The regulation of risk: the case of fracking in the UK and the Netherlands

Abstract The precautionary principle was developed in environmental politics as a guiding mechanism for governments where new technologies, products, and processes produced potential health or environmental problems but where scientific evidence could not explain why. Anecdotal evidence of fracking...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Science & public policy 2018-02, Vol.45 (1), p.45-52
Hauptverfasser: Patterson, Alan, McLean, Craig
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 52
container_issue 1
container_start_page 45
container_title Science & public policy
container_volume 45
creator Patterson, Alan
McLean, Craig
description Abstract The precautionary principle was developed in environmental politics as a guiding mechanism for governments where new technologies, products, and processes produced potential health or environmental problems but where scientific evidence could not explain why. Anecdotal evidence of fracking suggests that it might cause water pollution or subsidence, but the scientific evidence to support this proposition is not yet in place. This paper examines the actions of the UK and Dutch governments toward fracking. Although both governments have adopted the precautionary principle into national law, neither has directly invoked it in the field of fracking, relying instead on more conventional scientific understandings of risk. In line with other papers in Science and Public Policy, this article provides a comparative analytical analysis of scientific policy regulation. It does so by arguing that while notionally subscribed to the precautionary principle, the UK and Dutch authorities have been reluctant to use it.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/scipol/scx036
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>oup_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1093_scipol_scx036</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/scipol/scx036</oup_id><sourcerecordid>10.1093/scipol/scx036</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c270t-567c2644abca1af5ced2bf0e0360c219587e8263ddde18d2bcdb619ca181fea63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkLtPwzAQxi0EEqEwsntkMZwfcRI2VPFqK1jaOXL8KKYhiexUgv8et2Fnue_uu59Opw-hawq3FCp-F7Uf-jbJN3B5gjIqCkpyweEUZcCBES5YcY4uYvwEAFaKPEOL9YfFwW73rRp93-He4eDj7h6Pydcq2oPjgtI7322x747-ZolVZ47tm001tGmMl-jMqTbaqz-doc3T43r-Qlbvz6_zhxXRrICR5LLQTAqhGq2ocrm2hjUObPoZNKNVXha2ZJIbYywt006bRtIqwSV1Vkk-Q2S6q0MfY7CuHoL_UuGnplAfgqinIOopiMTfTHy_H_5BfwFkhmGY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>The regulation of risk: the case of fracking in the UK and the Netherlands</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><creator>Patterson, Alan ; McLean, Craig</creator><creatorcontrib>Patterson, Alan ; McLean, Craig</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract The precautionary principle was developed in environmental politics as a guiding mechanism for governments where new technologies, products, and processes produced potential health or environmental problems but where scientific evidence could not explain why. Anecdotal evidence of fracking suggests that it might cause water pollution or subsidence, but the scientific evidence to support this proposition is not yet in place. This paper examines the actions of the UK and Dutch governments toward fracking. Although both governments have adopted the precautionary principle into national law, neither has directly invoked it in the field of fracking, relying instead on more conventional scientific understandings of risk. In line with other papers in Science and Public Policy, this article provides a comparative analytical analysis of scientific policy regulation. It does so by arguing that while notionally subscribed to the precautionary principle, the UK and Dutch authorities have been reluctant to use it.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0302-3427</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1471-5430</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/scipol/scx036</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><ispartof>Science &amp; public policy, 2018-02, Vol.45 (1), p.45-52</ispartof><rights>The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c270t-567c2644abca1af5ced2bf0e0360c219587e8263ddde18d2bcdb619ca181fea63</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c270t-567c2644abca1af5ced2bf0e0360c219587e8263ddde18d2bcdb619ca181fea63</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1583,27923,27924</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Patterson, Alan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McLean, Craig</creatorcontrib><title>The regulation of risk: the case of fracking in the UK and the Netherlands</title><title>Science &amp; public policy</title><description>Abstract The precautionary principle was developed in environmental politics as a guiding mechanism for governments where new technologies, products, and processes produced potential health or environmental problems but where scientific evidence could not explain why. Anecdotal evidence of fracking suggests that it might cause water pollution or subsidence, but the scientific evidence to support this proposition is not yet in place. This paper examines the actions of the UK and Dutch governments toward fracking. Although both governments have adopted the precautionary principle into national law, neither has directly invoked it in the field of fracking, relying instead on more conventional scientific understandings of risk. In line with other papers in Science and Public Policy, this article provides a comparative analytical analysis of scientific policy regulation. It does so by arguing that while notionally subscribed to the precautionary principle, the UK and Dutch authorities have been reluctant to use it.</description><issn>0302-3427</issn><issn>1471-5430</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkLtPwzAQxi0EEqEwsntkMZwfcRI2VPFqK1jaOXL8KKYhiexUgv8et2Fnue_uu59Opw-hawq3FCp-F7Uf-jbJN3B5gjIqCkpyweEUZcCBES5YcY4uYvwEAFaKPEOL9YfFwW73rRp93-He4eDj7h6Pydcq2oPjgtI7322x747-ZolVZ47tm001tGmMl-jMqTbaqz-doc3T43r-Qlbvz6_zhxXRrICR5LLQTAqhGq2ocrm2hjUObPoZNKNVXha2ZJIbYywt006bRtIqwSV1Vkk-Q2S6q0MfY7CuHoL_UuGnplAfgqinIOopiMTfTHy_H_5BfwFkhmGY</recordid><startdate>20180201</startdate><enddate>20180201</enddate><creator>Patterson, Alan</creator><creator>McLean, Craig</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20180201</creationdate><title>The regulation of risk: the case of fracking in the UK and the Netherlands</title><author>Patterson, Alan ; McLean, Craig</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c270t-567c2644abca1af5ced2bf0e0360c219587e8263ddde18d2bcdb619ca181fea63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Patterson, Alan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McLean, Craig</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Science &amp; public policy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Patterson, Alan</au><au>McLean, Craig</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The regulation of risk: the case of fracking in the UK and the Netherlands</atitle><jtitle>Science &amp; public policy</jtitle><date>2018-02-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>45</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>45</spage><epage>52</epage><pages>45-52</pages><issn>0302-3427</issn><eissn>1471-5430</eissn><abstract>Abstract The precautionary principle was developed in environmental politics as a guiding mechanism for governments where new technologies, products, and processes produced potential health or environmental problems but where scientific evidence could not explain why. Anecdotal evidence of fracking suggests that it might cause water pollution or subsidence, but the scientific evidence to support this proposition is not yet in place. This paper examines the actions of the UK and Dutch governments toward fracking. Although both governments have adopted the precautionary principle into national law, neither has directly invoked it in the field of fracking, relying instead on more conventional scientific understandings of risk. In line with other papers in Science and Public Policy, this article provides a comparative analytical analysis of scientific policy regulation. It does so by arguing that while notionally subscribed to the precautionary principle, the UK and Dutch authorities have been reluctant to use it.</abstract><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><doi>10.1093/scipol/scx036</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0302-3427
ispartof Science & public policy, 2018-02, Vol.45 (1), p.45-52
issn 0302-3427
1471-5430
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1093_scipol_scx036
source Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)
title The regulation of risk: the case of fracking in the UK and the Netherlands
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T16%3A06%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-oup_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20regulation%20of%20risk:%20the%20case%20of%20fracking%20in%20the%20UK%20and%20the%20Netherlands&rft.jtitle=Science%20&%20public%20policy&rft.au=Patterson,%20Alan&rft.date=2018-02-01&rft.volume=45&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=45&rft.epage=52&rft.pages=45-52&rft.issn=0302-3427&rft.eissn=1471-5430&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/scipol/scx036&rft_dat=%3Coup_cross%3E10.1093/scipol/scx036%3C/oup_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_oup_id=10.1093/scipol/scx036&rfr_iscdi=true