Cost-Benefit Analysis versus the Precautionary Principle: Beyond Cass Sunstein’s Laws of Fear
Genre
Book reviewDate
2006Author
Mandel, Gregory N.Gathii, James Thuo
Subject
Legal analysis and writingEnvironmental law
International law
Terrorism
Crimes against the state
Permanent link to this record
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12613/6362
Metadata
Show full item recordDOI
http://dx.doi.org/10.34944/dspace/6344Abstract
Perhaps the quintessential role of government is to protect its citizens from threats of all types: war, global warming, terrorism, disease, toxic substances. This essay provides a review and cri-tique of Sunstein's innovative contribution to the lively debate over how government should perform this role, a debate that often pits cost-benefit analysis against the precautionary principle. The authors contend that Sunstein's critique of the precautionary prin-ciple has merit, but that his much-discussed Laws of Fear propos-als are deficient in several significant respects. Sunstein's pro-posals fail to solve problems related to cost-benefit analysis, implementation of deliberative democracy, and incorporation of social values into responses to threats. The essay concludes with a recommendation for reconceptualizing the precautionary prin-ciple in a manner that saves it from Sunstein's critiques.Citation
Gregory N. Mandel & James Thuo Gathii, Cost-Benefit Analysis versus the Precautionary Principle: Beyond Cass Sunstein’s Laws of Fear, 2006 Univ. of Ill. L. Rev. 1037 (2006).Available at: https://www.illinoislawreview.org/print/volume-2006-issue-5/