THE EU PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE

The EU Commission published a Communication on the Precautionary Principle as 02/02/2000; COM [2000] 1. This is an interpretation document, not a binding document, but sets out how the Commission services have to use the concept. The Communication states that

" The EU should weigh the benefits and costs of action or inaction"

There are 6 guidelines for the Commission Services:

[1] PROPORTIONALITY to the chosen level of protection.

[2] NON DISCRIMINATORY - meaning that comparable situations should not
be treated differently.

[3] CONSISTENCY with any previous decisions.

[4] EXAMINING COSTS AND BENEFITS - which means the total costs to the
entire community, including the cost of lack of action. This is much broader
than a cost-benefit analysis and it includes non-economic considerations such
as, for example, acceptability to the public. The Commission emphasises that
the European Court has ruled that the protection of health takes precedence
over economic costs.

[5] SUBJECT TO REVIEW IN CASE OF NEW SCIENTIFIC DATA.

[6] ASSIGNING RESPONSIBILITY FOR PRODUCING SCIENTIFIC
EVIDENCE. The Commission notes that, increasingly, there is a reversal of
proof in the sense that businesses have to do the necessary scientific work
and demonstrate that their products are safe.

Implications for Building Owners and Designers
It seems entirely reasonable that the designers of new buildings should seek and make provisions, so that in the event of fire, the potential hazard and pollution of the neighbourhood, community and environment is minimised.

As part of the risk assessment process, building owners and designers will be well advised to take note of the Precautionary Principle, particularly with regard to the impact of fire on the health of people working in a building or living in the locale.

For the future, besides the obvious threat to life safety from smoke and fire hazards, any ensuing litigation might include the pollution emanating from fires involving some contemporary building materials - which can actually themselves fuel a fire, emit noxious fumes and contaminate the fire brigade's water run off. Is it a valid precaution to avoid specifying such materials in the building envelope?

Choosing non-combustible building products will be a much easier task under the new Euroclass classification system for Reaction to Fire, shown as part of the CE Mark. The Precautionary Principle with regard to building design will be well served by this system.