This document discusses ethics and risk management in relation to chemicals. It provides definitions of risk as the probability of an adverse outcome and uncertainty of events and outcomes. It discusses utilitarianism which focuses on achieving the greatest good for the greatest number. The precautionary principle is explained as taking regulatory action when there are reasonable concerns about potential harm, even if there is not full scientific certainty of causal links or harm. The document examines cases where the precautionary principle has been applied, such as to flame retardants, insecticides, and bisphenol A, and criticisms of the precautionary principle. It stresses that risk management must still consider if prohibitions are necessary and proportional.

1. Ethics and Risk Management
T.J. Kasperbauer
Department of Food and Resource Economics, KU
1

2. 2

3. Definitions of Risk
• Probability x Severity of effects
• Probability of an adverse outcome
• Expected loss
• Uncertainty of outcomes
• Uncertainty of event x Uncertainty of outcomes
3

4. Definitions of Risk
1. Probabilities and expected outcomes
2. Events/consequences and uncertainties
4

5. Definition for Chemicals
• Hazard + Exposure
5

6. PEC/PNEC
Predicted Exposure Concentration
Predicted No Effect Concentration
6
More controllable
More about intrinsic
properties—uncontrollable

7. PEC/PNEC
• Risk manager can reduce PEC or increase
PNEC (or both).
• Reducing exposure usually the go-to.
7

8. Consequences and Principles
• Utilitarianism: main ethical tradition associated
with consequentialism
• Theories about rights and/or duties emphasize
principles
8

9. U.S. Forest Service
Original mission statement,1905
“Where conflicting interests must be
reconciled, the question shall always be
answered from the standpoint of the
greatest good of the greatest number in
the long run."
• Utilitarian conservation movement
9

10. • There are constraints on our actions – some
things we should never do (even if good
consequences would result overall)
• We don’t always have to maximize good
outcomes
Principles
10

11. Rights
• Often thought of as claims or entitlements against
others.
• Strong version: rights as “trumps”
– Overriding consideration
– Shouldn’t violate, even to bring about best consequences
11

12. Precautionary Principle
Regulation (EC) No. 1907/2006 (REACH):
“the need to do more to protect public health
and the environment in accordance with the
precautionary principle.”
12

13. 13

14. Precautionary Principle
1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and
Development:
“where there are threats of serious or
irreversible environmental damage, lack of full
scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason
for postponing cost effective measures to
prevent degradation.”
14

15. Rio Definition
• This seems somewhat trivial.
• Who thinks full certainty is required?
15

16. Consolidated version of the treaty establishing
the European Community. Official Journal of the
European Commission:
“precaution means that regulatory actions may
be taken in situations where potentially
hazardous agents might induce harm to humans
or the environment, even if conclusive evidence
about the potential harmful effects is not (yet)
available”
EU Definition
16

17. • Seems irrational
• Potential harms? Potential hazards?
EU Definition
17

18. Precautionary Principle
European Commission communication on the
precautionary principle, 2 February 2000:
“The precautionary principle applies where
scientific evidence is insufficient, inconclusive or
uncertain and preliminary scientific evaluation
indicates that there are reasonable grounds for
concern that the potentially dangerous effects on
the environment, human, animal or plant health
may be inconsistent with the high level of
protection chosen by the EU.”
18

19. Precautionary Principle
• If there is evidence of harm, but the causal
mechanisms are unknown.
• If the causal mechanisms capable of producing
harm are known, but there is no evidence of
actual harm.
19

20. ALARP
• As Low as Reasonably Practicable
• Implement risk reduction measures unless it
can be demonstrated that the costs greatly
outweigh the benefits.
20

21. 21

22. Exercise
• Discuss cases where the PP has been applied.
• What conception of the PP was used?
• Was it a good idea?
22

23. Deca-BDE
• Widely used flame retardant
• Bans in various countries
• Debate over importance of fire safety
• Not clear whether bans have increased fire
risks
23

24. Neonicotinoids
• Widely used insecticide
• Used as seed treatments, not sprayed
• Relatively safe for humans and other
vertebrates
• Dangerous for bees
• Question of lab studies applied to realistic
scenarios
• Question of studies included in analysis
24

25. Mercury
• Bad for human and nonhuman animals
• Consuming fish has health benefits
• Important to various cultures
25

26. Bisphenol A
• Some studies found adverse effects even at
lower levels (and EFSA-approved)
• Disputes over whether standard tests are
sufficiently sensitive.
• Has effects on mammary glands and nervous
system—often not part of standard tests.
• EFSA has dismissed most of these concerns.
26

27. Precautionary Principle
1. It is seen as anti-science – doesn’t wait for
evidence, and frequently acts against the
advice of scientists.
2. It is seen as having unintended side effects
(e.g., increasing other risks).
3. It is seen to be subject to political or
economic pressure.
4. It is seen to be driven by public fear and
outrage.
27

28. PP and Management
• Must still ask if prohibiting a product is
necessary for PP
• Also ask if it is proportional—who bears the
costs of precaution, and does that create
other risks
28

29. 88 Supposed False Positives
29
Late Lessons From Early Warnings (2013)

30. False Positive
“scientific evidence must exist showing that a
perceived risk is actually non-existent and this
evidence must be generally accepted in the
scientific and regulatory communities.”
1. Southern corn leaf blight
2. Saccharin
3. Swine flu
4. Food irradiation
30