Challenges in Development and Implementation of Health‐Risk‐Based Soil Quality Guidelines: Turkey's Experience

Management of contaminated sites is a critical environmental issue around the world due to the human health risk involved for many sites and scarcity of funding. Moreover, clean‐up costs of all contaminated sites to their background levels with existing engineering technologies may be financially infeasible and demand extended periods of operation time. Given these constraints, to achieve optimal utilization of available funds and prioritization of contaminated sites that need immediate attention, health‐risk‐based soil quality guidelines should be preferred over the traditional soil quality standards. For these reasons, traditional soil quality standards are being replaced by health‐risk‐based ones in many countries and in Turkey as well. The need for health‐risk‐based guidelines is clear, but developing these guidelines and implementation of them in contaminated site management is not a straightforward process. The goal of this study is to highlight the problems that are encountered at various stages of the development process of risk‐based soil quality guidelines for Turkey and how they are dealt with. Utilization of different definitions and methodologies at different countries, existence of inconsistent risk assessment tools, difficulties in accessing relevant documents and reports, and lack of specific data required for Turkey are among these problems. We believe that Turkey's experience may help other countries that are planning to develop health‐risk‐based guidelines achieve their goals in a more efficient manner.     

Issues in Ecological Risk Assessment: The CRAM Perspective

In 1989, a Committee on Risk Assessment Methodology (CRAM) was convened by the National Research Council (NRC) to identify and investigate important scientific issues in risk assessment. One of the first issues considered by the committee was the development of a conceptual framework for ecological risk assessment, defined as "the characterization of the adverse ecological effects of environmental exposures to hazards imposed by human activities." Adverse ecological effects include all biological and nonbiological environmental changes that society perceives as undesirable. The committee's opinion was that a general framework is needed to define the relationship of ecological risk assessment to environmental management and to facilitate the development of uniform technical guidelines. The framework for human health risk assessment proposed by the NRC in 1983 was adopted as a starting point for discussion. CRAM concluded that, although ecological risk assessment and human health risk assessment differ substantially in terms of scientific disciplines and technical problems, the underlying decision process is the same for both. Therefore, CRAM recommended that the 1983 risk assessment framework be modified to accommodate both human health and ecological risk assessment. CRAM defined an integrated health/ ecological risk assessment framework consisting of the four components: Hazard Identification, Exposure Assessment, Exposure-Response Assessment, and Risk Characterization. CRAM further provided recommendations on the scope of issues to be addressed in ecological risk assessment, critical research needs, and mechanisms for providing more detailed guidance on the scientific content of ecological risk assessments.     

Methodology for the Calculation of Annualized Incremental Risks in Systems of Dams

In the past few years, the field of dam safety has approached risk informed methodologies throughout the world and several methodologies and programs are appearing to aid in the systematization of the calculations. The most common way of implementing these calculations is through the use of event trees, computing event probabilities, and incremental consequences. This methodology is flexible enough for several situations, but its generalization to the case of systems of several dams is complex and its implementation in a completely general calculation methodology presents some problems. Retaining the event tree framework, a new methodology is proposed to calculate incremental risks. The main advantage of this proposed methodology is the ease with which it can be applied to systems of several dams: with a single risk model that describes the complete system and with a single calculation the incremental risks of the system can be obtained, being able to allocate the risk of each dam and of each failure mode. The article shows how both methodologies are equivalent and also applies them to a case study.     

Comparative Risk Analysis of Dioxins in Fish and Fine Particles from Heavy-Duty Vehicles

