Public Policy Making and Precautionary Principle

         

Precautionary Principle

                    

 The Precautionary Principle governs the use of foresight in decision making, in situations characterized by uncertainty and ignorance and where both regulatory action and inaction carry potentially large environmental and social costs. It supports sustainable development and helps to achieve significant and measurable improvement in environment, through the provision of timely, targeted, relevant and reliable information to policy and decision making agencies and the public.

 

Lessons from History

 

The key lessons can be drawn from history on using precaution in policy and decision -making. Some key lessons for decision-making have emerged from a ground-breaking analysis by the European Environment Agency of cases - from the damaging of the ozone layer by CFC chemicals to the "mad cow" disease epidemic – where public policy was formulated against a background of scientific uncertainty or surprise developments, or where clear evidence of hazards to people and the environment was ignored. That is why the "Precautionary Principle" is enshrined in European Union Treaty.

 

Innovations Vs Hazards

                         

 The use of the Precautionary Principle can bring benefits beyond the reduction of health and environmental impacts, stimulating both more
innovation, via technological diversity and flexibility, and better science. But over-precaution can also be expensive, in terms of lost opportunities for innovation and lost lines of scientific enquiry. If more account is taken - scientifically, politically and economically –of a richer body of information from more diverse sources, then society may be considerably more successful at achieving a better balance between innovations and their hazards in the future. The 'late lessons" distilled from the case studies of European Community, could help to achieve this better balance.

 None of the lessons would themselves remove the dilemmas of decision-making under situations of uncertainty and high stakes. They cannot eradicate uncertainties or avoid the consequences of ignorance. But they would at least increase the chances of anticipating costly impacts, of achieving a better balance between the pros and cons of technological innovations and of minimizing the costs of unpleasant surprises.

Ignoring Precautionary Principle

 

The use of synthetic hormones and antimicrobial agents to promote growth in farm animals; the use of the cancer-causing synthetic hormones to prevent miscarriages in women; the use of  Asbestos, CFCs, and the Chemicals Benzene, MTBE (a substitute for lead in petrol), Tributyl Tin (an antifouling agent used for painting of ship sides) and PCBs; the use of Genetically Modified Seeds are only a few examples of ignoring well established and universally accepted "Precautionary Principal", all over the world.

 

Examples in AP State

 

The excessive and indiscriminate use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides in agriculture, over exploitation of ground water, indiscriminate conversion of agriculture lands for intensive aquaculture,  contamination and encroachment of   water bodies such as Kolleru, a bird sanctuary, the polluting Activities  in the catchment areas of drinking water sources such as Himayat/ Osman Sagar, the pollution and encroachment of Hussein Sagar and other  water bodies in the name of tourism and development;   the discharge of under treated and untreated industrial effluents and domestic sewage into Musi river, the laying of pipelines for transfer of toxic industrial effluents, into Musi river with the object of dilution, the location of Pharma Parks and Bulk drug units,  near the sea coast with the sole object of discharging effluents into sea and the neglect of viable Public Transportation, resulting in increasing urban air pollution from automobiles, are some of the examples of ignoring the Precautionary Principle, closer to home in Hyderabad and the State of AP

 

Conclusion

            

There should be greater and shared understanding about past decisions on hazardous technologies and ill- conceived policies / decisions, and improved appreciation and wisdom about future decisions and in correcting the earlier ill-conceived decisions.