IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v30y2003i3p213-218.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The precautionary principle and democratizing expertise: A US perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Joel A Tickner
  • Sara Wright

Abstract

Democratizing expertise carries many implications for application of the precautionary principle. It can extend the amount and types of information incorporated into decisions, empower citizens, and ensure that experts alone are not charged with making value-laden decisions. It can also expose uncertainties in science and decision-making, and bring forth unrecognized alternative solutions to problems. In this article, we outline the implications of democratizing expertise on implementation of the precautionary principle in a US context, as well as barriers and opportunities. We argue that initiatives to democratize expertise and implement precaution in the United States will occur first at the local and regional level as a result of grassroots momentum for change. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Joel A Tickner & Sara Wright, 2003. "The precautionary principle and democratizing expertise: A US perspective," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(3), pages 213-218, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:30:y:2003:i:3:p:213-218
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154303781780470
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Andy Stirling, 2016. "Precaution in the Governance of Technology," SPRU Working Paper Series 2016-14, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    2. Royce A. Francis, 2015. "Elusive Critical Elements of Transformative Risk Assessment Practice and Interpretation: Is Alternatives Analysis the Next Step?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(11), pages 1983-1995, November.
    3. Shobita Parthasarathy, 2011. "Whose knowledge? What values? The comparative politics of patenting life forms in the United States and Europe," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 44(3), pages 267-288, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:30:y:2003:i:3:p:213-218. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.