Literature DB >> 28024105

Assessing and managing multiple risks in a changing world-The Roskilde recommendations.

Henriette Selck1, Peter B Adamsen2, Thomas Backhaus3, Gary T Banta1, Peter K H Bruce4, G Allen Burton5, Michael B Butts6, Eva Boegh1, John J Clague7, Khuong V Dinh8, Neelke Doorn9, Jonas S Gunnarsson4, Henrik Hauggaard-Nielsen1, Charles Hazlerigg10, Agnieszka D Hunka11, John Jensen12, Yan Lin13, Susana Loureiro14, Simona Miraglia8, Wayne R Munns15, Farrokh Nadim16, Annemette Palmqvist1, Robert A Rämö4, Lauren P Seaby1, Kristian Syberg1, Stine R Tangaa1, Amalie Thit1, Ronja Windfeld1, Maciej Zalewski17, Peter M Chapman18.   

Abstract

Roskilde University (Denmark) hosted a November 2015 workshop, Environmental Risk-Assessing 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.
© 2016 SETAC. © 2016 SETAC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Climate change; Ecosystem services; Multiple environmental stressors; Risk assessment; Risk management; Wicked problems

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28024105      PMCID: PMC6130322          DOI: 10.1002/etc.3513

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem        ISSN: 0730-7268            Impact factor:   3.742


  20 in total

Review 1.  Refocusing on nature: holistic assessment of ecosystem services.

Authors:  Charles A Menzie; Thomas Deardorff; Pieter Booth; Ted Wickwire
Journal:  Integr Environ Assess Manag       Date:  2012-06-05       Impact factor: 2.992

Review 2.  Have Ecosystem Services Been Oversold?

Authors:  Jonathan Silvertown
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2015-10-01       Impact factor: 17.712

3.  Differences in tolerance to anthropogenic stress between invasive and native bivalves.

Authors:  Ana Bielen; Ivana Bošnjak; Kristina Sepčić; Martina Jaklič; Marija Cvitanić; Jelena Lušić; Jasna Lajtner; Tatjana Simčič; Sandra Hudina
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2015-11-19       Impact factor: 7.963

Review 4.  The toxicology of climate change: environmental contaminants in a warming world.

Authors:  Pamela D Noyes; Matthew K McElwee; Hilary D Miller; Bryan W Clark; Lindsey A Van Tiem; Kia C Walcott; Kyle N Erwin; Edward D Levin
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2009-04-16       Impact factor: 9.621

Review 5.  Cumulative risk assessment lessons learned: a review of case studies and issue papers.

Authors:  Sarah S Gallagher; Glenn E Rice; Louis J Scarano; Linda K Teuschler; George Bollweg; Lawrence Martin
Journal:  Chemosphere       Date:  2014-11-06       Impact factor: 7.086

6.  Sustainability. Planetary boundaries: guiding human development on a changing planet.

Authors:  Will Steffen; Katherine Richardson; Johan Rockström; Sarah E Cornell; Ingo Fetzer; Elena M Bennett; Reinette Biggs; Stephen R Carpenter; Wim de Vries; Cynthia A de Wit; Carl Folke; Dieter Gerten; Jens Heinke; Georgina M Mace; Linn M Persson; Veerabhadran Ramanathan; Belinda Reyers; Sverker Sörlin
Journal:  Science       Date:  2015-01-15       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Global climate change and contaminants, a call to arms not yet heard?

Authors:  Wayne G Landis; Jason R Rohr; S Jannicke Moe; John M Balbus; William Clements; Alyce Fritz; Roger Helm; Christopher Hickey; Michael Hooper; Ralph G Stahl; Jenny Stauber
Journal:  Integr Environ Assess Manag       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 2.992

8.  The deal with diel: Temperature fluctuations, asymmetrical warming, and ubiquitous metals contaminants.

Authors:  Tyler A Hallman; Marjorie L Brooks
Journal:  Environ Pollut       Date:  2015-07-03       Impact factor: 8.071

9.  Implementing systematic review techniques in chemical risk assessment: Challenges, opportunities and recommendations.

Authors:  Paul Whaley; Crispin Halsall; Marlene Ågerstrand; Elisa Aiassa; Diane Benford; Gary Bilotta; David Coggon; Chris Collins; Ciara Dempsey; Raquel Duarte-Davidson; Rex FitzGerald; Malyka Galay-Burgos; David Gee; Sebastian Hoffmann; Juleen Lam; Toby Lasserson; Len Levy; Steven Lipworth; Sarah Mackenzie Ross; Olwenn Martin; Catherine Meads; Monika Meyer-Baron; James Miller; Camilla Pease; Andrew Rooney; Alison Sapiets; Gavin Stewart; David Taylor
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2015-12-11       Impact factor: 9.621

10.  Nanopesticides and Nanofertilizers: Emerging Contaminants or Opportunities for Risk Mitigation?

Authors:  Melanie Kah
Journal:  Front Chem       Date:  2015-11-16       Impact factor: 5.221

View more
  2 in total

1.  Ecosystem services deserve better than "dirty paper".

Authors:  Peter M Chapman; Henriette Selck; Neelke Doorn; Wayne R Munns
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 3.742

2.  The value of nature: Economic, intrinsic, or both?

Authors:  Anne W Rea; Wayne R Munns
Journal:  Integr Environ Assess Manag       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 2.992

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.