Innovation

Academic journal articles on sub-results of the RECIPES project

chiara.mazzetti@ecologic.eu — Mon, 18 Jul 2022 14:55:44 +0000

full image

Academic journal articles on sub-results of the RECIPES project

During the RECIPES project time, RECIPES partners have written on sub-results of the project. Below are the publications listed that refer to the RECIPES research.

Sabrina Röttger-Wirtz, "**Case C-616/17 Blaise and Others: The Precautionary Principle and Its Role in Judicial Review – Glyphosate and the Regulatory Framework for Pesticides**", Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 27(4), 2020: 529-542.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X20949424.

Abstract

The approval renewal of glyphosate as an active substance for pesticides in the EU has also kept the Court of Justice occupied. Within this line of case law, the Blaise case is the most recent one. In this preliminary reference procedure the Court was asked to review the validity of the Plant Protection Products Regulation 1107/2009, examined against the precautionary principle as benchmark. The case is relevant not only for the questions raised about the Regulation, but also as it sheds a light on the – albeit limited – use of the precautionary principle in the judicial review of EU legislative measure.

Fritz-Julius Grafe and Harald A. Mieg, "Precaution and Innovation in the Context of Wastewater Regulation: An Examination of Financial Innovation under UWWTD Disputes in London and Milan", Sustainability, 13(16), 2021: 9130.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13169130.

Abstract

The Water Framework Directive (WFD) under the guidance of the precautionary principle sets out standards to guarantee high quality water services for European citizens. This creates pressure on European cities to update and renew their water infrastructures in accordance with EU Law at great financial cost. Cities within the Union try to bridge this financial gap with a variety of approaches. This paper presents the cases of London and Milan, both of which were subject to legal proceedings for breaching the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive. By example of these two cases, this article details how the precautionary principle affects urban water infrastructure provision, and how the regulation of the primary risk of pollution can both trigger innovation and create secondary risks within the highly integrated urban water infrastructure sector. The London case focusses on an individual infrastructure project and shows how its financial framing has compromised the final outcome, while the Milan case presents a longer-view perspective that shows how structural changes in the urban water infrastructure sector have enabled an environment for sustainable financial innovation. The role of transparency and good local governance practices are emphasized for a successful implementation of the precautionary principle requirements in a city’s water sector. Managing this process effectively can result in meaningful social innovation for urban water infrastructure provision.

Jeroen P van Der Sluijs, "Insect decline, an emerging global environmental risk", Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 46, 2020: 39-42.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2020.08.012.

Abstract

The Earth’s entomofauna seems in an ongoing state of collapse. Insect decline could pose a global risk to key insect-mediated ecosystem functions and services such as soil and freshwater functions (nutrient cycling, soil formation, decomposition, and water purification), biological pest control, pollination services and food web support that all are critical to ecosystem functioning, human health and human survival. At present the attention for insect decline is low in all domains, ranging from scientific research to policy-making to nature conservation. Scientists made urgent calls to prioritise insect conservation. An international treaty for global pollinator stewardship and pollinator ecosystem restoration is urgently needed to counteract the current crisis. A review of insect pollinator conservation policies found that despite scientific calls and public outcry to develop polices that addresses declines, governments have not delivered such legislation, nor have they met basic monitoring needs recommended by experts.

Jeroen P van der Sluijs, Stéphane Foucart and Jérôme Casas, "Editorial overview: Halting the pollinator crisis requires entomologists to step up and assume their societal responsibilities", Current Opinion in Insect Science, 46, 2021: vi-xiii.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cois.2021.08.004.

The decline of bees and other pollinators continues at a high pace, and time for action is running out. Entomologists need to work with and for insects, in a much more complex settings but in a more positive and nurturing attitude. They need to step up to increase the policy relevance of their research, to help adequately diagnose the problem, and to help develop timely structural solutions and policy options. Breakthroughs such as the ban of an entire class of proven harmful pesticides implied in pollinator decline became only possible following deep engagement of scientists with all stakeholders and entomologists assuming their societal responsibilities. This needs to become the norm, not the exception.

Laura Drivdal and Jeroen P van der Sluijs, "Pollinator conservation requires a stronger and broader application of the precautionary principle", Current Opinion in Insect Science, 46, 2021: 95-105.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cois.2021.04.005.

