top of page
Writer's pictureJinqian Li

The success of precautionary approach referenced to deep-sea mining and China’s zero-covid policy

Updated: Apr 26, 2023

ABSTRACT


This paper assesses the success of the precautionary principle with regards to its impact on risk in a public health and an environmental scenario. It starts by examining what it is, when and why it might be applied, and the interpretative nature of both ‘precautionary’ and ‘success’, demonstrating how this affects its analysis. Two case studies then look at deep-sea mining and China’s zero-covid policy. Examination of the former shows that in particular contexts, the precautionary approach is imperative for risk minimisation - in this case, environmental. The latter demonstrates that precaution is not a panacea for risk control, and can in fact contribute towards risk when handled incorrectly. The paper concludes that despite the success of the precautionary approach being a case-by-case matter, more is stood to be gained by its application in terms of risk abatement, and it is therefore by summary a successful principle.


MAIN BODY


This paper begins by examining the definitions and assumptions imbued within the precautionary approach. First, it demonstrates that precaution, uncertainty, and risk are deeply entwined, and that they are necessary in understanding the basis and the applications of the precautionary principle. Next, this analysis will cover the uncertainty within the statement itself, showing that ‘precautionary’ and ‘successful’ are both value-imbued terms, and that this jeopardises its interpretation and validity. Despite this, success and limitations of precautionary approach policy can often be seen in hindsight through the results it imparts. By taking two examples of precautionary approaches - one that is currently in place, and one in hindsight - this policy paper yields three main results and recommendations. 


1) The precautionary principle should be used on a case-by-case basis, considering not only potential adverse effects of not employing it, but also the potential adverse effects of employing it.


2) With regards to its ability to prevent, manage and prepare for possible risks, these three aspects are distinct and must also be examined on separate basis.


3) The precautionary approach is by and large a successful and favourable approach, and should be employed as at least a temporary measure in instances where indecision over its use is present.


In evaluating the statement at hand, this response will use two in-depth examples. One looks at the use of the precautionary approach applied to deep-sea mining in international waters. The second examines the impact of the precautionary approach when used during China’s zero-covid policy.


DETAILS


The precautionary approach or precautionary principle (PP hereon in) is controversial (Lempert & Collins, 2007). Interrogating the PP requires assessment of numerous questions. The first relates to when it is necessary with respects to what it is designed to achieve, for which there is no consensus. It is generally agreed that the PP accounts for uncertainty, involves participatory decision-making, and reacts to the presence or possibility of risk (Hopster 2021; McCarthy, 2007). Although the PP has sometimes been characterised as being anti-innovation and anti-science (Hansson, 2020), a key principle is that it should be used in cases where is it ‘scientifically plausible’ that pursuing certain actions could lead to harm (Drivdal & van der Sluijs, 2021). In this light, the PP seeks to enhance knowledge, rather than stifle it.  


However, this does not necessarily speak to the approach’s ability to prevent, manage and prepare for possible risks. This depends on what level of risk is considered to be acceptable, and how this threshold is found. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) defines risk as ‘The potential for adverse consequences… recognising the diversity of values and objectives associated with such systems’ (IPCC, 2021). There are also many variables in theory regarding what qualifies as high enough uncertainty or risk to apply the PP, with it deemed necessary under high uncertainty, ‘threats of serious or irreversible damage’, or other levels of damage, as defined or interpreted by stakeholders (Ahteensuu, 2007; Moellendorf, 2022; UNCED, 1992). 


Meanwhile, the definitions of the PP ranges from the argument that uncertainty should not be used as an excuse not to take cost-effective precautionary measures (UNCED, 1992) to the statement supporting the obligation to take precautions with no reference to cost (Wingspread Statement on the Precautionary Principle, 1998). Similarly, the ‘success’ of the PP also tends to be subjectively valued, depending on who is assessing it and what their goals are. Some parties might see success as full avoidance of any risk to health or ecological systems, whereas some might see success as risk still existing, but at a much lower level. 


Therefore, while it could be highlighted that precaution, risk and uncertainty are always intertwined together, the analysis above also shows that the statement composed of these terms, including ‘precautionary approach’, ‘risk’ and ‘successful’, is highly interpretative. The following two case studies will explain and compare the successes and limitations of the PP, by particularly focusing on the environment and health scenarios.


