Yes, The Precautionary Principle Is Incoherent

Martin Peterson

Risk Analysis, 2017, vol. 37, issue 11, 2035-2038

Abstract: This article is a reply to Thomas Boyer‐Kassem's discussion of my criticism of the precautionary principle published in this journal about a decade ago. Boyer‐Kassem does not question the logical validity of the theorem proved in my original article, but he brings up important questions about its scope. He also challenges the plausibility of some of the assumptions on which it is based. In this comment, I argue that each objection can be adequately dealt with. As a decision rule, the precautionary principle is (still) incoherent.

Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12783

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:riskan:v:37:y:2017:i:11:p:2035-2038

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Risk Analysis from John Wiley & Sons
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().