ÃÛÑ¿´«Ã½

Politicians are consistently failing to learn from public health scandals like asbestos and BSE because they put too much faith in scientists from industry, according to a new report from the European Environment Agency.

The report says research into major crises from 1896 to 2000 shows that governments have consistently been insufficiently cautious about threats to public health and the environment.

It covers 10 controversies including mad cow disease; the use of medical radiation; asbestos; CFCs which eat the ozone layer; and the chemicals PCBs which are making wildlife infertile. In each case a body of experts assured the government that there would be no risk - and thousands of people have been given cancer as a result.

The report warns: "The growing innovative powers of science seem to be outstripping its ability to predict the consequences of its applications, whilst the scale of human interventions in nature increases the chances that any hazardous impacts may be serious and global. It is therefore important to take stock of past experiences, and learn how we can adapt to these changing circumstances."

We spoke to one of the report's authors, Andy Stirling from Sussex University.

"We should be a lot more humble about the use we can make of science in managing these sort of risks. Science is essential but it simply cannot tell you a lot of things - it can't handle surprise - and the answers you get are often very sensitive to the kind of assumptions you make," he said.

"Sometimes much too much weight is put on the science by the policy makers who sometimes make it appear as if the science is telling them what to do, when in fact a lot of political decision making and judgement has to be exercised."

He said the BSE crisis was one example of where this thinking could have prevented the situation becoming as bad as it did.

The report says that in each of the cases studied there were clear early warning signs ignored by the authorities. The first reports of injuries from radiation were made as early as 1896. The first clear and credible early warning about asbestos came two years later in 1898. A similar signal for action on CFCs came in 1974. In each case preventive action was taken far too late.

The report is part of a soul-searching exercise by Europe's institutions following surveys that show people don't trust them over public health and the environment. It will become a weapon in Europe's intellectual armoury in the growing battle with the USA over the use of the precautionary principles in international trade negotiations.

The Americans fear that excessive precaution hampers the risk-taking necessary for scientific and technological advance. The EEA team say they did ask industry to produce examples where regulations had stifled invention, but none of the industry bodies contacted was prepared to back an invitation to use a case study in the EEA report.