DEEP-SEA MINING


Deep-sea mining (DSM from hereon in) is a proposed practice of mining the seafloor for key precious rare earth metals (Leal Filho et al., 2021; Miller et al., 2018). According to its proponents, these metals (and therefore the mining practice itself) are required for the green transition to a more electricity-powered future, though other studies have found that land-based reserves are sufficient for projected demand if said metals are recycled efficiently (Miller et al., 2021; Watari et al., 2018). The International Seabed Authority (ISA) is the international autonomous body which mandates issues relating to the seabed. It has so far issued 31 exploration contracts (ISA, 2023) (some now expired) to states and private contractors. However, a number of campaign groups are calling for a moratorium - a key example of PP - before these licences are able to be exploited (WWF, 2021).


DSM poses unknown, potentially serious environmental risks. Pollution in the form of sediment plumes in the water column is inevitable, which will disturb light levels and food chains at all depths, with re-settling sediment subsequently at risk of burying seafloor organisms (Mrowiec, 2014; Sharma 2015; UN 2008). Poisonous metals and mining waste might also be released (Elerian et al., 2021). DSM may also disrupt organisms crucial to carbon cycling and destroy vulnerable biodiversity that has yet to even be discovered (Fauna & Flora International, 2020).


The extent of risk to the environment if DSM occurs on a commercial scale is unknown, and there will likely be consequences that cannot yet be even predicted: both ‘known unknowns’ and ‘unknown unknowns’ (Smith et al., 2020). The only significant test of DSM - the 1989 DIS-turbance and re-COL-onization (DISCOL) experimental project in the Peru basin (DISCOL, 2021) - found that 26 years later, plough tracks from mining machines were still visible and microbial life was still reduced by roughly 30% in these areas (Gollner et al., 2017; Vonnahme et al., 2020). Larger creatures (which generally have longer population recovery times) are likely to be even worse affected (Sweetman et al., 2017), potentially having significant impact on fisheries and human livelihoods There is also a large environmental justice element to DSM. Corporations can gain (and have gained) exploration licences by acting on the behalf of nations (so far, small Pacific island nations) via sponsorship (Tilot et al., 2021). These nations may be fed partisan information by foreign businesses who might act in the interest of private wealth rather than environmental mitigation, and citizens have historically not been consulted on - and have campaigned against - DSM (Greenpeace, 2020; Synchronicity Earth, 2020; The Environmental Justice Atlas, 2020).


DSM therefore poses risks to both its direct and wider environments, with potentially catastrophic consequences if mining were to occur on a large scale. The level of risk is very poorly understood but considered as potentially very high, likely bypassing many stakeholders’ thresholds for acceptable risk. Though contractors are currently required to carry out environmental impact assessments (EIAs) at the potential sites, there is little minimum standards legislation and no monitoring (Fauna & Flora International, 2020). There is therefore a lack of risk management and preparation enforcement in the field with the risk level itself being indeterminable.


In this instance, the PP has successfully protected the environment in almost every interpretation. There are very high levels of uncertainty, a global scale of consequences, highly complex and interacting risks, and huge numbers of uninformed stakeholders. Because of these extremes, ‘precaution’ and ‘successful’ are less interpretative, since it is clear that proceeding without caution could have fatal and worldwide consequences for the environment. Although some policymakers might suggest that not mining these resources poses threat to the environment due to their need for fuelling the green transition, hence not making the PP successful in the long run, many more policy options are available for tackling the transition (recycling, reduced transport, novel technologies).


However, the precautionary approach has not in this case either managed or prepared for risks to the environment. Again, this is due to the scale, uncertainty, and stakes, which makes testing on a commercial scale too risky in itself and would make any preparation likely to be insufficient.


ZERO-COVID POLICY IN CHINA 


In February 2022, China started implementing ‘dynamic clearing’ (or ‘dynamic zero’) policy in response to Covid-19 mortality threats with the virus strain of concern (Omicron) being highly transmittable, increasing the difficulty with which policymakers had to contend (Wang, 2023). The Chinese government’s ‘four early’ response: early detection, early reporting, early isolation and early treatment, was an example of the PP being deployed; precautions were taken in an attempt to alleviate potential strain on Covid’s system of risks and improve public health. The PP in this case applied to risks on the national and sub-national scale, with the government indicating that it was necessary to expand the scope of prevention/control measures to different cities, regions and areas, including limiting civilian mobility and strengthening nucleic acid detection (a testing method) (Xu et al., 2023). It thus could be noticed that, while countries worldwide were also cautious facing the Covid-19 and have taken different approaches to constrain the spread of the virus, China’s zero-covid policy was an extreme interpretation of the precautionary approach, aiming to eliminate the virus’s spread within the country. 


