The precautionary principle and electric and magnetic fields

Dale Jamieson, D. Wartenberg

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

    Abstract

    Current environmental regulation represents a paternalistic policy, more concerned to avoid false positives than false negatives, limiting opportunities for individuals to make choices between risk-avoidance and risk-taking alternatives. For example, many exposures to magnetic fields could be reduced at little or no cost but are not considered seriously, owing to the uncertainty of risk and the concern to avoid false positives. Even though precautionary approaches that focus on avoiding false negatives often do not lead to adverse economic consequences or irrational choices, such approaches usually are not taken. The value of autonomy and the proper role of governmental paternalism with respect to environmental policy need to be considered more carefully in environmental decision making.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)1355-1358
    Number of pages4
    JournalAmerican Journal of Public Health
    Volume91
    Issue number9
    StatePublished - 2001

    Fingerprint

    Magnetic Fields
    Paternalism
    Environmental Policy
    Risk-Taking
    Uncertainty
    Decision Making
    Economics
    Costs and Cost Analysis

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

    Cite this

    The precautionary principle and electric and magnetic fields. / Jamieson, Dale; Wartenberg, D.

    In: American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 91, No. 9, 2001, p. 1355-1358.

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

    Jamieson, D & Wartenberg, D 2001, 'The precautionary principle and electric and magnetic fields', American Journal of Public Health, vol. 91, no. 9, pp. 1355-1358.
    Jamieson, Dale ; Wartenberg, D. / The precautionary principle and electric and magnetic fields. In: American Journal of Public Health. 2001 ; Vol. 91, No. 9. pp. 1355-1358.
    @article{6a0bc48e94af4d6cbf6d1da20db4d228,
    title = "The precautionary principle and electric and magnetic fields",
    abstract = "Current environmental regulation represents a paternalistic policy, more concerned to avoid false positives than false negatives, limiting opportunities for individuals to make choices between risk-avoidance and risk-taking alternatives. For example, many exposures to magnetic fields could be reduced at little or no cost but are not considered seriously, owing to the uncertainty of risk and the concern to avoid false positives. Even though precautionary approaches that focus on avoiding false negatives often do not lead to adverse economic consequences or irrational choices, such approaches usually are not taken. The value of autonomy and the proper role of governmental paternalism with respect to environmental policy need to be considered more carefully in environmental decision making.",
    author = "Dale Jamieson and D. Wartenberg",
    year = "2001",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "91",
    pages = "1355--1358",
    journal = "American Journal of Public Health",
    issn = "0090-0036",
    publisher = "American Public Health Association Inc.",
    number = "9",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - The precautionary principle and electric and magnetic fields

    AU - Jamieson, Dale

    AU - Wartenberg, D.

    PY - 2001

    Y1 - 2001

    N2 - Current environmental regulation represents a paternalistic policy, more concerned to avoid false positives than false negatives, limiting opportunities for individuals to make choices between risk-avoidance and risk-taking alternatives. For example, many exposures to magnetic fields could be reduced at little or no cost but are not considered seriously, owing to the uncertainty of risk and the concern to avoid false positives. Even though precautionary approaches that focus on avoiding false negatives often do not lead to adverse economic consequences or irrational choices, such approaches usually are not taken. The value of autonomy and the proper role of governmental paternalism with respect to environmental policy need to be considered more carefully in environmental decision making.

    AB - Current environmental regulation represents a paternalistic policy, more concerned to avoid false positives than false negatives, limiting opportunities for individuals to make choices between risk-avoidance and risk-taking alternatives. For example, many exposures to magnetic fields could be reduced at little or no cost but are not considered seriously, owing to the uncertainty of risk and the concern to avoid false positives. Even though precautionary approaches that focus on avoiding false negatives often do not lead to adverse economic consequences or irrational choices, such approaches usually are not taken. The value of autonomy and the proper role of governmental paternalism with respect to environmental policy need to be considered more carefully in environmental decision making.

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034875936&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034875936&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    M3 - Review article

    C2 - 11527754

    AN - SCOPUS:0034875936

    VL - 91

    SP - 1355

    EP - 1358

    JO - American Journal of Public Health

    JF - American Journal of Public Health

    SN - 0090-0036

    IS - 9

    ER -