Abstract

The accumulating scientific evidence on global insect and pollinator decline is fueling calls for pollinator conservation policies. A broad range of regulating and incentivising policies is undoubtedly needed to address the diverse threats to pollinator abundance and diversity, but implementing policies and regulations is beset by socio-political challenges. Lessons could be learned from the past and current applications of concepts central to biodiversity conservation. Given the uncertainties and data gaps, the concept of the Precautionary Principle (PP) is particularly important. The PP means that when it is scientifically plausible that human activities may lead to morally unacceptable harm, actions shall be taken to avoid or diminish that harm: uncertainty should not be an excuse to delay action. This paper reviews the role of the PP in pollinator conservation. The current research front is fragmented: the PP is briefly mentioned as relevant in literature on biodiversity conservation because of the scientific uncertainties regarding insect decline and their diverse drivers. A separate strand of literature contains studies on specific cases where the PP has played a role in the regulation of specific threats to pollinators: systemic insecticides and global trade in bees. Although limited to two significant threats to pollinator abundance and diversity, these studies provide important lessons on the challenges of implementing precautionary pollinator conservation policies and underline socio-political aspects of the ‘human-dimensions’ of pollinator conservation. Specifically, they highlight that ambiguity is a greater challenge than scientific uncertainty, which may be heightened when policies are intended to regulate specific economic sectors. We suggest that more attention should be paid to the discrepancy between the PP as formally included in policies or regulations and its inadequate implementation (too little too late) in a context of scientific uncertainty and societal conflict.

Mieg, H.A. (2022). The Responsibility of Science: An Introduction. In: Mieg, H.A. (eds) The Responsibility of Science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, vol 57. Springer, Cham.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91597-1_1

Abstract

This is the introduction to the book The Responsibility of Science, containing three parts. I explain both the concept of responsibility and science as an institution. I then present lines of argumentation that run through the essays of this volume and combine them. (i) Responsibility is a relational concept, derived from the verb “to respond.” Therefore, the concept of responsibility refers to a relation involving at least three elements: Someone is responsible for something to someone else. Moreover, responsibility is attributive, that is, resulting from a social attribution of guilt or duties to a person. (ii) Science is meant here to refer to historically developed, institutionalized research and to be thought of independently of the objects of that research. Therefore, by ‘science,’ I am referring to natural and social sciences as well as humanities, and make no distinction between pure and applied science. (iii) This volume lives through the many references that link the chapters and the lines of argumentation that develop in the work, such as Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) as a new approach within EU research policy; the ethical question of the moral person in science; and the effects of the institutionalization and professionalization of science.

De Smedt, K., Vos, E. (2022). The Application of the Precautionary Principle in the EU. In: Mieg, H.A. (eds) The Responsibility of Science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, vol 57. Springer, Cham.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91597-1_8

Abstract

The precautionary principle is a guiding principle that allows decision makers to adopt precautionary measures even when scientific uncertainties about environmental and health impacts of new technologies or products remain. It is also a debated principle. Proponents of the precautionary principle argue that it provides a framework for improving the quality and reliability of decisions over technology, science, ecological and human health, and leads to improved regulation. Opponents argue that it is incoherent, lacking orientation and that it hinders innovation. The aim of this Chapter is to increase understanding of the perceived tension between the precautionary principle and innovation by examining how the precautionary principle is applied in EU law and by the EU courts.

Themes

Innovation, Precaution, Science

Interesting for

Research & Academia

Scientific Publication

Publishing Date

29 June 2022

European Policy Workshop: “Precaution for responsible innovation”

chiara.mazzetti@ecologic.eu — Tue, 01 Mar 2022 10:27:55 +0000

full image

European Policy Workshop: “Precaution for responsible innovation”

On February 22 and 23, the RECIPES project has held the European Policy Workshop: “Precaution for responsible innovation”.

Read HERE the summary of the Policy Workshop.

The purpose of the workshop was to review a pre-final version of the RECIPES guidance on how to ensure the Precautionary Principle’s ability to drive responsible innovation. The 2-day-workshop took place online, was hosted by RECIPES partner DIALOGIK and brought together 25 invited experts from EU and national policy-making institutions, European and national agencies, EU policy support organizations and bodies, scholars of science and technology governance, and similar experts.

Participants discussed the pre-final version of the guidance they had received before the event in break-out sessions taking place on both days. The discussion was guided by pre-defined questions. The participants were asked to comment on the clarity, argumentative strength and policy relevance of the guidance and to brainstorm on the exploitation of the document.

The discussions were preceded by some presentations by the RECIPES team. Prof. Ellen Vos (Maastricht University) offered insights into the (research) policy context in which the RECIPES project was launched and how this context has changed over the life of the project. Prof. Kristel de Smedt (Maastricht University) presented the guidance and outlined its purpose, target groups, sources and development process, and structure. She also explained how the guidance is supposed to be used. Aske Palsberg and Niels-Kristian Tjelle Holm (both from The Danish Board of Technology Foundation) presented the RECIPES process of engaging a broad range of actors in the development of the guidance document (in which the European Policy Workshop was the final step). They highlighted that the insights gained from the engagement process were used to create the main structure of the guidance. The workshop was moderated by Dr. Marion Dreyer (DIALOGIK).

