George Monbiot: Why policymakers understanding the Precautionary Principle is important

[wtmusic]

Sir Mark Walport, the (UK) government's new chief scientist, doesn’t seem to understand what the precautionary principle means.

"...I was trying to understand the context for the new chief scientist's cavalier treatment of scientific evidence, in an article he wrote opposing a European ban on neonicotinoid pesticides. These are the toxins which, several studies suggest, could be partly responsible for the rapid decline in bees and other pollinators.

<>

Among the many problems with the article he wrote was the way he defined the precautionary principle. Interpreting and upholding this principle is fundamental to the chief scientist's role. Yet he doesn't seem to understand what it means. Here's what he said about it:

This simple idea just means working out and balancing in advance all the risks and benefits of action or inaction, and to make a proportionate response.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2013/may/01/protect-natural-world-understand-precautionary-principle

[GliderGuider]

1. If I had any hair, it would have just burst into flames.

SRSLY? Walport seems to think his job is to redefine any inconvenient terms for the benefit of TPTB and BAU. Jesus.

[kristopher]

2. Monbiot conveniently omits the govt's pursuit of nuclear power from his list.

I'm not surprised, since his endorsement of that policy would reveal him to be a hypocrite.

[caraher]

3. It would only be hypocritical if he privately thought nuclear power more dangerous

In fact, Monbiot's position is completely consistent with his publicly-stated beliefs about climate change and the magnitude of the risks involved with nuclear power. Indeed, it would be truly bizarre for him to include nuclear power after the defense he made of it in the wake of Fukushima.

Unless you have some access to his private thoughts that I don't, this omission makes him, at worst, wrong, not a hypocrite.

[kristopher]

4. Not at all.

When you apply the precautionary principle to the use of nuclear power in light of the alternatives it is unequivocal that endorsing it violates the principle. Since he is taking others to task for being willfully blind in their interpretation of the PP that makes him a hypocrite.

[cprise]

5. I think he is probably wrong *and* a hypocrite

Monbiot seems to think that nuclear is safe enough because the risks are known.

But the Precautionary Principle deals with how we act in the face of uncertain chances and high stakes. It applies more to nuclear power and less to carbon emissions, IMHO.