scholarly journals The Implementation of the Precautionary Principle in Nuclear Safety Regulation: Challenges and Prospects

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (24) ◽  
pp. 14033
Author(s):  
Miaomiao Yin ◽  
Keyuan Zou
Keyword(s):  
Precautionary Principle ◽  
Perceived Risk ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Nuclear Safety ◽  
Risk Level ◽  
Safety Regulation ◽  
The Precautionary Principle ◽  
Community Interest ◽  
Precautionary Action

The precautionary principle has been implemented in many fields including environment protection, biological diversity, and climate change. In the field of international nuclear safety regulation, the implementation of this principle is in an ongoing process. Since Japan declared to discharge Fukushima nuclear waste water into the ocean, the precautionary principle was put on the stage, and some debates are invoked on it. As is observed by this article, the precautionary principle has not been effectively implemented in nuclear safety regulation, specifically in nuclear safety law making, law enforcement, and judicial application. The reasons can be found from two main challenges: indeterminacy of perceived risk level required to justify precautionary action and hard balance of national interest and community interest in nuclear safety. In a long-term perspective, the framework of international nuclear safety regulation has to respond to these challenges, both by clarifying the precautionary principle in legal binding nuclear safety documents and moving towards a more transparent, fair, and effective enforcement regime in order to promote safer, more sustainable, and efficient civilian nuclear utilization around the world.

The Administrative Ordering of Nature and Society – Precaution and Food Safety at the Molecular and Global Levels

2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 313-325 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaap C. Hanekamp ◽  
Jan Kwakman ◽  
Roel Pieterman ◽  
Paolo F. Ricci
Keyword(s):  
Food Security ◽  
Food Safety ◽  
Precautionary Principle ◽  
Global Scale ◽  
Safety Regulation ◽  
Risk Regulation ◽  
Safety Testing ◽  
The Precautionary Principle ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Food Safety Regulation

Responding to public fears and the loss of confidence in the aftermath of several food safety crises in the 1990s and 2000s, more and more regulatory laws have increasingly been affected by the precautionary principle. To clarify how those developments can have adverse consequences, we discuss two very different cases. First, at the molecular level we discuss the problems the system encounters by strictly applying the linear no-threshold (LNT) at low doses model, which was adopted in response to fears about the effects of ionizing radiations. Second, at a global scale, we discuss the problems associated with the precautionary regulation on Illegal, Unreported and Unregistered Fisheries that came into effect January 1, 2010. The technical aspects of food safety testing and their impacts are perhaps unknown to policy makers but they do dominate safety decisions. Both examples show that strict application of the precautionary principle produce deleterious side effects, which go against the very policy values that the precautionary regulation should protect. We show, in particular, that overly precautionary food safety regulation may harm food security. We conclude in the EU and other Western nations, problems of food security are much more relevant to human health and life expectancy than food safety. We recommend that current food safety regulation based on the precautionary risk-regulation reflex should normatively be re-evaluated with a complete regard for the values of food security – both within and outside the EU.

The Controllability Precautionary Principle: Justification of a Climate Policy Goal Under Uncertainty

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eugen Pissarskoi
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Precautionary Principle ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Policy Goal ◽  
The Precautionary Principle ◽  
Climate Change Policies

How can we reasonably justify a climate policy goal if we accept that only possible consequences from climate change are known? Precautionary principles seem to offer promising guidelines for reasoning in such epistemic situations. This chapter presents two versions of the precautionary principle (PP) and defends one of them as morally justifiable. However, it argues that current versions of the PP do not allow discrimination between relevant climate change policies. Therefore, the chapter develops a further version of the PP, the Controllability Precautionary Principle (CPP), and defends its moral plausibility. The CPP incorporates the following idea: in a situation when the possible outcomes of the available actions cannot be ranked with regard to their value, the choice between available options for action should rest on the comparison of how well decision makers can control the processes of the implementation of the available strategies.

Insufficient Knowledge in Kunduz: The Precautionary Principle and International Humanitarian Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-79
Author(s):  
Emma J Marchant
Keyword(s):  
Precautionary Principle ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
The Precautionary Principle ◽  
Lack Of Information ◽  
Operational Application ◽  
Federal Court Of Justice ◽  
Insufficient Knowledge

Abstract The targeting protocols applied by forces during armed conflict are some of the most secretive documents held by any military. However, their role in applying principles of international humanitarian law (IHL) means that they are key to understanding their development. This piece is primarily concerned with practical and operational application of the precautionary principle under IHL; how much knowledge is sufficient to carry out an attack lawfully during modern armed conflict. In order to establish if a standard has developed with the increase in intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance technology, this piece uses the framework of an investigation into an incident in Kunduz, Afghanistan in 2009. I explore the difficulties of obtaining information post-incident, the differential standards expected by North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Bundesgerichtshof (German Federal Court of Justice), and the manner in which these can be evaluated through the principles of proportionality, distinction and precautions in attack. The piece looks at the interrelated issues raised by the Rules of Engagement and Tactical Directives, as well as the problems surrounding the clarity of intelligence available. I argue that this case is demonstrative of the failings inherent in the application and practical use of the precautionary principle outlined by IHL. The lack of transparency afforded in, and after, incidents of this nature prevents objective analysis and so the development of IHL can be obfuscated. I conclude that the lack of information following incidents of this kind confuses any intelligence standard that exists under IHL.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document