The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics

2018 Edition
| Editors: Macmillan Publishers Ltd

Precautionary Principle

  • Christian Gollier
  • Nicolas Treich
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95189-5_2397

Abstract

The precautionary principle (PP), as it appears in international treaties or in some countries’ legal systems, suggests that the prospect of scientific progress should not justify the delay of preventive measures. Three effects identified in the economics literature – the irreversibility, the precautionary and the ambiguity aversion effects – may be consistent with the normative content of the PP. A difficult question is how then the PP can be implemented. Several social actors may want to take advantage of a current lack of scientific evidence to promote their own interests. The PP can also be misused, for example, for demagogy or protectionism.

Keywords

Ambiguity and ambiguity aversion Asymmetric information Availability heuristic Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (2000) Convention on Biological Diversity (1992) Convention on Climate Change (1992) Environmental economics Irreversibility effect Maastricht Treaty (EU) Precautionary effect Precautionary principle Protection Risk Risk perception Scientific progress Scientific uncertainty 

JEL Classifications

D81 Q50 H43 C44 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Bibliography

  1. Arrow, K., and A. Fischer. 1974. Environmental preservation, uncertainty and irreversibility. Quarterly Journal of Economics 88: 312–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blackwell, D. 1951. Comparison of experiments. In Proceedings of the second Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability, ed. J. Neyman. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  3. Chen, Z., and L. Epstein. 2002. Ambiguity, risk, and asset returns in continuous time. Econometrica 70: 1403–1443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Commission of the European Communities. 2000. Communication from the Commission on the Precautionary Principle. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities. Online. Available at http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/com/cnc/2000/ com2000_0001en01.pdf. Accessed 23 Mar 2006.
  5. Epstein, L. 1980. Decision-making and the temporal resolution of uncertainty. International Economic Review 21: 269–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gilboa, I., and D. Schmeidler. 1989. Maximin expected utility with non-unique prior. Journal of Mathematical Economics 18: 141–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gollier, C., B. Jullien, and N. Treich. 2000. Scientific progress and irreversibility: An economic interpretation of the Precautionary Principle. Journal of Public Economics 75: 229–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gollier, C., and N. Treich. 2003. Decision-making under scientific uncertainty: The economics of the Precautionary Principle. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 27: 77–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hammitt, J., J. Wiener, B. Swedlow, D. Kall, and Z. Zhou. 2005. Precautionary regulation in Europe and in the United States: A quantitative comparison. Risk Analysis 25: 1215–1228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Henry, C. 1974. Investment decisions under uncertainty: The ‘irreversibility effect’. American Economic Review 64: 1006–1012.Google Scholar
  11. Jones, J., and R. Ostroy. 1984. Flexibility and uncertainty. Review of Economic Studies 6: 13–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kimball, M. 1990. Precautionary savings in the small and in the large. Econometrica 61: 53–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Morris, J. 2000. Defining the precautionary principle. In Rethinking risk and the precautionary principle, ed. J. Morris. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.Google Scholar
  14. Na, S., and H. Shin. 1998. International environmental agreements under uncertainty. Oxford Economic Papers 50: 173–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. O’Riordan, T., and J. Cameron, eds. 1994. Interpreting the precautionary principle. London: Earthscan Publications.Google Scholar
  16. Sunstein, C. 2005. Laws of fear: Beyond the precautionary principle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ulph, A., and D. Ulph. 1997. Global warming, irreversibility and learning. Economic Journal 107: 636–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. UNGA (United Nations General Assembly). 1992. Report of the United Nations conference on environment and development. Annex I: Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. Rio de Janeiro, 3–14 June. A/CONF.151/26 (Vol. I) of 12 August. Online. Available at http://www.un.org/documents/ga/conf151/aconf15126-1annex1.htm. Accessed 30 Mar 2006.

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christian Gollier
    • 1
  • Nicolas Treich
    • 1
  1. 1.