The risks Covid-19 posed to the public were relatively well known in the context because of prior knowledge of pandemics in general, alongside growing knowledge about and experience of transmission rates, mortality, and economic losses. For example, the health organisation has classified people in different groups based on their vulnerability to the pandemic (WHO, 2023). Uncertainty was therefore relatively low, meaning that the PP was more based on speculative systemic risk effects than a lack of scientific or policy awareness.


Under the execution of the zero-covid policy, interpreting whether the PP was ‘successful’ is a lot more complex, given a system of metrics underlying, including mortality, transmission, economic capacity, political trust and civil obedience with complex causal structures, non-linear cause-effect relationships, and threshold effects. 


Whilst zero-covid policies will have alleviated mass influx to undersupplied hospitals and medical staff, and may have prevented some deaths amongst vulnerable people, the policy stakeholders were the Chinese people at large. The severe lockdowns and strict trip tracking caused many inconveniences to people’s daily lives, leading to more potential health risks. For example, in the November 2022 Urumqi fire accident, inflexible precautions prevented people living in the building from escaping and firefighters from crossing barriers to put out the fire for long periods (Nordin, 2023). Meanwhile, protests about the negative economic and livelihood impacts of the policy, and public backlashes on mismanagement or abuse of power by medical and other control personnel, demonstrated increased affiliated health risks of the PP. 


After zero-covid policy was lifted in December 2022, the virus was rampant throughout the country beyond the government’s ability to control it (Zhang et al., 2023), prompting many to wonder whether the PP had any effect. This is especially considering that the strict PP had detrimental consequences to employment, mental health, trade, and more. If the consequences of these outweigh the benefits of zero-covid policy, as many Chinese citizens would perhaps conclude, then the PP via zero-covid was not successful in preventing risks to health. Similarly, it was not successful in the management of health, since it may have exacerbated existing problems more than it dealt with the new one: the virus. According to a report by Reuters, by the time Chinese officials made plans to relax the policy, certain regions had limited funding to ensure widespread nucleic acid testing, to enforce restrictions, and to deal with other fundamental diseases (Zhu, 2023). The implementation of the policy inflicted both significant direct costs (including vaccination, square cabin construction for isolation, nucleic acid testing) and indirect costs (psychological problems caused by isolating people at home, growth in anger and distrust in government). 


Finally, it was unsuccessful in preparing for risks, due to the virus spreading rapidly as soon as the policy was removed, causing at one point hospitals to be full, medicines to be in shortage, and crematoria to be overwhelmed in many places (Xu et al., 2023). At the same time, it was illustrated that by 2023, only 40% of people over 80 have received three doses of the vaccine, making it urgent to protect the elderly against the new coronavirus – this is one of the biggest challenges facing China after the abandonment of the ‘dynamic zero’ policy (Wang et al., 2023).


In this instance, the PP has not been successful from citizen or government perspectives in preventing, managing and preparing risks to public health. The case highlighted the importance of striking a balance between caution and pragmatism when implementing precautionary approaches to address systemic risks such as Covid-19. While it is essential to err on the side of caution to prevent the spread of the virus, it is also necessary to consider the policy's potential negative consequences.


ENDING/SUMMARY


This paper has demonstrated that the precautionary approach is adept at preventing large risks which a majority of stakeholders would consider to be unacceptable. DSM provides a policy context with very high stakes and uncertainty, within which the definition of ‘precaution’ is less open to suggestion. Considering these risks it presents have not come into fruition due to a continuous stalling and evaluation of mining plans, the PP has prevented yet not managed or prepared for risks.


In the Covid case, the PP was demonstrably not successful when taking into account the full suite of sociological factors. Whilst it may have successfully prevented and managed the virus in the short run, the policy had largely detrimental effects when looking at effects outside of the virus itself. Furthermore, the PP in this case failed since its deployment meant risks were just deferred, rather than eliminated. In terms of ‘preparing’ for risks, the PP potentially therefore yielded worse health results than if it had never been used.


Taking these two case studies into account, this policy paper recommends that the PP should continue to be used in risk regulation. In the face of large risks and uncertainties, there is more that stands to be gained by the PP than stands to be lost, particularly if consequences of actions are irreversible. However, it must be taken on a case-by-case basis, and may not always be appropriate where risks are better understood and/or presided over by a small number of policy makers, such as a central government. 