The workshop participants have provided the RECIPES team with valuable input and inspiring information and ideas on how to improve the guidance. The main outcome of the event will be summarized in a workshop documentation and made available via the RECIPES website. The finalised guidance will be presented at the RECIPES conference "Precaution for responsible innovation: New options to move forward", taking place on May 11, 2022

Organiser

DIALOGIK, DBT, IASS with support from UM, KNAW, UiB, K&A and ARC

Contact

Frank Dratsdrummer, DIALOGIK

Email: dratsdrummer@dialogik-expert.de

Themes

Innovation, Precaution

Interesting for

Policy Makers, Regulatory Authorities & Agencies

RECIPES Event

Event Date

22 February 2022 - 23 February 2022

Location

Online

Language

English

BeeCaution seminar on the role of the precautionary principle in chemicals regulation

chiara.mazzetti@ecologic.eu — Wed, 26 Jan 2022 18:16:56 +0000

full image

BeeCaution seminar on the role of the precautionary principle in chemicals regulation

On January 18th 2022, the precautionary principle in chemicals regulation was discussed in an online seminar with academics and stakeholders.

The seminar was organised by University of Bergen's BeeCaution project, which is a spin-off project of the H2020 RECIPES project. BeeCaution aims to build a Norwegian network of actionable knowledge for precaution by engaging a Nordic audience in RECIPES' discussions on precaution and innovation. The seminar gathered 47 participants with different backgrounds, including students, toxicologists, NGOs, legal scholars, and representatives from public scientific committees.

In the first half of the seminar, a presentation on the precautionary principle in the European chemicals regulation (REACH)’ was given by Christina Rudén, professor of toxicology and regulatory ecotoxicology at the University of Stockholm. Rudén criticised the lack of precaution in chemical regulations in the EU. She talked about what she termed the “Seven Sins” of the EU's chemical regulation, including: that most chemicals are insufficiently tested, that mixed exposures of chemicals are ignored, that there is a structural conflict of interest and lack of transparency in regulatory risk assessment of chemicals, and that the PP is very rarely used explicitly. Rudén also mentioned some possible improvements in the newly proposed Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability as a step in the right direction. This strategy indicates better management of endocrine disruptors and mixture risk and improved transparency. However it remains to be implemented, cross-cutting legislation is still missing, and the structural problems of conflict of interest remain unaddressed.

Prof. Ketil Hylland, toxicologist at the University of Oslo, was invited to comment on Rudén’s presentation. Hylland agreed on the need of a precautionary approach. He mentioned uncertainty around prenatal exposure to low doses of chemicals as an example. He further suggested that instead of focusing on calculating natures tolerance levels of chemicals in risk assessments, the main focus should start from the question whether the chemical is really needed (essential use). Regarding the PP, he found it strange that when looking up the PP in the EU, most of the focus is on the limitations of the principle.

After a short break, the seminar was open to comments from the audience. Topics discussed include:

The problem of ‘paralysis by analysis’
A better testing regime is needed, that is more science-based instead of volume based
The problems of regulatory silos
What counts as ‘essential use’ of chemicals should be discussed more
More interdisciplinary collaboration is needed, especially legal scholars and social scientists need to engage more in debates and research related to regulation of chemicals
The problematics of setting specific thresholds, and that the PP is applied retrospectively
There is a window of opportunity to engage with the implementation of the new chemical strategy
Other relevant cases mentioned: Norway’s GMO legislation and the EUs prolonged process of updating the so called "Bee Guidance" for pesticide assessments

A video of Rudén’s presentation will be made available at the webpage of UiB's BeeCaution project soon.

Organiser

University of Bergen

Contact

Prof. Jeroen van der Sluijs
Email: Jeroen.Sluijs@uib.no

Further Links

BeeCaution project

Themes

Endocrine disruptors, Environment, Governance, Health, Innovation, Precaution, Regulation, Science

Interesting for

Policy Makers, Regulatory Authorities & Agencies, Research & Academia, Industry & Business, Funding Sources & Finance, NGOs & Associations

RECIPES Event

Event Date

18 January 2022

Location

Bergen, Norway

Language

English

Precaution for Responsible Innovation: New Options to Move Forward

chiara.mazzetti@ecologic.eu — Thu, 20 Jan 2022 10:32:52 +0000

full image

Precaution for Responsible Innovation: New Options to Move Forward

RECIPES Dissemination Conference

On May 11, the RECIPES project has held its dissemination conference “Precaution for Responsible Innovation: New Options to Move Forward”.

