Practical Applications

  • Christian Munthe
Part of the The International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology book series (ELTE, volume 6)


We have now reached the point of inquiry where it is time to relate the various theoretical lines of reasoning presented in earlier chapters to actual practices of making risky decisions. In particular, we need to reconsider the issue about what PP should amount to in actual political decision making regarding environmental action and the use and introduction of technology. In doing this, I will proceed in a sort of ‘down-top’ order, starting with the issue of what the theory developed in the preceding chapter might say about a number of particular activities in isolation from the issue of policy. After this, the discussion will move on to the primary policy level and discuss what my theory implies regarding PP and its implementation within the political and regulative systems of a nation. As a final, I will then conclude by considering a number of implications on a more overarching global and long-term level of policy making.


Nuclear Power Plant Synthetic Biology Precautionary Measure Risk Production Consumerist Society 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Agar N. Liberal Eugenics: In Defence of Human Enhancement. London: Blackwell, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahteensuu M. “In Dubio Pro Natura? A Philosophical Analysis of the Precautionary Principle in Environmental and Health Risk Governance.” PhD diss., Turku: Department of Philosophy, University of Turku, 2008.Google Scholar
  3. Andersson P. “Humanity and Nature: Towards a Consistent Holistic Environmental Ethics.” PhD diss., Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis, 2007.Google Scholar
  4. Archibugi D., D. Held, and M. Köhler, eds. Re-imagining Political Community: Studies in Cosmopolitan Democracy. London: Polity Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  5. Arrhenius G. “The Boundary Problem in Democratic Theory.” In Democracy Unbound: Basic Explorations I, edited by F. Tersman. Stockholm: Department of Philosophy, Stockholm University, 2005.Google Scholar
  6. Ashcroft R.E. “Fair Process and the Redundancy of Bioethics: A Polemic.” Public Health Ethics 1 (1) (2008): 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Axelrod R. The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books, 1984.Google Scholar
  8. Beck U. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  9. Beitz C.R. Political Theory and International Relations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1979.Google Scholar
  10. Boström N. and R. Roache. “Ethical Issues in Human Enhancement.” In New Waves in Applied Ethics, edited by J. Ryberg and T.S. Petersen. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.Google Scholar
  11. Buchanan A., D.W. Brock, N. Daniels, and D. Wikler. From Chance to Choice: Genetics and Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.Google Scholar
  12. Davis R.B. “The Principlism Debate: A Critical Overview.” Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 20 (1) (1995): 85–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dower N. An Introduction to Global Citizenship. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2003.Google Scholar
  14. Gibson D.G., J.I. Glass, C. Lartigue, V.N. Noskov, R.-Y. Chuang, M.A. Algire, G.A. Benders, M.G. Montague, L. Ma, M.M. Moodie, C. Merryman, S. Vashee , R. Krishnakumar, N. Assad-Garcia, C. Andrews-Pfannkoch, E.A. Denisova, L. Young, Z.-Q. Qi, T.H. Segall-Shapiro, C.H. Calvey, P.P. Parmar, C.A. Hutchison III., H.O. Smith, and J.C. Venter. “Creation of a Bacterial Cell Controlled by a Chemically Synthesized Genome.” Science 329 (5987) (2010): 52–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Glover J. What Sort of People Should there Be? Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1984.Google Scholar
  16. Glover J. “It Makes No Difference Whether or Not I Do It.” In Applied Ethics, edited by P. Singer. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986.Google Scholar
  17. Harris J. Clones, Genes, and Immortality: Ethics and the Genetic Revolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  18. Heater D. World Citizenship and Government. London: Macmillan Press, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Held D. Democracy and the Global Order. From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1995.Google Scholar
  20. Hinsley F.H. Power and the Pursuit of Peace. Theory and Practice in the History of Relations Between States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963.Google Scholar
  21. Hobbes T. Leviathan. 1651.Google Scholar
  22. Hunt G. and M.D. Mehta, eds. Nanotechnology: Risk, Ethics and Law. Sterling, VA: Earthscan, 2006.Google Scholar
  23. Häyri M. Rationality and the Genetic Challenge: Making People Better? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.Google Scholar
