Marchant Gary E
Center for the Study of Law Science and Technology, Arizona State University College of Law, Tempe, Arizona 85287, USA.
Environ Health Perspect. 2003 Nov;111(14):1799-803. doi: 10.1289/ehp.6197.
The rapid spread of the precautionary principle (PP) demonstrates the need to explicitly address the role of precaution in environmental decision making. Unfortunately, the PP in its current form is limited by the vagueness of, and variations in, the many formulations of the PP. This ambiguity in the meaning of the PP would not be so serious if the PP were limited to a general aspirational policy, but in every jurisdiction that has adopted the PP it has been transformed rapidly into a binding legal rule. As a legal rule, the ambiguity of the PP results in arbitrary application by regulatory agencies and reviewing courts and limits the capability of reviewing courts to perform their function in overseeing agency actions. To improve the explicit application of precaution, we must go beyond the current form of the PP and attempt to define the factors that weigh in favor of more or less precaution for specific risks.
预防原则(PP)的迅速传播表明,有必要明确阐述预防在环境决策中的作用。不幸的是,当前形式的预防原则受到其众多表述的模糊性和差异性的限制。如果预防原则仅限于一项一般性的理想政策,那么其含义上的这种模糊性不会如此严重,但在每一个采用了预防原则的司法管辖区,它都迅速转变为一项具有约束力的法律规则。作为一项法律规则,预防原则的模糊性导致监管机构和复审法院任意适用,并限制了复审法院在监督机构行动方面履行其职能的能力。为了改进预防原则的明确适用,我们必须超越其当前形式,并尝试确定有利于针对特定风险采取或多或少预防措施的权衡因素。