At the conference, the RECIPES project presented and discussed some of the ideas on how to improve the use of the precautionary principle that were developed in consultation with several stakeholders at various points during the project period (the RECIPES guidance). The conference brought together around 90 participants from a range of different actor groups including several of those who had participated in one or more of the RECIPES workshops. The conference was carried out in hybrid format, so the participants joined it onsite or online.

Several of the speakers and panellists stressed that the topicality of the precautionary principle has increased in the past, e.g., due to the increasing transgression of planetary boundaries. They considered the principle to be even more important in the future. They appreciated that the RECIPES guidance reconfirms the importance of the precautionary principle and reinstates its innovative potential, especially by stressing its dual role as a legal principle and safeguard and as a policy principle and compass. They identified the RECIPES guidance as a timely document.

It was emphasised that the use of the precautionary principle requires political discussions at all levels (local, regional, national, EU, global). These would need to open up complex issues to the wider public, involve the knowledge and perspectives of a wide diversity of actors, and deal with (uncertain) risks as well as (uncertain) benefits, and address questions such as “(uncertain) risks and potentially serious harm for whom?” and “(uncertain) benefits for whom?” and “what are sustainable and public-interest-oriented pathways out of interlinked multiple crises such as climate change and loss of biodiversity?”.

It was highlighted that recent reports by IPBES, IPCC and UNEP, CBD and WHO on biodiversity, climate change and environment, agree that solutions for these wicked challenges of a systemic nature, characterized by uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguities, can only be achieved by systemic, multidimensional, cross-sectoral, interdisciplinary, transdisciplinary and participative approaches. The benefit of the precautionary principle would be that it enables solutions for (uncertain) risks in a systemic way that not simply shifts responsibility to the individual level.

For more information, you can find the programme of the conference HERE and the presentations held at the conference below. Moreover, you can find statements by some panellists below (the panellists were not asked to provide a written statement but some have made it available to the RECIPES team).

Welcome note by the coordinator: Guidance for the future use of the precautionary principle, Ellen Vos & Kristel de Smedt (University of Maastricht)
The RECIPES engagement approach: Reaching out to society and policy for developing the guidance - Aske Palsberg & Niels-Kristian Tjelle Holm (The Danish Board of Technology Foundation)
Discussion input no. 1 from the RECIPES guidance: The precautionary principle works best in a double role: safeguard and compass - Tijs Sikma (Rathenau Institute)
Discussion input no. 2 from the RECIPES guidance: The precautionary principle is a knowledge and participation issue - Jeroen van der Sluijs (University of Bergen) and Pia-Johanna Schweizer (Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies)
Intervention by Christine von Weizsäcker
Intervention by Carolina Vigo

In the videos below Christine von Weizsächer and Nina Holland, RECIPES Advisory Board Members, offer their perspectives on the RECIPES project, during the final conference held in May 2022:

Organiser

Dialogik, DBT, IASS, UM, Ecologic Institute with support from KNAW, UiB, K&I and ARC

Contact

Dr. Marion Dreyer, Dialogik

Email: dreyer@dialogik-expert.de

Themes

Artificial Intelligence in healthcare, CRISPR-based gene drives, Endocrine disruptors, Environment, Financial risks and urban waste planning, Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO’s), Glyphosate, Health, Innovation, Microplastics, Nanotechnologies, Neonicotinoid insecticides, Precaution, Regulation, Safety, Science

Interesting for

Policy Makers, Regulatory Authorities & Agencies, Research & Academia, Industry & Business, Funding Sources & Finance, NGOs & Associations, Citizens & Civil Society Organisations

RECIPES Event

Event Date

11 May 2022

Location

Hybrid Format: Online & Brussels

Language

English

Online conference on precaution and innovation in Germany and beyond

chiara.mazzetti@ecologic.eu — Tue, 07 Dec 2021 14:49:40 +0000

full image

Online conference on precaution and innovation in Germany and beyond

On the 18 and 19 November 2021, the German non-governmental organization NABU organized the online conference “Vorsorge und Innovation - Fit for Future?”. The meeting was set up to discuss the relationship between innovation and the precaution principle. For two days, the conference gathered experts including academics, government officials, and industry actors.