  24. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007 (AR4), Geneva: IPCC, 2007. Available online: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Juth N. Genetic Information: Values and Rights. The Morality of Presymptomatic Genetic Testing. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis, 2005.Google Scholar
  26. Malmqvist E. “Good Parents, Better Babies: An Argument about Reproductive Technologies, Enhancement and Ethics.” PhD diss., Linköping: Linköping University, 2008.Google Scholar
  27. Mayer J.E. “The Golden Rice Controversy: Useless Science or Unfounded Criticism?” BioScience 55 (9) (2005): 726–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mayr E. Systematics and the Origin of Species. New York: Columbia University Press, 1942.Google Scholar
  29. Mill J.S. On Liberty. London: Penguin, 1982.Google Scholar
  30. Munthe C. “Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis: Ethical Aspects.” In Encyclopedia of Life Sciences. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2007.Google Scholar
  31. Munthe C. Pure Selection: The Ethics of Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis and Choosing Children Without Abortion. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis, 1999c.Google Scholar
  32. Munthe C. “Selected Champions: Making Winners in the Age of Genetic Technology.” In Values in Sport, edited by C.M. Tamburrini and T. Tännsjö. London & New York: E&FN Spon, 2000.Google Scholar
  33. Munthe C. The Moral Roots of Prenatal Diagnosis: Ethical Aspects of the Early Introduction and Presentation of Prenatal Diagnosis in Sweden. Göteborg: Centre for Research Ethics, 1996b.Google Scholar
  34. O’Mathúna D. Nanoethics: Big Ethical Issues with Small Technology. London: Continuum International Publishing Group, 2009.Google Scholar
  35. Palmer J. “Laser Fusion Test Results Raise Energy Hopes.” BBC News, January 28, 2010. Available online:
  36. Parfit D. Reasons and Persons, 2nd printing. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984.Google Scholar
  37. Pennisi E. “Synthetic Genome Brings New Life to Bacterium.” Science 328 (5981) (2010): 958–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Persson I. “Kan den liberala demokratin stoppa sin miljöförstörelse” [Can Liberal Democracy Stop Its Own Environmental Destruction?]. Tidskrift för politisk filosofi 12 (3) (2008): 7–26.Google Scholar
  39. Peterson M. “The Precautionary Principle Is Incoherent.” Risk Analysis 26 (3) (2006): 595–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pogge T. World Poverty and Human Rights: Cosmopolitan Responsibilities and Reforms. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2008.Google Scholar
  41. Rawls J. A Theory of Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1971.Google Scholar
  42. Rawls J. The Law of Peoples. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
  43. Resnik M.D. Choices: An Introduction to Decision Theory. Minneapolis & London: University of Minnesota Press, 1987.Google Scholar
  44. Rummukainen M. “Reflections on the Uncertainty in Climate Scenarios.” Paper presented at the conference Uncertainty and Active Risk Management in Agriculture and Forestry, Swedish Agricultural University, Alnarp, May 25–26, 2005.Google Scholar
  45. Sandin P. Better Safe than Sorry: Applying Philosophical Methods to the Debate on Risk and the Precautionary Principle. Stockholm: Royal Institute of Technology, 2004.Google Scholar
  46. Sandin P. and S.-O. Hansson. “The Default Value Approach to the Precautionary Principle.” Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 8 (3) (2002): 463–71.Google Scholar
  47. Shickle D. “Are ‘Genetic Enhancements’ Really Enhancements?” Cambridge Quarterly of Health Care Ethics 9 (3) (2000): 342–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Singer P. One World. The Ethics of Globalization. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002.Google Scholar
  49. Stork D. “22nd IAEA Fusion Energy Conference: summary of contributions on Fusion Technology and ITER Activities”. Nuclear Fusion 49: 104002104026, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sunstein C.R. Laws of Fear: Beyond the Precautionary Principle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tännsjö T. Global Democracy: The Case for a World Government. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2008.Google Scholar
  52. Tännsjö T. Coercive Care: The Ethics of Choice in Health and Medicine. London & New York: Routledge, 1999.Google Scholar
  53. Tännsjö T. “Should We Change the Human Genome?” Theoretical Medicine 14 (1993): 231–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Tännsjö T. Conservatism for Our Time. London: Routledge, 1990.Google Scholar
  55. United Nation’s Framework Convention on Climate Change 1997, Report of the Conference of the Parties on its third Session, held at Kyoto from 1 to 11 December 1997. FCCC/CP/1997/7/Add.1, Bonn 1997: UNFCCC.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Philosophy, Linguistics and Theory of ScienceUniversity of GothenburgGothenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations