Julian Morris – författare

Rethinking Risk and the Precautionary Principle challenges the claim that the precautionary principle is an appropriate guide to public policy decision-making in the face of uncertainty.The precautionary principle is frequently invoked as a justification for regulating human activities. From bans on the use of growth hormones in cattle to restrictions on children''s playground activities, precautionary thinking seems to be taking over our lives. As the contributors to this book show, such an approach is of dubious utility and may even be counterproductive.This is a timely and important contribution to the debate on how to manage risk in the modern world. The editor, Julian Morris, is Director of the Environment and Technology Programme at the Institute of Economic Affairs in London. He has written widely on issues relating to environmental protection and technological development.- Up to date discussion of current issues and scientific controversies- Challenges the claim that the ''precautionary principle'' is an appropriate guide to public policy decisions

Environmental and consumer activists have for a long time blamed pesticides, fertilizers and other aspects of intensive farming for causing environmental degradation and human disease. Yet, as the authors in this book show, intensive farming has enabled growth in food production at a rate greater than population growth, thereby ensuring that people are better fed than ever before, whilst simultaneously limiting the effect of farming on the environment.The authors debunk numerous pervasive myths, including:Myth: Pesticides are bad for the environment and bad for human healthFact: Synthetic pesticides enable the production of large quantities of fresh fruit and vegetables, which means that people are better protected against cancer. In addition, the synthetic pesticides themselves are often less toxic than natural pesticides. Overall, synthetic pesticides present a net gain in health terms.Myth: Antibiotic resistance in animals is spreading to humans.Fact: The use of antibiotics in young animals keeps meat prices low and does not materially contribute to antibiotic resistance in humans.Myth: Nitrate fertilizers are a threat to human health.Fact: Nitrate fertilizers are probably beneficial to human health.Myth: Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are bad for the environment and bad for our health.Fact: Many environmental problems associated with agriculture can be reduced by using GMOs, which have the potential to improve yields and quality which simultaneously reducing associated inputs, such as fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides. Commercially produced GM foodcrops have no known impacts on human health and future GM foodcrops are likely to have health benefits (enabling such things as low-fat chips/french fries and non-allergenic peanuts).Myth: Instances of food poisoning would be reduced if we had more regulations.Fact: Instances of food poisoning in the UK may have been exacerbated by over-cautious government regulation.Myth: Subsidies are needed to order to ensure that food and fish are produced in environmentally sound ways.Fact: Subsidies to fisheries and farming have caused widespread environmental degradation.Myth: Packaging and transporting food is environmentally unfriendly.Fact: Packaging enhances the shelf life of products and reduces wastage during transport. Transporting food allows society to take advantage of different environmental and socio-economic conditions that exist in different places.

In this study the authors examine the so-called scientific 'consensus' about global warming. They argue climate change is a problem of great complexity, and such analysis as has been made by no means supports the view that climate change would place intolerable burdens on future generations.

The root causes of land degradation are the actions of political entrepreneurs, aid agencies, and governments of developing countries who misuse 'aid' money. Only when individuals are permitted to own property, especially land and water, to engage in free trade, and to resolve disputes through customary law, will the problems of land degradation, poverty, and hunger be reduced to acceptable levels.

Rethinking Risk and the Precautionary Principle challenges the claim that the precautionary principle is an appropriate guide to public policy decision-making in the face of uncertainty.

The precautionary principle is frequently invoked as a justification for regulating human activities. From bans on the use of growth hormones in cattle to restrictions on children's playground activities, precautionary thinking seems to be taking over our lives. As the contributors to this book show, such an approach is of dubious utility and may even be counterproductive.

This is a timely and important contribution to the debate on how to manage risk in the modern world. The editor, Julian Morris, is Director of the Environment and Technology Programme at the Institute of Economic Affairs in London. He has written widely on issues relating to environmental protection and technological development.

Up to date discussion of current issues and scientific controversies Challenges the claim that the 'precautionary principle' is an appropriate guide to public policy decisions