On Thursday 18 November, after an opening by Michal Schäfer (NABU representative) and Dr. Carsten Neßhöver (representative of the German Environment Agency), Prof Andrew Stirling presented and discussed the current challenges for the governance of technological innovation. Dr Heidi Stockhaus the presented the results of the RECIPES project regarding the effect of the precautionary principle. She explored the legal status and current implementation of both principles in different legal orders. The presentation was followed by a comment by Ulrich Petschow.

On Friday 19 November, the conference continued, and Prof Sebastian Pfotenhauer discussed the role of the precaution principle in risk governance and innovation governance, for a responsible and sustainable innovation process. Dr Pia-Johanna Schweizer then presented the methodology and preliminary results of the RECIPES project, focusing on the co-creative approach.

The event ended with a round table discussion on precaution and its role for future innovation challenges, as well as its possible adaptations. Prof Christian Calliess, Prof Katharina Hölzle, Max Müller and Prof Martina Schraudner discussed different point of views and possibilities – considering the various stakes and challenges of innovation and precaution and suggesting conciliation possibilities.

Organiser

NABU

Contact

Dr Heidi Stockhaus, Ecologic Institute

Email: heidi.stockhaus@ecologic.eu

Dr Pia-Johanna Schweizer, IASS

Email. Pia-Johanna.Schweizer@iass-potsdam.de

Themes

Governance, Innovation, Precaution, Regulation, Safety

Interesting for

Policy Makers, Regulatory Authorities & Agencies, Research & Academia, Industry & Business, NGOs & Associations, Citizens & Civil Society Organisations

External Event

Event Date

18 November 2021 - 19 November 2021

Location

Online

Language

German

European Policy Workshop: “Precaution for responsible innovation”

chiara.mazzetti@ecologic.eu — Thu, 04 Nov 2021 18:26:38 +0000

full image

European Policy Workshop: “Precaution for responsible innovation”

On February 22 and 23, the RECIPES project will organize the European Policy Workshop: “Precaution for responsible innovation”.

The workshop aims to review the pre-final version of the RECIPES guidance on how to ensure the PP’s ability to drive responsible innovation. It will take place online and will address, as main target groups, EU policy makers, European agencies, EU policy support organizations and bodies and similar experts.

Participants will have the chance to discuss a pre-final version of the RECIPES guidance (Sent in advance to registered guests). A series of Break-out sessions taking place on both days will allow participants to discuss the guidance to further improve its clarity, plausibility, policy relevance and future-orientation, as well as to brainstorm on the exploitation of the document.

For more information, you can find the programme of the Workshop HERE.

The workshop will be moderated by the RECIPES partners.

Organiser

Dialogik, DBT, IASS with support from UM, KNAW, UiB, K&A and ARC

Contact

Frank Dratsdrummer, Doalogik

Email: dratsdrummer@dialogik-expert.de

Themes

Artificial Intelligence in healthcare, CRISPR-based gene drives, Endocrine disruptors, Environment, Financial risks and urban waste planning, Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO’s), Glyphosate, Governance, Health, Innovation, Microplastics, Nanotechnologies, Neonicotinoid insecticides, Precaution, Regulation, Safety, Science

Interesting for

Policy Makers, Regulatory Authorities & Agencies, Research & Academia

RECIPES Event

Event Date

22 February 2022 - 23 February 2022

Location

Online

Language

English

Guidance for future application of the precautionary principle

chiara.mazzetti@ecologic.eu — Mon, 06 Sep 2021 13:58:08 +0000

full image

Guidance for future application of the precautionary principle

As a last step of the project, the RECIPES team has developed a Guidance for application of the precautionary principle in the EU. The guidance advises on how to deal responsibly with uncertain risks in the development and implementation of technology in the EU. Target groups of this guidance are primarily EU policy makers, EU agencies, and EU policy support organisations and bodies that are concerned with risk regulation or the governance of science, technology and innovation.

The main documents are:

Guidance for application of the precautionary principle in the EU
The 3rd policy brief
The sector-specific briefs that illustrate the application of the guidance to chemicals and gene technology

Themes of the guidance

The guidance for future application of the precautionary principle covers the three meta-themes identified in the needs assessment:

Participation

Organisation and production of expertise

Extent of application

Development process

After having identified the needs of stakeholders for guidance to support the future application of the precautionary principle in a co-creative process, the RECIPES team developed guidance for the three meta-themes identified.

Stakeholder phase 1: Consultation workshops

During June 2021, the RECIPES team consulted twice with stakeholders: During the first consultation workshop, it gathered feedback on the first ideas developed for the three meta-themes. During the second consultation workshop, the RECIPES team asked stakeholders to perform a SWOT analysis for the first draft of the guidance.

