Society of risks and effects of paralysis of the precautionary principle

The precautionary principle has been hailed as the new paradigm for the legal systems in protecting the health and environmental risk. However, it was received, since its inception, with a certain amount of criticism from academic and legal community. The criticisms are supported in the fact that the weaker versions of the precautionary principle are accused of being trivial or empty, while the stronger versions enable unreasonably restrictive requirements, imposing the burden of proof on those who create a hazard, though it is impossible prove the degree of likelihood of these activities produce significant damage. The majority voice this criticism comes from the U.S. Cass R. Sunstein, who devotes much of his book "Laws of Fear: beyond the precautionary principle" to attack the principle as indefensible, though ultimately concludes that it can be useful in some circumstances. According to him, the precautionary principle threatens to be paralyzing, forbidding both as regulatory inaction and any action between these two extremes. Accordingly, in relevant cases, every step taken, including inaction, creates a risk to the health or the environment, whereas the risks are part of the system. Meanwhile, although the precautionary approach suffers from a number of conceptual flaws, it could only be justified in certain scenarios where the principle becomes operative and the benefits of its application are greater than their misdeeds.