Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11673114›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental health perspectives2001

The precautionary principle in environmental science.

D Kriebel, J Tickner, P Epstein, J Lemons, R Levins, E L Loechler, M Quinn, R Rudel, T Schettler, M Stoto

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental health perspectives, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 111 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
111citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

111 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Embedding Chemistry and Pharmacy Into Sustainability.Angewandte Chemie (International ed. in English) · 2026
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Science for Pandemic Preparedness: A Precautionary Framework.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2025
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Divergent responses of native predators to severe wildfire and biological invasion are mediated by life history.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

51 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

D KriebelLowell Center for Sustainable Production, Department of Work Environment, University of Massachusetts-Lowell, Lowell, Massachusetts 01854, USA. David_Kriebel@uml.edu
J Tickner
P Epstein
J Lemons
R Levins
E L Loechler
M Quinn
R Rudel
T Schettler
M Stoto

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Environmental scientists play a key role in society's responses to environmental problems, and many of the studies they perform are intended ultimately to affect policy. The precautionary principle, proposed as a new guideline in environmental decision making, has four central components: taking preventive action in the face of uncertainty; shifting the burden of proof to the proponents of an activity; exploring a wide range of alternatives to possibly harmful actions; and increasing public participation in decision making. In this paper we examine the implications of the precautionary principle for environmental scientists, whose work often involves studying highly complex, poorly understood systems, while at the same time facing conflicting pressures from those who seek to balance economic growth and environmental protection. In this complicated and contested terrain, it is useful to examine the methodologies of science and to consider ways that, without compromising integrity and objectivity, research can be more or less helpful to those who would act with precaution. We argue that a shift to more precautionary policies creates opportunities and challenges for scientists to think differently about the ways they conduct studies and communicate results. There is a complicated feedback relation between the discoveries of science and the setting of policy. While maintaining their objectivity and focus on understanding the world, environmental scientists should be aware of the policy uses of their work and of their social responsibility to do science that protects human health and the environment. The precautionary principle highlights this tight, challenging linkage between science and policy.

Indexed as

Environmental HealthPolicy MakingPublic PolicyDecision MakingEnvironmental PollutionForecastingHumansModels, TheoreticalRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID11673114
PMCPMC1240435

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.