The Precautionary Principle and/or Risk Assessment in World Trade Organization Decisions: A Possible Role for Risk Perception

Risk Analysis

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 491-499

  Goldstein, Bernard D ^a   Carruth, Russellyn S ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

Beef hormone; European Community; Precautionary principle; Risk perception; World Trade Organization

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; FOOD PRODUCTS; HEALTH RISKS; HORMONES; INTERNATIONAL TRADE; SAFETY FACTOR; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS;

HORMONE TREATED CATTLE; TRADE BARRIERS;

RISK ASSESSMENT;

ASBESTOS;

EUROPEAN UNION; PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK PERCEPTION; TRADE RELATIONS; WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION;

BEEF CATTLE; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD; HEALTH HAZARD; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; PERCEPTION; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT;

ANIMALS; DECISION MAKING; EUROPEAN UNION; FOOD CONTAMINATION; HUMANS; INTERNATIONAL AGENCIES; PERCEPTION; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EURASIA; EUROPE;

EID: 2442630544     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00452.x     Document Type: Review

References (45)

1. Kriebel, D., Tickner, J., Epstein, P., Lemons, J., Levins, R., Loechler, E. L., Quinn, M., Rudel, R., Schettler, T., & Stoto, M. (2001). The precautionary principle in environmental science. Environmental Health Perspectives, 109, 871-876.
2. Applegate, J. S. (2000). The precautionary preference: An American perspective on the precautionary principle. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 6, 413-443.
3. Cameron, J., & O'Riordan, T. (Eds.). (1994). Interpreting the Precautionary Principle. London: Cameron May.
4. Rogers, M. D. (2000). Guest perspectives: The precautionary principle, a view from Europe. Risk Policy Report, 7, 41-43.
5. Graham, J. D. (2000). Perspectives on the precautionary principle. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 6, 383-385.
6. Commission of the European Communities. (2000). Communication from the Commission on the Precautionary Principle. Brussels: COM 2000:1.
7. Sand, P. H. (2000). The precautionary principle: A European perspective. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 6, 445-458.
8. United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. (1992). Final Declaration, Principle, 15. Rio De Janeiro.
9. Raffensberger, C. A., & Tichner, J. (Eds.). (1999). Protecting Public Health and the Environment: Implementing the Precautionary Principle. Washington, DC: Island Press.
10. U.S. General Accounting Office Report to Congressional Requesters. (2000). Environmental Protection Agency: Use of Precautionary Assumptions in Health Risk Assessments and Benefits Estimates. GAO-01-55.
11. Sandin, P. (1999). Dimensions of the precautionary principle. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 5, 889-907.
12. Silbergeld, E. (2001). Book review of Making Better Environmental Decisions by Mary O'Brien. Public Health Reports, 116, 66-68.
13. Wallstrom, M. (2002). EU and US Approaches to Environment Policy - Are We Converging or Diverging? European Institute, Washington, DC, April 25, 2002. Available at www. eurunion.org/index.htm.
14. Miller, H. I., & Conko, G. (2000). The science of biotechnology meets the politics of global regulation. Issues in Science and Technology, 17, 47-54.
15. Majone, G. (2002). The precautionary principle and its policy implications. Journal of Common Market Studies, 40, 89-110.
16. Krimsky, S. (1999). The precautionary approach. Forum for Applied Research and Public Policy, 13, 34-37.
17. Funtowicz, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (1992). Risk management as a post-normal science. Risk Analysis, 12, 95-97.
18. O'Riordan, T., & Rayner, S. (1991). Risk management for global environmental change. Global Environmental Change, 2, 91-108.
19. Raffensperger, C., Schettler, T., & Myers, N. (2000). Precaution: Belief, regulatory system, and overarching principle. International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, 6, 266-269.
20. O'Brien, M. (2000). Making Better Environmental Decisions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21. Rampton, S., & Stauber, J. (2002). Trust Us, We're Experts: How Industry Manipulates Science and Gambles with Your Future. New York: Penguin Putnam, Inc.
22. EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones). WT/DS26/AB/R, WT/DS48/AB/R, Appellate Body Report, 16 January 1998.
23. European Communities-Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-Containing Products. WT/DS135/AB/R, Appellate Body Report, 12 March 2001.
24. EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones). WT/DS26//R/USA and WT/DS48//R/CAN, Panel Report, 18 August 1997.
25. EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones). WT/DS26/AB/R, WT/DS48/AB/R, Appellate Body Report, 16 January 1998, p. 6.
26. EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones). p. 21.
27. EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones). p. 11.
28. Howse, R. (2000). Democracy, science, and free trade: Risk regulation on trial at the World Trade Organization. Michigan Law Review, 98, 2329-2357.
29. European Communities-Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-Containing Products. WT/DS135R, Panel Report, 18 September 2000.
30. Carruth, R. S., & Goldstein, B. D. (this issue). The Asbestos Case: A comment on the appointment and use of nonpartisan experts in World Trade Organization dispute resolution involving health risk. Risk Analysis.
31. Neumayer, E. (2000). Trade and the environment: A critical assessment and some suggestions for reconciliation. Journal of Environment and Development, 9, 139-159.
32. National Research Council. (1996). Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
33. Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236, 280-285.
34. Fischhoff, B., Brostrom, A., & Quadrel, M. J. (1993). Risk perception and communication. Annual Review of Public Health, 14, 183-203.
35. Sandman, P. M. (1993). Responding to Community Outrage: Strategies for Effective Risk Communication. Fairfax, VA: American Industrial Hygiene Association.
36. Kasperson, R., Golding, D., & Tuler, S. (1993). Social distrust as a factor in siting hazardous facilities and communicating risks. Journal of Social Issues, 48, 161-187.
37. Siegrist, M., & Cvetkovich, G. (2000). Perception of hazards: The role of social trust and knowledge. Risk Analysis, 20, 713-719.
38. Lofstedt, R. E., Vogel, D., Renn, O., Slater, D., & Rogers, M. D. (2001). The changing character of regulation: A comparison of Europe and the United States. Risk Analysis, 21, 399-416.
39. Lofstedt, R. E., Ikeda, S., & Thompson, K. M. (2000). Risk management across the globe: Insights from a comparative look at Sweden, Japan, and the United States. Risk Analysis, 20, 157-159.
40. Codex Alimentarius Commission, FAO/WHO. (2000). Risk Analysis: (1) Working Principles for Risk Analysis Additional Comments of the United States. CX/GP 00/3. Rome.
41. Presidential/Congressional Commission on Risk Assessment and Risk Management. (1998). Communicating Risk in a Changing World (pp. 5-9). Washington, DC.
42. Goldstein, B. D., Erdal, S., Burger, J., Faustman, E., Friedlander, B., Greenberg, M., Leschine, T., Powers, C., Waishwell, L., & Williams, B. (2000). Stakeholder participation for community health risk evaluation: Experience from the CRESP program. Environmental Epidemiology and Toxicology, 2, 103-111.
43. Goldstein, B. D. (1996). Risk assessment as a governmental indicator. Technology, 333A, 59-62.
44. Goldstein, B. D. (1999). The precautionary principle and scientific research are not antithetical. Environmental Health Perspectives, 107, A594-A595.
45. Goldstein, B. D. (2000). Use and abuse of the precautionary principle. Risk Policy Report, 7, 39-40.