Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share Episode 9: Risk should not be made complicated when the hazard is clear - with Hans Peter Arp
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
Episode 9: Risk should not be made complicated when the hazard is clear - with Hans Peter Arp
Live from SETAC 2023 - Raoul Wolf hosts a series of ZeroPM podcasts. In this episode he interviews Hans Peter Arp about his poster "
Risk should not be made complicated when the hazards and exposure are clear", which can be found here.
Different stakeholders will approach scientific uncertainty differently. Scientists are often driven to reduce uncertainty; regulators are driven to act on uncertainty (e.g. by invoking the precautionary principle), and those that are responsible for causing the environmental stress often seek to use scientific uncertainty as basis for inaction or deniability. To cut through these different viewpoints, the tool developed by William of Ockham (1287-1347), referred to as Ockham's razor, can be useful for governance. Ockham's razor states that "Entities are not to be multiplied without necessity", meaning in practice for this context that if adding new variables/complexities does not lower the overall uncertainty or picture of a sustainability assessment, then they should not be added, as they will only make governance more complex, and less transparent. When it preventing harmful chemicals from entering the environment, this has an impact on the role of risk perception and communication. In many cases, the hazards and risk of exposure are clear enough, from the perspective of some stakeholders, to prevent a substance from allowing a harmful chemical to be produced for a certain use. However, those who can profit from such substances, either as a producer or a consumer, may be drawn into the discussion of uncertainty to keep questioning the risk models, as a strategy to keep allowing the harmful substances in the environment.
To resolve diverse attitudes towards uncertainty, different stakeholders should be guided towards focusing on simple solutions with few variables, clear targets, that lay frank the societal winners and losers. Transparency is a key aspect here, as simple models and open data make it easier to engage in this dialogue. There should also be a focus on benefits of simple, sustainable solutions. Society should use carrots (not just sticks) to innovate towards beneficial, simple solutions to prevent environmental stressors, rather than argue about where the complicated impact thresholds are.
To follow more of the work of the WP5 Substance Grouping team, follow our Zenodo Community and of ZeroPM.eu.
Recorded during the SETAC Europe Dublin Conferencen, May 1st, 2023.
ZeroPM is a research and innovation project funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101036756.
View all episodes
By ZeroPM - Zero pollution of persistent and mobile substancesLive from SETAC 2023 - Raoul Wolf hosts a series of ZeroPM podcasts. In this episode he interviews Hans Peter Arp about his poster "
Risk should not be made complicated when the hazards and exposure are clear", which can be found here.
Different stakeholders will approach scientific uncertainty differently. Scientists are often driven to reduce uncertainty; regulators are driven to act on uncertainty (e.g. by invoking the precautionary principle), and those that are responsible for causing the environmental stress often seek to use scientific uncertainty as basis for inaction or deniability. To cut through these different viewpoints, the tool developed by William of Ockham (1287-1347), referred to as Ockham's razor, can be useful for governance. Ockham's razor states that "Entities are not to be multiplied without necessity", meaning in practice for this context that if adding new variables/complexities does not lower the overall uncertainty or picture of a sustainability assessment, then they should not be added, as they will only make governance more complex, and less transparent. When it preventing harmful chemicals from entering the environment, this has an impact on the role of risk perception and communication. In many cases, the hazards and risk of exposure are clear enough, from the perspective of some stakeholders, to prevent a substance from allowing a harmful chemical to be produced for a certain use. However, those who can profit from such substances, either as a producer or a consumer, may be drawn into the discussion of uncertainty to keep questioning the risk models, as a strategy to keep allowing the harmful substances in the environment.
To resolve diverse attitudes towards uncertainty, different stakeholders should be guided towards focusing on simple solutions with few variables, clear targets, that lay frank the societal winners and losers. Transparency is a key aspect here, as simple models and open data make it easier to engage in this dialogue. There should also be a focus on benefits of simple, sustainable solutions. Society should use carrots (not just sticks) to innovate towards beneficial, simple solutions to prevent environmental stressors, rather than argue about where the complicated impact thresholds are.
To follow more of the work of the WP5 Substance Grouping team, follow our Zenodo Community and of ZeroPM.eu.
Recorded during the SETAC Europe Dublin Conferencen, May 1st, 2023.
ZeroPM is a research and innovation project funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101036756.