REFERENCE LIST


Ahteensuu, M. (2007). Rationale for Taking Precautions : Normative Choices and Commitments in the Implementation of the Precautionary Principle.


DISCOL. (2021, May 2). DISCOL – a DIS-turbance and re-COL-onization experiment. DISCOL. Retrieved March 9, 2023, from https://www.discol.de/home 


Drivdal, L., & van der Sluijs, J. P. (2021). Pollinator conservation requires a stronger and broader application of the Precautionary Principle. Current Opinion in Insect Science, 46, 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cois.2021.04.005 


Elerian, M., Alhaddad, S., Helmons, R., & van Rhee, C. (2021). Near-field analysis of turbidity flows generated by polymetallic nodule mining tools. Mining, 1(3), 251–278. https://doi.org/10.3390/mining1030017 


Fauna & Flora International. (2020, October 6). The risks and impacts of deep-seabed mining to marine ecosystems. Retrieved March 9, 2023, from https://www.fauna-flora.org/app/uploads/2020/04/FFI_2020_The-risks-impacts-deep-seabed-mining_Executive-Summary-.pdf 


Gollner, S., Kaiser, S., Menzel, L., Jones, D. O., Brown, A., Mestre, N. C., ... & Arbizu, P. M. (2017). Resilience of benthic deep-sea fauna to mining activities. Marine Environmental Research, 129, 76-101.


Greenpeace. (2020, July 23). Deep trouble - greenpeace. Retrieved March 9, 2023, from https://www.greenpeace.org/static/planet4-international-stateless/c86ff110-pto-deep-trouble-report-final-1.pdf 


Hansson, S. O. (2020). How extreme is the precautionary principle? NanoEthics, 14(3), 245–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-020-00373-5 


Hopster, J. (2021). Climate uncertainty, real possibilities and the Precautionary Principle. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/8eykf 


IPCC. (2021, February 15). The concept of risk in the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report: a summary of cross Working Group discussions. Retrieved March 9, 2023, from https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2021/02/Risk-guidance-FINAL_15Feb2021.pdf


ISA. (2023, July 2). Exploration contracts. International Seabed Authority. Retrieved March 9, 2023, from https://www.isa.org.jm/exploration-contracts/ 


Leal Filho, W., Abubakar, I., Nunes, C., Platje, J., Ozuyar, P., Will, M., Nagy, G., Al-Amin, A., Hunt, J., & Li, C. (2021). Deep Seabed Mining: A note on some potentials and risks to the sustainable mineral extraction from the oceans. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 9(5), 521. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse9050521


Lempert, R. J., & Collins, M. T. (2007). Managing the risk of uncertain threshold responses: Comparison of robust, optimum, and precautionary approaches. Risk Analysis, 27(4), 1009–1026. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2007.00940.x 


McCarthy, E. (2007). Ocean Noise, scientific uncertainty, and the paradox of the Precautionary Principle. Journal of International Wildlife Law & Policy, 10(3), 233–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/13880290701769296 


Miller, K. A., Brigden, K., Santillo, D., Currie, D., Johnston, P., & Thompson, K. F. (2021). Challenging the need for deep seabed mining from the perspective of metal demand, biodiversity, Ecosystems Services, and benefit sharing. Frontiers in Marine Science, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.706161 


Miller, K. A., Thompson, K. F., Johnston, P., & Santillo, D. (2018). An overview of seabed mining including the current state of development, environmental impacts, and knowledge gaps. Frontiers in Marine Science, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2017.00418 


Moellendorf, D. (2022). Uncertainty and precaution. Mobilizing Hope, 35–53. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190875619.003.0003 


Mrowiec, A. (2014, June 12). Deep sea mining-who will win the battle? Oceana Europe. Retrieved March 9, 2023, from https://europe.oceana.org/blog/deep-sea-mining-who-will-win-battle/ 


Nordin, J. (2023). China’s Pandemic Shift: The End of Dynamic zero-COVID.


Sharma, R. (2015). Environmental issues of deep-sea mining. Procedia Earth and Planetary Science, 11, 204-211.


Smith, C. R., Tunnicliffe, V., Colaço, A., Drazen, J. C., Gollner, S., Levin, L. A., Mestre, N. C., Metaxas, A., Molodtsova, T. N., Morato, T., Sweetman, A. K., Washburn, T., & Amon, D. J. (2020). Deep-sea misconceptions cause underestimation of seabed-mining impacts. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 35(10), 853–857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2020.07.002 


Sweetman, A. K., Thurber, A. R., Smith, C. R., Levin, L. A., Mora, C., Wei, C. L., ... & Roberts, J. M. (2017). Major impacts of climate change on deep-sea benthic ecosystems. Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene, 5.


