Abstract
The diversity of interpretation, the subsequent lack of implementation, and the enforcement of the precautionary principle have been important issues in the European environmental discourse for the past five years. The European Commission published a communication on the Commission’s interpretation of the precautionary principle on February 2nd, 2000. However, the distinction between precaution and prevention is absent in the EU Commission’s interpretation, resulting in the communication’s lacking relevance for the precautionary principle. The important consequence of the precautionary concept in policy and decision-making is that it should not be based on an assumed certainty of the certainty of environmental knowledge — but rather on a certainty of the uncertainty of environmental knowledge. In other words, the regulation should, to a greater extent, be based on the management of uncertainty, and risk assessments should explicitly present and discuss related uncertainty and lack of knowledge. The management of uncertainty should be based on setting the acceptable level of risk of accepting a failure to reject the null hypothesis of no adverse effects (β). This is done by setting the required power (1-β) according to a socioeconomic cost-benefit analysis. Moreover, the acceptable ecological effect size (A) could also be seta priori which would have implications for the power of a study. Reversal of the burden of proof could be considered in order to resolve possible legal implications for the risk managers.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arrow KJ (1992): I know a hawk from a handsaw. In: Szenberg M (ed) Eminent Economists: Their life and philosophies. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press, pp 42–50
Beck U (1992): Risk society. Sage Publications, London, UK
Bernstein PL (1996): Against the gods: The remarkable story of risk. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, New York, USA
Bichel S (ed) (1998): Rapport fra Hovedudvalget, MilJøstyrelsen www.mst.dk/udgiv/publikationer/1999/87-7909-296-9/html/ helepubl.htm — 101k. Bichel-udvalget, Copenhagen, Denmark
Bodansky D (1991): Scientific uncertainty and the precautionary principle. Environment33: 4–5 & 43–44
Bratt C (1996): Når tvivlen skal komme miljøet til gode. Tidsskrift for samfunnsforskning2:199–224
Buhl-Mortensen L, Welin S (1998): The ethics of doing policy relevant science: The precautionary principle and the significance of non-significant results. Science and Engineering Ethics4: 401–412
Carey J (2000): Personal communication 3rd SETAC World Congress, Brighton, UK, 21–25/5-2000
EU COM (2000): Communication from the European Commission on the precautionary principle (COM 2000,1,02-02-2000). Brussels: EC. Available on the World Wide Web:http://europa.eu.int/ comm/off/com/health consumer/precaution en.pdf
EU COM (2001): Full text of the White Paper on the Strategy for a future Chemicals’ Policy (COM 2001, 88) (pdf-200K; except el 1, 200K). Stakeholders’ Conference,europa.eu.int/comm/environment/chemicals/whitepaper.htm — 11k
Danish Environmental Ministry (2000): Pesticidhandlingsplan II. Copenhagen, Denmark.www.mst.dk/udgiv/Publikationer/2000/ 87-7944-262-5/html/helepubl.htm — 42k
Feldman HL (1995): Science and uncertainty in mass exposure litigation. Texas Law Review74: 24–48
Freestone D, Hey E (1996): Origins and development of the precautionary principle. In: Freestone D, Hey E (eds) The Precautionary Principle and International Law (pp 3–15) The Hague, Kluwer Law International, Holland
Gee D (2000): Personal communications at the chemicals conference ‘Chemicals under the spotlight’ in Copenhagen 27–28/ 10–2000
Gray JS (1990): Statistics and the precautionary principle. Marine pollution Bulletin21: 174–176
Green RH (1979): Sampling design and statistical methods for environmental scientists. John Wiley & Sons, New York, New York, USA
Gullett W (2000): Environmental decision-making in a transboundary context: Principles and challenges for the Denmark-Sweden Øresund fixed link. Journal of Environmental Assessment and Management 2 (3). In press
Fisher E, Harding R (eds) (1999): Perspectives of the precautionary principle. The Federation Press, Sydney, Australia
Hey E (1992): The precautionary concept in environmental policy and law: Institutionalizing caution. Georgetown International Environmental Law Review4: 303–318
Kuhn T (1962): The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago University Press, USA
Majewski C (2000): Personal communication. 3rd SETAC World Congress in Brighton, UK, 21–25/5–2000
Mapstone BD (1995): Scalable decision rules for environmental impacts studies: Effect size, Type I and Type II errors. Ecological Applications5: 401–410
Nice Treaty (2001): Treaty of Nice File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat — View as Text Journal of the European Communities C 80/ 1 ‘Treaty of Nice Amending the Treaty on European Union, the Treaties Establishing the European Communities and Certain’. Description: Text of the Nice Treaty (PDF format)europa.eu.int/ eur-lex/en/treaties/dat/nice treaty en.pdf
O’Riordan T, Jordan A (1995): The precautionary principle in contemporary environmental politics. Environmental Values4: 1991–2012
Peterman RM (1990): Statistical power can improve fisheries research and management. Canadian Journal of Fishery and Aquatic Science47: 2–15
Peterman RM, M’Giongle M (1992): Statistical power analysis and the precautionary principle. Marine Pollution Bulletin24: 231–234
Peters RH (1991): A critique for ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
Raffensberg C, Tickner J (eds) (1999): Protecting public health and the environment: Implementing the precautionary principle. Island Press, Washington, DC, USA
Rehbinder E (1994): The precautionary principle in an international perspective. Pages 91–105. In: Basse EM (ed) Miljørettens grundspørgsmål, bidrag til en Nordisk forskeruddannelse. Gad, København, Denmark
Sanderson H (2000): Håndtering af forsigtighedsprincippet. Vand & Jord3:88–90
Sanderson H (2001): Replicability and interpretation of micro/ mesocosm experiments. ESPR — Environ Sci & Pollut Res-OnlineFirst [DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1065/espr2001.09.085]
Sanderson H, Petersen S (2001): Statistical power analysis of data from quasi-natural mesocosm ponds treated with Roundup2000. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. In press
Santillo D (2000): A precautionary tale: Report from the precautionary principle debate. Third SETAC World Congress, Brighton, May 2000. SETAC Globe1: 17–20
Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1995): Biometry. 3rd edition, WH Freeman and company, New York
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (1992): Rio declaration on environment and development. Made at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Available on the World Wide Web:http://www. unep.org/Documents/Default.asp ?DocumentID = 78 & ArticleID=1163
Underwood AJ (1995): Ecological research and (and research into) environmental management. Ecological applications5: 232–247
Underwood AJ (1997): Experiments in ecology: Their logical design and interpretation using analysis of variance. Cambridge University Press, UK
Weinberger AM (1985): Science and its limits: The regulators dilemma. Issues in Science and Technology Fall:59–72
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sanderson, H., Petersen, S. Power analysis as a reflexive scientific tool for interpretation and implementation of the precautionary principle in the European Union. Environ Sci & Pollut Res 9, 221–226 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02987494
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02987494