| 1. |
- Bradshaw, Clare, et al.
(författare)
-
Using an Ecosystem Approach to complement protection schemes based on organism-level endpoints
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Journal of Environmental Radioactivity. - : Elsevier BV. - 0265-931X .- 1879-1700. ; 136, s. 98-104
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Radiation protection goals for ecological resources are focussed on ecological structures and functions at population-, community-, and ecosystem-levels. The current approach to radiation safety for non-human biota relies on organism-level endpoints, and as such is not aligned with the stated overarching protection goals of international agencies. Exposure to stressors can trigger non-linear changes in ecosystem structure and function that cannot be predicted from effects on individual organisms. From the ecological sciences, we know that important interactive dynamics related to such emergent properties determine the flows of goods and services in ecological systems that human societies rely upon. A previous Task Group of the IUR (International Union of Radioecology) has presented the rationale for adding an Ecosystem Approach to the suite of tools available to manage radiation safety. In this paper, we summarize the arguments for an Ecosystem Approach and identify next steps and challenges ahead pertaining to developing and implementing a practical Ecosystem Approach to complement organism-level endpoints currently used in radiation safety.
|
|
| 2. |
- Hedman, Jenny E, 1972-
(författare)
-
Fate of contaminants in Baltic Sea sediment ecosystems : the role of bioturbation
- 2008
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Aquatic sediments are of major importance for the cycling of environmental pollutants, acting as both sinks and secondary sources of contaminants to the ecosystem. Sediment-living organisms can affect the fate and transport of contaminants through activities like feeding and burrowing, collectively called bioturbation. Apart from high contaminant levels, the Baltic benthic ecosystem is affected by stressors such as eutrophication-induced anoxic conditions and invading alien species. The main objectives of this thesis were to determine the effects of bioturbation on contaminant fluxes in Baltic Sea sediments and to increase the understanding of how these other stressors act together upon contaminant fate in the benthic ecosystem. Bioturbation affected contaminants in a species-specific way. The native species Monoporeia affinis and Macoma balthica increased the incorporation of BDE-99 and Cd deposited on the sediment surface, enhancing their retention in the sediment. The invasive polychaete Marenzelleria sp. did not contribute to the incorporation of surface-deposited contaminants, however, significantly increased the release of contaminants back to the water column. Reoxygenation of anoxic laminated sediments and bioturbation by Marenzelleria increased the sediment-to-water flux of dissolved organic contaminants. When the bioturbation-driven release of PCB was compared to the release caused by physical sediment resuspension, results indicated that the continuous activities of benthic infauna can be just as, or even more, important than physical disturbance for the remobilization of sediment-bound contaminants. Bioaccumulation was significantly higher when contaminants were deposited associated to phytoplankton compared to lignin or sediment, suggesting that there are likely seasonal differences in the mobilization of contaminants in the benthic ecosystem. In summary, bioturbation is an important process influencing contaminant fate in Baltic Sea sediments, and the risk of remobilization of historically buried contaminants may increase with improved benthic redox conditions and the invasion of new deeper-digging species, such as Marenzelleria.
|
|
| 3. |
- Hunka, Agnieszka D., 1978-, et al.
(författare)
-
Ecological risk assessment of pesticides in the EU : What factors and groups influence policy changes?
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Journal of Risk Research. - Abingdon : Routledge. - 1366-9877 .- 1466-4461. ; 18:9, s. 1165-1183
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- For the last couple of years, European environmental risk assessment (ERA) regulations have undergone significant changes. The new 1107/2009 directive which came into effect in 2011 has triggered an on-going debate on defining specific protection goals for ERA. During this period, we conducted a study on policy change among the most influential ERA stakeholders from Europe. We interviewed 43, purposively sampled, participants from the European safety authorities, plant protection product industry and academia. Transcribed interviews underwent thematic analysis conducted separately by two coders. As we followed the advocacy coalition framework, our findings focus on stakeholders processes, interrelations and values behind the ERA policy change. The main challenges emerging from our analysis turned out to be the slow uptake of scientific developments into ERA and very broadly defined protection goals. The use of safety factors and cut-off criteria left risk assessors with many uncertainties. With ERA in its current form it turned out to be impossible to determine whether the current scheme is over- or under-protective. Still, the study shows that the problem of over- or under-protectiveness lies deep in the perception of stakeholders and depends greatly on their priorities. Academics strive for better ecological relevance as a priority. They have concerns that ERA is oversimplified. Regulators worry that ERA relies too much on risk mitigation and is possibly not protective enough, but at the same time, the majority believes that the assessment is well established and straightforward to follow. Industry representatives would like to see ERA based more on probabilistic risk assessment. Recent changes, according to risk assessment and management practitioners have led to an inevitable increase in complexity, which is not perceived as a positive thing, and does not necessarily translate into better risk assessment. © 2014 Taylor & Francis.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Hunka, Agnieszka D., 1978-, et al.
