I'm thinking that the "precautionary principle" can be summarized as the need for action without 100% evidence...my understanding is that it is taking the word of people, media, and the clear view of what's happening to the world around you, instead of scientific statements, facts, and numbers. It's opening your eyes and seeing as believing, taking precaution before it's too late. I don't believe there is ever an end to scientific studies, and if we always waited for a scientific conclusion before any action then we'd have doomed ourselves years ago.
The precautionary principle should be widely applied to Environmental regulation, because there will always be evidence for or against taking action. As I said before, seeing is believing, and even a few pictures of our diminished Arctic Ice or a drowning polar bear should be enough to start taking action for our Northern region. If we wait until ALL scientific data is collected as proof of potential extinction of the Polar Bear, they will probably be long gone.
Perhaps there could be serious negative consequences, as we do want to still make sure that even our visual evidence is enough to march in and save the day. We have to take precaution ON the precautionary principle so as to not "jump the gun" too quickly. Otherwise, acting on stopping irreversible damage as quickly as possible should be something that we definitely follow.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment