This is the third in a series that looked at how the hazard-based regulatory approach has led to the contrapreneur pushing the precautionary principle to challenge the achievements of entrepreneurs. This irrationality is only possible in a world where …
An expedient policy process relying on precaution and hazard-based regulations has allowed contrapreneurs to cement their anti-innovation strategy at the heart of Brussels
What is the difference between the risk-based regulatory approach and a hazard-based one? Why is it that hazard-based activists are so successful in pushing such an unrealistic approach?
The Great Plague of London showed the precautionary principle at its worst when they killed the cats. Today environmental zealots seem to find delight in “drowning kittens”.
Precaution as a policy tool has been manipulated to meet activist agendas. On climate and GMOs, we see two different, contradictory perceptions of precaution applied. How can activists deal with this contradiction?
May is parade month in Brussels, but one cannot help but already notice the impressive parade of stupid marching through this town, and nowhere more can this be better exemplified than in the activism surrounding bee health and neonicotinoid pesticides. For much of the last four years, campaigners have been falling over themselves using… » read more