Implementation of the precautionary principle in standards for the workplace

What are the core ideas behind the Precautionary Principle?

The Precautionary Principle is both celebrated and criticized. It has become an important principle for decision making, but it is also subject to criticism. One problem that is often pointed out with the principle is that is not clear what it actually says and how to use it. I have taken on this problem by performing an analysis of some of the most influential formulations of the principle in an attempt to identify the core ideas behind it, with the purpose of producing a formulation of the principle that is clear and practically applicable. It was found that what is called the Precautionary Principle is not a principle that tells us what do to achieve extra precaution or how to handle situations when extra precaution is called for. Instead, it was found to be a list of circumstances that each justify extra precaution. An analysis of some of the most common and influential formulations of the Precautionary Principle identified four such circumstances: (1) When we deal with important values that tend to be systematically downplayed by traditional decision methods - such as human health and the environment. (2) When we suspect that the decision might lead to irreversible and severe consequences and the values at stake are also irreplaceable, (3) When timing is at least as important as being right. (4) When it is more important to avoid false negatives than false positives. This interpretation of the Precautionary Principle does not say anything about what kind of actions to take when extra precaution is called for, but it does provide a clear and practically useful list of circumstances that call for extra precaution and that is not subject to the most common objections to the Precautionary Principle.

O princípio da precaução e a saúde no trabalho

O princípio da precaução (PP) é uma diretriz em saúde que vem ganhando relevo nos últimos 20 anos. Seu propósito é orientar medidas nas situações em que o conhecimento científico está ainda incompleto, denotando a incerteza. As condições de economia de mercado estimulam o uso de produtos e processos inovadores, dependentes do desenvolvimento científico e das novas descobertas em curso. Suas implicações para a saúde nem sempre estão inteiramente avaliadas, expondo a população trabalhadora às incertezas. O exame da literatura mostra que o uso do PP, embora sob consenso dos órgãos reguladores em diferentes países, ainda é objeto de intenso debate na comunidade científica. Em coerência com os propósitos básicos, a proteção do meio ambiente conta com milhares de citações do seu emprego, em contraste com as poucas recomendações de uso para as exposições ocupacionais. Entre estas, o PP vem sendo entendido como pouco adequado ao âmbito dos especialistas e mais indicado à proteção de populações vulneráveis. Investigações históricas mostram que a noção de precaução foi quase sempre usada em sentido inverso, fazendo-se uso da dúvida para conter as possíveis melhorias de proteção no trabalho. Conclui-se que o uso do PP depende do pressuposto da incerteza científica, caracterizada pela noção de risco, em detrimento do determinismo da causa, condição ainda não superada nas relações de trabalho.

Assessment of Reproductive Risk at Work

The risk-assessment process involves hazard identification, dose&endash;response assessment, exposure assessment, and characterization of risk. Special competence and careful consideration are needed to assess effects on human reproduction. There is often a lack of scientific information concerning, e.g., toxic influences of chemical substances on human fertility, pregnancy, and offspring. Legislation and guidelines concerning workplace exposures need further development in many countries. It is important that occupational health and safety personnel, as well as experts in this field, assist employers and employees in the development of good workplace policies for the protection of the reproductive functioning of male and female workers. A protocol for effective risk assessment is described.

Developments in reproductive risk management

Internationally, the debate on aims for occupational health policy is expanding its horizons. Included among the issues are not only concerns about safety for workers, but also for their progeny. Equality among the sexes is also assuming a prominent position. In several countries, existing and proposed legislation already considers these matters. In the course of this article it is argued that this legislation and its implementation are inadequate. There are several reasons for this. Firstly, what constitutes health risks for workers exposed to chemical substances is subject to different interpretations. This is further complicated when one includes risks to reproductive function and to the progeny: the reproductive risks of toxicity. The different interpretations of the concepts of safety and equality are also discussed. There are differences in regulations and in standards about whether or not safety factors should be used when knowledge is uncertain. The operation of reasonable measures with a generic or sex specific policy also differs. Secondly, the current occupational exposure limits are set too high. These aspects are considered and it is probable that the policy aims should be made more specific. An elaborated approach that includes the "precautionary principle" in safety standards is proposed. To advise employers in their role as managers of reproductive risks of toxicity, a recently developed system for occupational health and safety services is described. This system is based on two criteria: effectiveness and reasonableness of proposed measures. The effectiveness criterion includes the precautionary principle; the reasonableness criterion includes equal rights and opportunities for men and women. Finally, a supportive governmental policy that is consistent with the most recent international development is recommended.