IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v40y2020i5p939-956.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Uncertain Risk Assessment and Management: Case Studies of the Application of the Precautionary Principle in Portugal

Author

Listed:
  • Vasco Barroso Gonçalves

Abstract

This study intends to clarify how the precautionary principle (PP) has been interpreted and applied by the courts in Portugal in the analysis of conflicts associated with uncertain and serious potential risks to human health and the environment. It also aims to contribute to the debate of when and how to apply precautionary measures. To this end, recent court cases in the areas of waste incineration, high‐voltage power lines, as well as dam and wind farm construction were considered. The degree of consistency in the courts’ decisions and their reasons in the different judicial bodies was analyzed with the support of a theoretical framework based on three attributes: the level of seriousness of potential hazards, level of evidence required, and the severity of precautionary actions taken. Different positions among courts were observed, with contradictory arguments in the same case or in similar cases. A greater propensity for favorable decisions in the acceptance of restraining orders was verified in the courts of lower instances, where human health could be threatened. However, the decisions of the Supreme Administrative Court, which were always unfavorable to the restraining orders, seem to reflect the priority given to national economic and political interests over local or regional environmental interests. They may also reflect the Supreme Court's reluctancy to apply the PP in the absence of a firm legally binding PP in national legislation. To address this situation, more explicit legal requirements and criteria for the analysis of uncertain risks and the weighting of interests by area of activity are needed.

Suggested Citation

  • Vasco Barroso Gonçalves, 2020. "Uncertain Risk Assessment and Management: Case Studies of the Application of the Precautionary Principle in Portugal," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(5), pages 939-956, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:40:y:2020:i:5:p:939-956
    DOI: 10.1111/risa.13451
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13451
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/risa.13451?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Terje Aven, 2011. "On Different Types of Uncertainties in the Context of the Precautionary Principle," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(10), pages 1515-1525, October.
    2. Jonathan B. Wiener & Michael D. Rogers, 2002. "Comparing precaution in the United States and Europe," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(4), pages 317-349, October.
    3. Harrie F.G. van Dijk & Eric van Rongen & Gilbert Eggermont & Erik Lebret & Wiebe E. Bijker & Daniëlle R.M. Timmermans, 2011. "The role of scientific advisory bodies in precaution-based risk governance illustrated with the issue of uncertain health effects of electromagnetic fields," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 451-466, April.
    4. Michael D. Rogers, 2011. "Risk management and the record of the precautionary principle in EU case law," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 467-484, April.
    5. Elen Stokes, 2008. "The EC courts' contribution to refining the parameters of precaution," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(4), pages 491-507, June.
    6. Andreas Klinke & Ortwin Renn, 2012. "Adaptive and integrative governance on risk and uncertainty," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 273-292, March.
    7. Giandomenico Majone, 2002. "The Precautionary Principle and its Policy Implications," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 89-109, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kjell Hausken, 2019. "Principal–Agent Theory, Game Theory, and the Precautionary Principle," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 105-127, June.
    2. Gerstetter, Christiane & Maier, Matthias Leonhard, 2005. "Risk regulation, trade and international law: debating the precautionary principle in and around the WTO," TranState Working Papers 18, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    3. Gregory Shaffer & Mark Pollack, 2004. "Regulating Between National Fears and Global Disciplines:Agricultural Biotechnology in the EU," Jean Monnet Working Papers 10, Jean Monnet Chair.
    4. Kenisha Garnett & David J. Parsons, 2017. "Multi‐Case Review of the Application of the Precautionary Principle in European Union Law and Case Law," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(3), pages 502-516, March.
    5. Diahanna L. Post, 2006. "The Precautionary Principle and Risk Assessment in International Food Safety: How the World Trade Organization Influences Standards," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(5), pages 1259-1273, October.
    6. Aven, Terje & Renn, Ortwin, 2018. "Improving government policy on risk: Eight key principles," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 230-241.
    7. Louis Anthony (Tony) Cox, Jr., 2011. "Clarifying Types of Uncertainty: When Are Models Accurate, and Uncertainties Small?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(10), pages 1530-1533, October.
    8. Schweizer, Pia-Johanna & Bovet, Jana, 2016. "The potential of public participation to facilitate infrastructure decision-making: Lessons from the German and European legal planning system for electricity grid expansion," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 64-73.
    9. Ortwin Renn & Andreas Klinke, 2013. "A Framework of Adaptive Risk Governance for Urban Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(5), pages 1-24, May.
    10. Sven Ove Hansson, 2016. "How to be Cautious but Open to Learning: Time to Update Biotechnology and GMO Legislation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(8), pages 1513-1517, August.
    11. Onozaka, Yuko & Saue, Vegar Veseth & Costanigro, Marco, 2018. "The Moderating Effect of Heterogeneous Beliefs on Consumer Preferences for a New Food Technology: The Case of Modified Atmospheric Packaging," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274068, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Julia Black & Robert Baldwin, 2012. "When risk‐based regulation aims low: Approaches and challenges," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(1), pages 2-22, March.
    13. Benjamin D. Trump & Christy Foran & Taylor Rycroft & Matthew D. Wood & Nirzwan Bandolin & Mariana Cains & Timothy Cary & Fiona Crocker & Nicholas A. Friedenberg & Patrick Gurian & Kerry Hamilton & Jan, 2018. "Development of community of practice to support quantitative risk assessment for synthetic biology products: contaminant bioremediation and invasive carp control as cases," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 517-527, December.
    14. Pieter van Gelder & Pim Klaassen & Behnam Taebi & Bart Walhout & Ruud van Ommen & Ibo van de Poel & Zoe Robaey & Lotte Asveld & Ruud Balkenende & Frank Hollmann & Erik Jan van Kampen & Nima Khakzad & , 2021. "Safe-by-Design in Engineering: An Overview and Comparative Analysis of Engineering Disciplines," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(12), pages 1-28, June.
    15. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2012. "On the Risk Management and Risk Governance of Petroleum Operations in the Barents Sea Area," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(9), pages 1561-1575, September.
    16. John D. Graham & Jonathan B. Wiener, 2008. "The precautionary principle and risk--risk tradeoffs: a comment," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(4), pages 465-474, June.
    17. Daniel Ammann & Angelika Hilbeck & Beatrice Lanzrein & Philipp Hübner & Bernadette Oehen, 2007. "Procedure for the Implementation of the Precautionary Principle in Biosafety Commissions," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 487-501, June.
    18. Jorge Nufiez Ferrer, 2006. "Increasing the Market Access for Agricultural Products from Bangladesh to the EU," CPD Working Paper 58, Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD).
    19. Xiaoteng Ma & Ziyu Tang & Dan Wang & Hao Gao, 2020. "The Influence of Risk Culture on the Performance of International Joint-Venture Securities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-21, March.
    20. Yan Cai & Eunmi Kim, 2019. "Sustainable Development in World Trade Law: Application of the Precautionary Principle in Korea-Radionuclides," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-18, April.

    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:wly:riskan:v:40:y:2020:i:5:p:939-956. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.