The precautionary principles basically states that ‘is an action or behavior has potential suspected risk of causing the public harm or causing harm to the larger environment in the lack of a scientific approval, the burden of proof that this action is not harmful would fall on those performing that action. The precautionary principle is applied not only by developed countries but other developing countries that are also engaged in possible decisions that would cause harm to people and the environment. In a nutshell, this principle is centered on the factor of social responsibility in protection of the public from plausible risk. Gedeon Ritcher, GlaxosmithKline pharmaceutical companies are among the firms that have designed their productions and overall organizational procedures in protecting the public and the environment in its cause of procedures. As a large pharmaceutical company, Gedeon Richter has put much emphasis on preventing and aiding in a continuous decreased of environmental negativities with its activities, GlaxoSmithKline on the other hand has combined its traditions and an extensive scientific knowledge in applying modern expectation to meet full the demands of the precautionary principle.

Question 2

Oroville Dam Spillway failures could be as a result of human factors. There was a flashing warning sign of the dam collapsing were triggered by human factors that led to a catastrophic failure. The lack of a transparent leadership and official to discern the upcoming danger was invincible. The officials engage in non-sober acts that authorized the digging up of sand below the dam causing water to rise above safety for the public. Apart from the first authorization by the officials, the authorized again another 32 million cubic meters of water that caused the whole catastrophe leading the death of 230,000 people.  Understanding the Oroville dam spillway failure comes with an understanding of regulatory failures in the same industry. The failures were a depiction that government regulators have not been out to protect the public welfare and that of the environment. This is because even the day of evacuation, the federal agency department could not initiate a faster a proper design for minimizing the danger of the spillway or design an emergency route that would repair the damage already caused by the further degradation of the spillway. The ecology dialogue and externalities under the environmental protection acts as dialogue failed to apply in this concepts. Digging up the sand underneath acted as a way to destroy natural habitats for organisms living in the dam. Externalities failed to take into account the people living around the dam. Applying the precautionary principle would have significantly reduced the damage caused by the dam later.

Question 3

Climate change has continued to be a hot topic for discussion this century. I believe a bottom up approach would work better when planning a social movement that aims at protecting the environment. The bottom up approach required us to build a base of relationships and constituencies that support the movement. From base building, we can go ahead and bring together policy makers, environmental experts and business people together with the bases at the bottom to help create a plan to support climate change actions. In environmental protection, we cannot achieve anything by failing to engage the crowds at the bottom because we are likely to lack the support we need.

Question 4

With the increasing discussions of global warming I think air pollution is the most intriguing discussion because it is closely linked to greenhouse emissions that are released to warm the planet and cause danger to public health. I think air pollution would get the most popular vote because of its significance in public health concerns as well. I think the many solutions of environmental degradation can be treated by answering to the call of climate change in a concerted effort.