Multiple international bodies have specified that the…
““Multiple international bodies have specified that the absence of scientific evidence of potential damage is not sufficient justification for taking risks. As the jurist Cass Sunstein points out, the precautionary principle is costly, and when interpreted strictly it can be paralyzing.””
About This Quote
This interpretation was drafted with AI assistance. It is one reading of the quote, not the author's own explanation.
Strict precautionary measures can hinder progress; lack of evidence isn’t enough to justify risk, yet overcaution can paralyze action.
In simple terms: Overcautious policies may stall progress.
Key Takeaway
Balance risk with evidence.
Themes
risk management
policy
science
Mood
analytical
cautious
Type
policy
philosophical
When to use this quote
- government regulation
- environmental policy
- business decisions
Key Concepts
Precautionary principle
cost‑benefit analysis
Questions to Reflect On
- When should precaution be relaxed?
- How to measure acceptable risk?
A Different Perspective
May ignore urgent needs for safety.