A Companion to the Philosophy of Technology

Practical Implications

A major outcome of these critical debates is a recognition that the substantive significance of the precautionary principle rests largely in the specific institutional frameworks, deliberative procedures and analytical methods through which it is implemented.⁸⁹ In other words, precaution is more important as a process than as a “decision rule.”⁹⁰ The purpose of this precautionary process is to help address a lack of scientific certainty by expending more effort in “social learning”⁹¹ – exploring a wider range of salient knowledges. This is an important point, because much of the ostensible support currently afforded to the principle by governmental bodies – like the European Commission⁹² – is explicitly predicated on the qualification that precaution is a risk “management” (rather than “assessment”) measure. This point is also relevant to countervailing concerns from bodies such as the US government⁹³ (among others) to the effect that precaution implies a rejection of conventional “science-based” risk assessment. In considering these concerns, the resulting questions focus on the precise nature of the broader and more rigorous appraisal process implied by precaution – and the associated demands on money, attention, time and evidence.

A detailed understanding of these practical implications rests on an appreciation of the relationships between the precautionary principle and conventional “science-based” risk assessment.⁹⁴ Here, an especially significant contribution ...