(författare)
-
Risk communication discourse among ecological risk assessment professionals and its implications for communication with nonexperts
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management. - Hoboken : John Wiley & Sons. - 1551-3777 .- 1551-3793. ; 9:4, s. 616-622
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Risk communication, especially to the general public and end users of plant protection products, is an important challenge. Currently, much of the risk communication the general public receives is via the popular press, and risk managers face the challenge of presenting their decisions and their scientific basis to the general public in an understandable way. Therefore, we decided to explore the obstacles in risk communication, as done by expert risk assessors and managers. Using the discourse analysis framework and readability tests, we studied perspectives of 3 stakeholder groups-regulators, industry representatives, and academics across Europe. We conducted 30 confidential interviews (10 participants in each group), with part of the interview guide focused on communication of pesticide risk to the general public and the ideas experts in the field of risk assessment and management hold of the public perception of pesticides. We used the key informant approach in recruiting our participants. They were first identified as key stakeholders in ecological risk assessment of pesticides and then sampled by means of a snowball sampling technique. In the analysis, first we identified main motifs (themes) in each group, and then we moved to studying length of the sentences and grammar and to uncovering discoursespresent in the text data. We also used the Flesch Reading Ease test to determine the comprehension difficulty of transcribed interviews. The test is commonly used as a standard for estimating the readability of technical documents. Our results highlight 3 main obstacles standing in the way of effective communication with wider audiences. First of all, ecological risk assessment as a highly technical procedure uses the specific language of ecological risk assessment, which is also highly specialized and might be difficult to comprehend by nonexperts. Second, the idea of existing "expert-lay discrepancy," a phenomenon described in risk perception studies is visibly present in the experts' opinions. Finally, the communicationflow among stakeholders was perceived as flawed, e.g., our participants did not consider themselves fully included in the communication process, despite taking part in many networks. Interestingly, both studies on the role of trust in risk perception, and research on links between daily choices and perceived risk, show that the public is more likely to rely on experts they can trust, than the experts in our study were inclined to think. © 2013 SETAC
|
|
| 6. |
- Hunka, Agnieszka D., 1978-, et al.
(författare)
-
Stakeholders' Perspective on Ecological Modeling in Environmental Risk Assessment of Pesticides : Challenges and Opportunities
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Risk Analysis. - Hoboken : Wiley-Blackwell. - 0272-4332 .- 1539-6924. ; 33:1, s. 68-79
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The article closely examines the role of mechanistic effect models (e.g., population models) in the European environmental risk assessment (ERA) of pesticides. We studied perspectives of three stakeholder groups on population modeling in ERA of pesticides. Forty-three in-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with stakeholders from regulatory authorities, industry, and academia all over Europe. The key informant approach was employed in recruiting our participants. They were first identified as key stakeholders in the field and then sampled by means of a purposive sampling, where each stakeholder identified as important by others was interviewed and asked to suggest another potential participant for our study. Our results show that participants, although having different institutional backgrounds often presented similar perspectives and concerns about modeling. Analysis of repeating ideas and keywords revealed that all stakeholders had very high and often contradicting expectations from models. Still, all three groups expected effect models to become integrated in future ERA of pesticides. Main hopes associated with effect models were to reduce the amount of expensive and complex testing and field monitoring, both at the product development stage, and as an aid to develop mitigation measures. Our analysis suggests that, although the needs of stakeholders often overlapped, subtle differences and lack of trust hinder the process of introducing mechanistic effect models into ERA. © 2012 Society for Risk Analysis.
|
|
