A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Ecological wisdom as a guide for implementing the precautionary principle
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2626-160X
Many governments around the world have used the precautionary principle as the foundation in developing public policies since the late twentieth century. The principle stipulates that governments shall be obligated to restrict or ban activities that may cause serious and/or irreversible harm to human health and the environment, even without fully established scientific evidence of causal relationship. Further, the proposers of the activities must demonstrate that those activities will not cause serious harm. The precautionary principle has received criticisms, and these range from ignoring the benefits from proposed activities or overlooking the harm from inaction, having bias toward nature, to imposing an impossible burden of proof on the action proposers. Some of the debates have revealed the misuse of the principle and the need for clarification and specification. Other differences of opinion can be attributed to the uncertainties of the future since neither the proponents nor the opponents of the principle can be certain about the outcome of a proposed action. Therefore, socio-ecological practitioners need more knowledge implementation and impact research to produce actionable guidance on implementing the precautionary principle for sustaining human settlements. The recent progress of ecological wisdom has the potential to provide a fresh perspective for applying the precautionary principle. After describing ecological wisdom, this essay demands that pursuing benefits and avoiding problems are everyone’s responsibility. All involved stakeholders have the same moral obligation to internalize knowledge, experience, and ethical values in decision-makings that affect humans and the environment they rely on.
Ecological wisdom as a guide for implementing the precautionary principle
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2626-160X
Many governments around the world have used the precautionary principle as the foundation in developing public policies since the late twentieth century. The principle stipulates that governments shall be obligated to restrict or ban activities that may cause serious and/or irreversible harm to human health and the environment, even without fully established scientific evidence of causal relationship. Further, the proposers of the activities must demonstrate that those activities will not cause serious harm. The precautionary principle has received criticisms, and these range from ignoring the benefits from proposed activities or overlooking the harm from inaction, having bias toward nature, to imposing an impossible burden of proof on the action proposers. Some of the debates have revealed the misuse of the principle and the need for clarification and specification. Other differences of opinion can be attributed to the uncertainties of the future since neither the proponents nor the opponents of the principle can be certain about the outcome of a proposed action. Therefore, socio-ecological practitioners need more knowledge implementation and impact research to produce actionable guidance on implementing the precautionary principle for sustaining human settlements. The recent progress of ecological wisdom has the potential to provide a fresh perspective for applying the precautionary principle. After describing ecological wisdom, this essay demands that pursuing benefits and avoiding problems are everyone’s responsibility. All involved stakeholders have the same moral obligation to internalize knowledge, experience, and ethical values in decision-makings that affect humans and the environment they rely on.
Ecological wisdom as a guide for implementing the precautionary principle
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2626-160X
Many governments around the world have used the precautionary principle as the foundation in developing public policies since the late twentieth century. The principle stipulates that governments shall be obligated to restrict or ban activities that may cause serious and/or irreversible harm to human health and the environment, even without fully established scientific evidence of causal relationship. Further, the proposers of the activities must demonstrate that those activities will not cause serious harm. The precautionary principle has received criticisms, and these range from ignoring the benefits from proposed activities or overlooking the harm from inaction, having bias toward nature, to imposing an impossible burden of proof on the action proposers. Some of the debates have revealed the misuse of the principle and the need for clarification and specification. Other differences of opinion can be attributed to the uncertainties of the future since neither the proponents nor the opponents of the principle can be certain about the outcome of a proposed action. Therefore, socio-ecological practitioners need more knowledge implementation and impact research to produce actionable guidance on implementing the precautionary principle for sustaining human settlements. The recent progress of ecological wisdom has the potential to provide a fresh perspective for applying the precautionary principle. After describing ecological wisdom, this essay demands that pursuing benefits and avoiding problems are everyone’s responsibility. All involved stakeholders have the same moral obligation to internalize knowledge, experience, and ethical values in decision-makings that affect humans and the environment they rely on.
Ecological wisdom as a guide for implementing the precautionary principle
Socio Ecol Pract Res
Wang, Xinhao (author)
Socio-Ecological Practice Research ; 1 ; 25-32
2019-03-01
8 pages
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
English
Chatroom: the precautionary principle
British Library Online Contents | 2001
Planning and the Precautionary Principle
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 1998
Precautionary principle and risk assessment
| Online Contents | 2008
Challenges posed by the precautionary principle and accountability in ecological risk assessment
| Online Contents | 2003