Search

The precautionary principle is regularly cited in cases that involve development in eco-sensitive locations. We investigated whether the precautionary principle provides the basis for a coherent framework to prevent environmental harm, and does it work in practice? We suggest that, in principle, the precautionary principle makes good sense. In practice, however, it is imprecise in policy and law and fails to fulfil its promise because it is loosely defined and thus lacks substance and clarity. Consequently, it operates in a framework that is ambiguous, leaving it open to manipulation by discretionary powers. To counter such deficiencies, human-induced environmental harm should be formally observed as 'criminogenic' and environmental protection prioritised against which other competing priorities (e.g., 'year on year' economic growth) are measured. This would overcome the politico-legal obfuscation and contestations of climate change policy that currently impedes the precautionary principle's practical application. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]