Reiko
  • Home
  • About Us
      • Back
      • Trustees
      • Our Objectives
      • PSGR Past Trustees 
  • Contact Us
      • Back
      • Join PSGR
  • Precautionary Principle
  • Global Responsibility

  • You are here:  
  • Home
  • Precautionary Principle

Precautionary Principle

‘In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be applied widely by 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.’      (UNCED 1992)

When Germany established the Clean Air Act in 1974, it included the requirement for Vorsorgeprinzip. or foresight. This was the first formal application of the precautionary principle. In 1992 to aid United Nations states prevent and protect the environment from environmental degradation, the Precautionary Principle was included in the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development.  The step to incorporate the Precautionary Principle to protect human health, in addition to an obligation to prevent of environmental harm was taken in 2005 by UNESCO:

When human activities may lead to morally unacceptable harm that is scientifically plausible but uncertain, actions shall be taken to avoid or diminish that harm. Morally unacceptable harm refers to harm to humans or the environment that is:

  • Threatening to human life or health; or
  • Serious and effectively irreversible; or
  • Inequitable to present or future generations; or
  • Imposed without adequate consideration of the human rights of those affected.

The judgement of plausibility should be grounded in scientific analysis. Analysis should be ongoing so that chosen actions are subject to review. Uncertainty may apply to, but need not be limited to, causality or the bounds of the possible harm.

Actions are interventions that are undertaken before harm occurs that seek to avoid or diminish the harm. Actions should be chosen that are proportional to the seriousness of the potential harm, with consideration of their positive and negative consequences, and with an assessment of the moral implications of both action and inaction. The choice of action should be the result of a participatory process. (UNESCO 2005, p.14)

Information

  • Endocrine Disruption
  • Epigenetics
  • PSGR Supports
  • Glossary
  • Publications & Resources
    • Submissions & Responses
      • FSANZ
      • NZ RMA
      • NZ EPA & MfE
      • NZ MPI
      • Trade
      • Health
      • NZ Council Submissions
      • General government
    • Letters
      • New Zealand Councils
      • Regulatory Authorities
      • Federated Farmers
      • Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand
    • Reports & Papers
  • Links
  • Taking Action

Topics

  • Depleted Uranium
  • Emerging Issues
    • Nanotechology
  • Fluoride
  • Freshwater
  • Genetic Engineering & New Breeding Technologies
    • Genetic Engineering FAQs
    • Transgenic Cotton
    • Open Letter to the New Zealand Government 2003 (Genetic Engineering)
    • Royal Commission on Genetic Modification (2000)
    • Genetic Engineering: Policy and Science since the Royal Commission: Insoluble Problems
    • Testimonies
    • Synthetic Biology
    • NZ Councils - Precautionary Statements on GMOs
  • Geo-engineering
  • Hydraulic Fracturing
  • Mercury Toxicity
  • Pesticide toxicity
  • Pollution & Biosolids
  • Synthetic Biology

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
- Margaret Mead

  • Contact Us
  • About Us

Who's Online

We have 156 guests online


 

© Physicians and Scientists for Global Responsibility New Zealand Charitable Trust