Stakeholder phase 2: Multi-criteria assessment

During September 2021, the RECIPES team scrutinized an elaborated version of the guidance via a modified participatory multi-criteria assessment. The purpose was to ensure that the guidance will be of relevance and acceptable for different stakeholders. To this end, the RECIPES team facilitated an open-ended focus group discussion based on a range of criteria, including accessibility and concreteness. The RECIPES methodology developed for planning and implementation of the multi-criteria assessment is available HERE.

Stakeholder phase 3: Policy workshop

In February 2022, the RECIPES team discussed a pre-final version of the guidance at the European Policy Workshop: “Precaution for responsible innovation” with policy makers and policy advisors to further improve its clarity, plausibility and policy relevance.

Authors

Please refer to the individual reports for the list of authors.

ISBN/ISSN/DOI

N/A

Themes

Environment, Innovation, Precaution, Regulation, Safety, Science

Interesting for

Policy Makers, Regulatory Authorities & Agencies, Research & Academia, Industry & Business, Funding Sources & Finance, NGOs & Associations, Citizens & Civil Society Organisations

Guidelines & Recommendations

Policy Brief

Report

Publishing Date

20 July 2022

Language

English

RECIPES' co-creative process and needs assessment results

chiara.mazzetti@ecologic.eu — Mon, 29 Mar 2021 08:22:33 +0000

full image

RECIPES' co-creative process and needs assessment results

From May 2020 to January 2021, the RECIPES team has engaged in a co-creative process to identify needs and ideas for guidelines and tools to support the future application of the precautionary principle. Needs expressed by stakeholders during this process relate to participation, to the organisation of expertise and to the extent of application of the precautionary principle.

Stakeholder workshops series

The RECIPES team had planned to engage stakeholders during a series of workshops to discuss scenarios for future application of the precautionary principle and to identify needs for new tools and guidelines for implementing the precautionary principle. After the co-creation process was disrupted by the restrictions for travel and in-person meetings due to the Covid-19 pandemic, the RECIPES team adjusted its methodology to ensure co-creation via online formats, including webinars and digital platforms.

During the first phase of the co-creative process, stakeholders were asked to assess three scenarios, one in which current practice continues, one in which precaution is strengthened, and on which emphasises innovation. Based on the feedback provided, the RECIPES team developed a vision for the future implementation of the precautionary principle in the EU. The vision may be summarised as follows

Implementation of the precautionary principle shall ensure a high level of proactive protection of human health and the environment, and stimulate socially desired innovation.

Needs mapping

Based on the vision for future implementation of the precautionary principle, the RECIPES team engaged in a co-creative process with stakeholders to identify and map needs. These needs can be clustered in:

Participation: Need for transparency of the process, clarity about the host and the procedure, improved quality of formats for engagement, early involvement, etc.
Organisation of expertise: Need to decrease influence of political interests, for a clear definition of scientific evidence, for institutionalised standards, etc.
Extent of application: Need to formulate the precautionary principle in a way that encourages sustainable competition and sustainable economy, to strengthen application for technologies which are already on the marked, etc.

A description of the co-creative process and the results of the needs assessment can be found in the report which is available HERE.

The main findings of the needs assessment process have been compiled in a policy brief.

Authors

Please refer to the individual reports for the list of authors.

ISBN/ISSN/DOI

N/A

Themes

Innovation, Precaution

Interesting for

Policy Makers, Regulatory Authorities & Agencies, Research & Academia, Industry & Business, Funding Sources & Finance

Policy Brief

Report

Publishing Date

29 October 2021

Language

English

Analysis of the case studies

chiara.mazzetti@ecologic.eu — Thu, 11 Mar 2021 10:02:10 +0000

full image

Analysis of the case studies

To fully understand the complexities and the controversies around the application of the precautionary principle, the RECIPES project conducted nine case studies. The aim was to understand and explain the potential differences in the application depending on the topic and the context. A comparison across the different cases indicates that the application of the precautionary principle had positive effects on innovation and contributed to more responsible pathways.

Back in 2019, the RECIPES project finalised the selection of the case studies and developed a conceptual framework focusing on the role of the case studies within the project as well as a methodological framework for the individual case study analyses.

An overview of all case studies can be found HERE, while the conceptual framework and the methodological framework can be found HERE.

Gender Analysis

The RECIPES project is committed to take gender aspects into account when conducting its research. To this end, a note has been developed to inform case study authors on how to reflect gender considerations in the different research steps. The note is available HERE.

