks. 

Conclusions. This section has outlined the problem of uncertainty in preventing risks from chemical exposures and the limitations of current scientific and decision tools based on the concept of risk assessment. It has outlined a new paradigm for decision-making for sustainability embodied in the precautionary principle. This approach has several key aspects ... 

Environmental impact assessment has already shown its value for implementing and strengthening sustainable development, as it combines the precautionary principle of preventing environmental damage and also arranges for public participation. EIA has also become the major tool for an integrated approach to the protection of the environment since it requires a comprehensive assessment of the impacts of an activity on the environment, contrary to the traditional sectoral approach. Moreover, EIA requires the formulation of alternatives to the proposed activity and brings facts and information on environmental impacts to the attention of the decision-makers and the public. 

The performance of systematic risk assessments is a task often taken by federal agencies like US EPA, US FDA, EU EFSA or national institutions. The result of a risk assessment is a starting point for the risk manager, e.g., the ministries, to develop adequate measures, like controls, limits or use restrictions. In the structured approach to the risk analysis the precautionary principle can be particularly relevant to the risk management. It shall be applied in those circumstances where scientific evidence is insufficient or imcertain and when there are indications for concern [95]. In order to prevent a disproportionately intensive use measures based on the precautionary principle should be... 

Article LI 10-1 enviromnent code. The precaution principle is explained in the requirements in article 5 of the environment charter which requires that when damage occurs, although rmcertain in the state of scientific knowledge, which may seriously and irreversibly affect the enviromnent, public authorities shall ensure, by applying the precautionary principle, and in their areas of responsibility, the implementation of risk assessment procedures the adoption of provisional and proportionate measures to prevent the occurrence of damage . 

Human health risk assessment of the type introduced above is not the only risk assessment modality operative in various areas. A second approach is that of the Precautionary Principle (see, for example, Percival 2006). The Precautionary Principle figures in health risk assessment to some extent but here it is presented for discussion within the final topic of this work, lead regulation. While this approach has been defined in various ways and often appears to be misunderstood, it basically describes a proactive, a priori, and more conservative methodology in terms of the consumer sector. This approach attempts to prevent or minimize risk of any public health and safety hazards before commercial introduction of a product occurs. Substances enter or do not enter the commercial domain based on evaluations generated beforehand. 

These two modalities also interact differently with public health policy. Conventional risk assessment helps inform efforts at secondary disease prevention or disease risk prevention by first quantifying the extent of contact with existing toxic substances and then the extent of harm to human and other populations from such toxic substances. The Precautionary Principle... 

The general assessment required by MHSWR should identify the hazards, the extent of the risks faced and enable the necessary preventive and precautionary measures to be decided. Where possible the protective precautions should be collective rather than personal. If personal protective equipment is considered appropriate, PPER sets out the steps to be taken in the process of selecting suitable and effective equipment which the employer has to provide to his employees. Training should be given in the correct use and maintenance of PPE and in the procedures for reporting damage and faults. 

---