Synchronicity Earth. (2020, August 17). Alliance of Solwara Warriors. Synchronicity Earth. Retrieved March 9, 2023, from https://www.synchronicityearth.org/partner/alliance-of-solwara-warriors/?fwp_programme=ocean


The Environmental Justice Atlas. (2020, October 1). Environmental justice atlas. EJAtlas. Retrieved March 9, 2023, from https://www.ejatlas.org/print/deep-sea-mining-project-solwara-1-in-the-bismarck-sea-papua-new-guinea 


Tilot, V. C., Guilloux, B., Willaert, K., Mulalap, C. Y., Bambridge, T., D’Arcy, P., Mawyer, A., Gaulme, F., Kacenelenbogen, E., Jeudy de Grissac, A., Moreno Navas, J., & Dahl, A. (2021). The concept of Oceanian sovereignty in the context of deep sea mining in the Pacific region. Frontiers in Marine Science, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.756072 


UN. (2008, September 9). Rationale and recommendations for the establishment of preservation reference areas for nodule mining in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone. United Nations. Retrieved March 9, 2023, from https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/623612#record-files-collapse-header 


UNCED. (1992). A/conf.151/26/vol.I: Rio declaration on environment and development. Retrieved March 10, 2023, from https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_CONF.151_26_Vol.I_Declaration.pdf 


Vonnahme, T. R., Molari, M., Janssen, F., Wenzhöfer, F., Haeckel, M., Titschack, J., & Boetius, A. (2020). Effects of a deep-sea mining experiment on seafloor microbial communities and functions after 26 years. Science Advances, 6(18). https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaz5922 


Wang, G., Yao, Y., Wang, Y., Gong, J., Meng, Q., Wang, H., Wang, W., Chen, X., & Zhao, Y. (2023). Determinants of COVID-19 vaccination status and hesitancy among older adults in China. Nature Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-023-02241-7 


Wang, H. (2023). Reflection and foresight on personal information protection and optimization in Public Health Emergencies in China—from the perspective of personal information collection during the period of China’s dynamic-zero COVID-19 prevention and control policy. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(2), 1290. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20021290

Watari, T., McLellan, B., Ogata, S., & Tezuka, T. (2018). Analysis of potential for critical metal resource constraints in the International Energy Agency’s long-term low-carbon energy scenarios. Minerals, 8(4), 156. https://doi.org/10.3390/min8040156 


WHO. (2023, January 1). Coronavirus disease (covid-19). World Health Organization. Retrieved March 10, 2023, from https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019?adgroupsurvey=%7Badgroupsurvey%7D&gclid=Cj0KCQiApKagBhC1ARIsAFc7Mc6MTTlkE4anbJOTNT3JrBVyZX4PN2zn-7jEA9P3SuBFNX60VApslzQaAvFKEALw_wcB 


Wingspread Statement on the Precautionary Principle. (1998). Wingspread Statement on the Precautionary Principle. WINGSPREAD statement on the Precautionary Principle. Retrieved March 10, 2023, from https://www.gdrc.org/u-gov/precaution-3.html 


WWF. (2021, August 7). No Deep Seabed Mining. WWF. Retrieved March 9, 2023, from https://wwf.panda.org/discover/our_focus/oceans_practice/no_deep_seabed_mining/


Xu, C., Wang, X., Hu, H., Qin, H., Wang, J., Shi, J., & Hu, Y. (2023). A sequential re-opening of provinces for China’s zero-covid policy. Nature Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-022-02177-4 


Xu, T., Shao, M., Liu, R., Wu, X., & Zheng, K. (2023). Risk perception, perceived government coping validity, and individual response in the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic in China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(3), 1982. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20031982 


Zhang, M., Wang, Y., Zhang, T., Zhou, J., Deng, Y., Wang, L., & Du, Y. (2023). Status of and perspectives on covid-19 vaccination after lifting of the dynamic zero-covid policy in China. Global Health & Medicine. https://doi.org/10.35772/ghm.2022.01063 


Zhu, J. (2023, March 3). How China's new No.2 hastened the end of xi's zero-covid policy. Reuters. Retrieved March 10, 2023, from https://www.reuters.com/world/china/how-chinas-new-no2-hastened-end-xis-zero-covid-policy-2023-03-03/



8 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Comments


bottom of page