Case Studies documentation

Over the course of 2020, the case study authors have engaged in research and drafting. They prepared a report, a factsheet and a short video for all nine cases:

Case study 1: CRISPR-based gene drives
Case study 2: Genetically modified organisms
Case study 3: Endocrine disruptors
Case study 4: Neonicotinoid insecticides
Case study 5: Nanotechnologies
Case study 6: Glyphosate
Case study 7: Financial risks in water infrastructure planning
Case study 8: The use of artificial intelligence in healthcare
Case study 9: Microplastics in food products and cosmetics

All case studies have been bundled in one report, which can be found HERE.

As a last step, the RECIPES project compared the different case studies and identified complexities and controversies surrounding the application of the precautionary principle in the different cases. The report, which combines the inter-case study analysis and the identification of cross-cutting issues is available HERE.

Lessons learnt

When comparing the nine case studies, the RECIPES project identified several lessons learnt in regard to the relevance of the precautionary principle, procedures for its application and effects of the precautionary principle. Lessons learnt include the following:

Relevance: It is necessary to take a broader array of potential consequences into account when developing a new technology and to openly communicate the limitations of scientific knowledge as well as of technological solutions.
Procedures: Although deliberative methods and procedures have proven valuable for public involvement, more guidance is needed on the scope of procedures and methods to acknowledge differences e.g. in the evidence base.
Effects: While the case studies indicated that there is a need to stimulate pathways for innovation, more empirical research is required to test the claim that the precautionary principle hinders innovations in the European Union.

The RECIPES project also compared the results of the case study analysis with the results of the stocktake of the precautionary principle conducted in 2019. The results of the stocktake can be found HERE. The comparison of results can be found HERE.

Authors

Please refer to the individual reports for the list of authors.

ISBN/ISSN/DOI

N/A

Themes

Interesting for

Policy Makers, Regulatory Authorities & Agencies, Research & Academia, Industry & Business, Funding Sources & Finance

Case Study

Report

Publishing Date

11 March 2021

Language

English

Taking stock of the precautionary principle since 2000

chiara.mazzetti@ecologic.eu — Thu, 21 Jan 2021 12:34:04 +0000

full image

Taking stock of the precautionary principle since 2000

Application, effects, public debate and citizens’ perceptions

The precautionary principle is supposed to enable decision-makers to adopt precautionary measures even if scientific uncertainties about environmental and health risks remain. However, opinions about the precautionary principle are divided. To some, it is unscientific and an obstacle to progress. To others, it is a necessary tool to protect human health and the environment.

We have recently published the report on “The effect of the precautionary principle since 2000”, which examines the application of the precautionary principle from 2000 to 2019. According to the report, the precautionary principle is recognised as a general principle of EU law. However, a lack of clear guidelines for its implementation results in different interpretations and applications across countries and policy areas. This allows for a flexible use of the principle but also leaves stakeholders with a lack of legal certainty. The report presents both, a stocktaking of the way the precautionary principle has been applied and reflections on its limitation.

This first report, along with a selection of nine Case Studies conducted in 2019-2020, prepares the ground for the core tasks of the project: the development of scenarios where both the precautionary principle and innovation are taken into account, and the development of tools and guidelines for applying the precautionary principle. These tools and guidelines will be co-created with different stakeholders via interviews, workshops, and webinars. They will be designed to help policymakers and other stakeholders to apply the precautionary principle while encouraging innovation.

Here are the:
- Report on “The effect of the precautionary principle since 2000”
- Synthesis of the report on “The effect of the precautionary principle since 2000”

The main findings of the report have been compiled in a policy brief.

Citizen meetings
The citizen’s meetings, which were part of this project phase, allowed the research team to collect citizens’ opinions, reflections, and ideas on the precaution principle and innovation. They were participating in the meetings conducted in Bulgaria, Norway, Italy, Denmark, and the Netherlands, and did not perceive precaution and innovation as a contradiction to each other. They favoured a case-by-case review for balancing precaution and innovation.

Here are the:
- Citizen Meetings’ full report
- Synthesis of the Citizen Meetings’ report

Stakeholder Database

Throughout the project, the RECIPES team engages with different stakeholders. Meetings are conducted to discuss issues related to precaution and innovation with citizens, workshops are organized to discuss the future of the precautionary principle and to develop tools and guidelines for its application, and stakeholders are interviews as part of the case studies on the precautionary principle. As a basis for the selection of stakeholders for such exercises and for dissemination activities, a stakeholder database has been established as a living document.

Media analysis
Furthermore, during the first project phase, the project team conducted a media analysis for three newspapers - the Süddeutsche Zeitung (Germany), Le Monde (France) and The Guardian (UK). The analysis aimed to depict how media shapes and drives the public debate on the precautionary principle. One of the RECIPES case study topics that was most frequently referred to in all of the newspapers, was GMOs.

