| 1. |
- Selck, H., et al.
(författare)
-
Assessing and managing multiple risks in a changing worldThe Roskilde recommendations
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. - Hoboken, NJ : Wiley. - 0730-7268 .- 1552-8618. ; 36:1, s. 7-16
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Roskilde University (Denmark) hosted a November 2015 workshop, Environmental RiskAssessing and Managing Multiple Risks in a Changing World. This Focus article presents the consensus recommendations of 30 attendees from 9 countries regarding implementation of a common currency (ecosystem services) for holistic environmental risk assessment and management; improvements to risk assessment and management in a complex, human-modified, and changing world; appropriate development of protection goals in a 2-stage process; dealing with societal issues; risk-management information needs; conducting risk assessment of risk management; and development of adaptive and flexible regulatory systems. The authors encourage both cross-disciplinary and interdisciplinary approaches to address their 10 recommendations: 1) adopt ecosystem services as a common currency for risk assessment and management; 2) consider cumulative stressors (chemical and nonchemical) and determine which dominate to best manage and restore ecosystem services; 3) fully integrate risk managers and communities of interest into the risk-assessment process; 4) fully integrate risk assessors and communities of interest into the risk-management process; 5) consider socioeconomics and increased transparency in both risk assessment and risk management; 6) recognize the ethical rights of humans and ecosystems to an adequate level of protection; 7) determine relevant reference conditions and the proper ecological context for assessments in human-modified systems; 8) assess risks and benefits to humans and the ecosystem and consider unintended consequences of management actions; 9) avoid excessive conservatism or possible underprotection resulting from sole reliance on binary, numerical benchmarks; and 10) develop adaptive risk-management and regulatory goals based on ranges of uncertainty. Environ Toxicol Chem 2017;36:7-16. (c) 2016 SETAC
|
|
| 2. |
- Green, D. S., et al.
(författare)
-
Time to kick the butt of the most common litter item in the world: Ban cigarette filters
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Science of the Total Environment. - : Elsevier BV. - 0048-9697. ; 865
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Cigarette filters offer no public health benefits, are single-use plastics (cellulose acetate) and are routinely littered. Filters account for a significant proportion of plastic litter worldwide, requiring considerable public funds to remove, and are a source of microplastics. Used cigarette filters can leech toxic chemicals and pose an ecological risk to both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Bottom-up measures, such as focusing on consumer behaviour, are ineffective and we need to impose top-down solutions (i.e., bans) if we are to reduce the prevalence of this number one litter item. Banning filters offers numerous ecological, socioeconomic, and public health benefits.
|
|
| 3. |
- Syberg, K., et al.
(författare)
-
Toward a Conceptual Approach for Assessing Risks from Chemical Mixtures and Other Stressors to Coastal Ecosystem Services
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management. - : Wiley. - 1551-3777 .- 1551-3793. ; 13:2, s. 376-386
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Growth of human populations and increased human activity, particularly in coastal areas, increase pressure on coastal ecosystems and the ecosystem services (ES) they provide. As a means toward being able to assess the impact of multiple stressors on ES, in the present study we propose an 8-step conceptual approach for assessing effects of chemical mixtures and other stressors on ES in coastal areas: step A, identify the relevant problems and policy aims; step B, identify temporal and spatial boundaries; step C, identify relevant ES; step D, identify relevant stressors (e.g., chemicals); step E, translate impacts into ES units; step F, assess cumulative risk in ES units; step G, rank stressors based on their contribution to adverse effects on ES; and step H, implement regulation and management as appropriate and necessary. Two illustrative case studies (Swedish coastal waters and a coastal lagoon in Costa Rica) are provided; one focuses on chemicals that affect human food supply and the other addresses pesticide runoff and trade-offs among ES. The 2 cases are used to highlight challenges of such risk assessments, including use of standardized versus ES-relevant test species, data completeness, and trade-offs among ES. Lessons learned from the 2 case studies are discussed in relation to environmental risk assessment and management of chemical mixtures. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2017;13:376-386. (C) 2016 SETAC
|
|
