The thinking/caring/professional answer is, of course, `no` but that`s just what Defra`s Statutory guidance would have us do.
Howard Price
Principal Policy Officer, CIEH
Standing up for SPOSH
-----Original Message-----
From: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Russell Corbyn
Sent: 13 August 2014 15:18
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: question about uk vs French methodology
Come again?
Do we stop doing science now then and just remove 20% of the problem?
I'm sure there are cases where it will work and those where it won't. But because something isn't yellow doesn't mean it is green. Many things are interesting but that doesn't make them in anyway robust.
Where does this stop or be rationalised?
Has it actually resorted to this?
Russell
"There is a straw somewhere that will make a difference."
-----Original Message-----
From: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Chris Dainton
Sent: 12 August 2014 18:56
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: question about uk vs French methodology
The 80/20 rule does appear (quick Wiki search) to have been applied in occupational health and safety (not followed up references):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle
Interesting concept - not one that should be dismissed immediately.
This made me chuckle:
"Pareto developed the principle by observing that 20% of the pea pods in his garden contained 80% of the peas."
Chris Dainton
|