More details can be found in:
-   the Media Analysis synthesis report
-   the Media Analysis of the Süddeutsche Zeitung
-   the Media Analysis of Le Monde and
-   the Media Analysis of The Guardian.

The project
The RECIPES (REconciling sCience, Innovation and Precaution through the Engagement of Stakeholders) project is based on the idea that the responsible application of the precautionary principle and the consideration of innovation aspects do not necessarily contradict with each other. Building on this idea, RECIPES aims to reconcile innovation and precaution by developing tools and guidelines to ensure the precautionary principle is applied while still encouraging innovation. The project (2019 - 2021) is funded by the EU’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme and is implemented by a consortium that includes 11 partners from 7 European countries.

Authors

Please refer to the individual reports for the list of authors.

Published in

March 2020

ISBN/ISSN/DOI

N/A

Themes

Innovation, Precaution, Regulation, Safety, Science

Interesting for

Policy Makers, Regulatory Authorities & Agencies, Research & Academia, Industry & Business, Funding Sources & Finance, NGOs & Associations, Citizens & Civil Society Organisations

Policy Brief

Report

Publishing Date

18 March 2020

Language

English

Innovation

Academic journal articles on sub-results of the RECIPES project

Academic journal articles on sub-results of the RECIPES project

Sabrina Röttger-Wirtz, "Case C-616/17 Blaise and Others: The Precautionary Principle and Its Role in Judicial Review – Glyphosate and the Regulatory Framework for Pesticides", Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 27(4), 2020: 529-542.

Abstract

Fritz-Julius Grafe and Harald A. Mieg, "Precaution and Innovation in the Context of Wastewater Regulation: An Examination of Financial Innovation under UWWTD Disputes in London and Milan", Sustainability, 13(16), 2021: 9130.

Abstract

Jeroen P van Der Sluijs, "Insect decline, an emerging global environmental risk", Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 46, 2020: 39-42.

Abstract

Jeroen P van der Sluijs, Stéphane Foucart and Jérôme Casas, "Editorial overview: Halting the pollinator crisis requires entomologists to step up and assume their societal responsibilities", Current Opinion in Insect Science, 46, 2021: vi-xiii.

Laura Drivdal and Jeroen P van der Sluijs, "Pollinator conservation requires a stronger and broader application of the precautionary principle", Current Opinion in Insect Science, 46, 2021: 95-105.

Abstract

Mieg, H.A. (2022). The Responsibility of Science: An Introduction. In: Mieg, H.A. (eds) The Responsibility of Science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, vol 57. Springer, Cham.

Abstract

De Smedt, K., Vos, E. (2022). The Application of the Precautionary Principle in the EU. In: Mieg, H.A. (eds) The Responsibility of Science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, vol 57. Springer, Cham.

Abstract

Themes

Interesting for

European Policy Workshop: “Precaution for responsible innovation”

European Policy Workshop: “Precaution for responsible innovation”

Themes

Interesting for

BeeCaution seminar on the role of the precautionary principle in chemicals regulation

BeeCaution seminar on the role of the precautionary principle in chemicals regulation

Themes

Interesting for

Precaution for Responsible Innovation: New Options to Move Forward

Precaution for Responsible Innovation: New Options to Move Forward

Themes

Interesting for

Online conference on precaution and innovation in Germany and beyond

Online conference on precaution and innovation in Germany and beyond

Themes

Interesting for

European Policy Workshop: “Precaution for responsible innovation”

European Policy Workshop: “Precaution for responsible innovation”

Themes

Interesting for

Guidance for future application of the precautionary principle

Guidance for future application of the precautionary principle

Themes of the guidance

Development process

Stakeholder phase 1: Consultation workshops

Stakeholder phase 2: Multi-criteria assessment

Stakeholder phase 3: Policy workshop

Themes

Interesting for

RECIPES' co-creative process and needs assessment results

RECIPES' co-creative process and needs assessment results

Stakeholder workshops series

Needs mapping

Themes

Interesting for

Analysis of the case studies

Analysis of the case studies

Gender Analysis

Case Studies documentation

Lessons learnt

Themes

Interesting for

Taking stock of the precautionary principle since 2000

Taking stock of the precautionary principle since 2000

Themes

Interesting for

Sabrina Röttger-Wirtz, "**Case C-616/17 Blaise and Others: The Precautionary Principle and Its Role in Judicial Review – Glyphosate and the Regulatory Framework for Pesticides**", Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 27(4), 2020: 529-542.