Precautionary tales
by Jack Stilgoe
Demos associate James Harkin had a interesting thing in Saturday's Guardian. He sketches the idea of the precautionary principle, "better safe than sorry" at its dullest, and stretches it to the war in Iraq. Big Don's "unknown unknowns", a phrase he borrowed from environmental and science policy, were used to justify action when inaction might have had serious consequences, had the US's worst suspicions been confirmed.
In science, the precautionary principle is a useful way of justifying policies that cannot yet be "evidence-based." It asks for a greater appreciation of uncertainty and ignorance. Its critics, whose naive view of science tends to reflect a contempt for people who aren't scientists, argue that it politicises science, pushing aside rational debate in favour of arguments about "what-ifs." There is of course a danger that the unknown and unknowable becomes a new domain for political control. But the other element of the precautionary principle, the one that is often ignored, is that it asks for decisionmakers to hear new voices. The quest to map and give meaning to our uncertainties requires experts to open-up and reflect on their own assumptions. As with any rhetoric of justification, the precautionary principle can be abused. But, if it is properly held to account, it can provide a basis for decisions that are better and more legitimate.