Dioxins and airborne fine particles are both environmental health problems that have been the subject of active public debate. Knowledge on fine particles has increased substantially during the last 10 years, and even the current, lowered levels in the Europe and in the United States appear to be a major public health problem. On the other hand, dioxins are ubiquitous persistent contaminants, some being carcinogens at high doses, and therefore of great concern. Our aim was to (a) quantitatively analyze the two pollutant health risks and (b) study the changes in risk in view of the current and forthcoming EU legislations on pollutants. We performed a comparative risk assessment for both pollutants in the Helsinki metropolitan area (Finland) and estimated the health effects with several scenarios. For primary fine particles: a comparison between the present emission situation for heavy-duty vehicles and the new fine particle emission standards set by the EU. For dioxins: an EU directive that regulates commercial fishing of Baltic salmon and herring that exceed the dioxin concentration limit set for fish meat, and a derogation (= exemption) from the directive for these two species. Both of these two decisions are very topical issues and this study estimates the expected changes in health effects due to these regulations. It was found that the estimated fine particle risk clearly outweighed the estimated dioxin risk. A substantial improvement to public health could be achieved by initiating reductions in emission standards; about 30 avoided premature deaths annually in the study area. In addition, the benefits of fish consumption due to omega-3 exposure were notably higher than the potential dioxin cancer risk. Both regulations were instigated as ways of promoting public health.     

Consideration of Background Exposures in the Management of Hazardous Waste Sites: A New Approach to Risk Assessment

The current approach to health risk assessment of toxic waste sites in the U.S. may lead to considerable expenditure of resources without any meaningful reduction in population exposure. Risk assessment methods used generally ignore background exposures and consider only incremental risk estimates for maximally exposed individuals. Such risk estimates do not address true public health risks to which background exposures also contribute. The purpose of this paper is to recommend a new approach to risk assessment and risk management concerning toxic waste sites. Under this new approach, which we have called public health risk assessment, chemical substances would be classified into a level of concern based on the potential health risks associated with typical national and regional background exposures. Site assessment would then be based on the level of concern for the particular pollutants involved and the potential contribution of site contaminants to typical background human exposures. While various problems can be foreseen with this approach, the key advantage is that resources would be allocated to reduce the most important sources of human exposure, and site remediation decisions could be simplified by focussing on exposure assessment rather than questionable risk extrapolations.     

A Process for Incorporating Comparative Risk into Environmental Policymaking in Louisiana

The goal of Louisiana's 1990–1991 comparative risk project, also called the Louisiana Environmental Action Plan (LEAP), was to incorporate risk assessment into state environmental planning and policymaking. Scientists, government officials, and citizens were brought together to estimate the relative risk to human health, natural resources, and quality of life posed by 33 selected environmental issues. The issues were then ranked according to their relative estimated risks. It was hoped that this ranking of "comparative risks" would enable state policymakers to target the most important environmental problems and allocate scarce public resources more rationally and efficiently. As a result of the project, the governor issued an Executive Order forming a permanent Public Advisory Committee to continue this type of comparative risk assessment in Louisiana.     

Role of Comparative Risk Assessment in Addressing Environmental Security in the Middle East

During the 21st century, environmental challenges are likely to intensify across the world and possibly lead to violent conflicts. Strategies for conflict avoidance will be incomplete unless they recognize, discuss, and mitigate regional environmental stress factors. Comparative risk assessment (CRA) is one of the most critical tools emerging to influence modern environmental policies and is increasingly used to create a common language to help reconcile competing interests in development and environmental disputes around the world. This article considers the environmental challenges facing the Middle East in light of their "transboundary" nature and proposes CRA as a framework for setting environmental priorities and reducing tensions in the region.     

Waterborne Disease‐Related Risk Perceptions in the Sonora River Basin,Mexico

Waterborne disease is estimated to cause about 10% of all diseases worldwide. However, related risk perceptions are not well understood, particularly in the developing world where waterborne disease is an enormous problem. We focus on understanding risk perceptions related to these issues in a region within northern Mexico. Our findings show how waterborne disease problems and solutions are understood in eight small communities along a highly contaminated river system. We found major differences in risk perceptions between health professionals, government officials, and lay citizens. Health professionals believed that a high level of human‐waste‐related risk existed within the region. Few officials and lay citizens shared this belief. In addition, few officials and lay citizens were aware of poor wastewater‐management‐related disease outbreaks and water contamination. Finally, aside from health professionals, a few interviewees understood the importance of basic hygiene and water treatment measures that could help to prevent disease. Our results add to the literature on environmentally‐related risk perceptions in the developing world. We discuss recommendations for improving future human‐wastewater‐related risk communication within the region.     

Advancing Risk‐Informed Decision Making in Managing Defense Nuclear Waste in the United States: Opportunities and Challenges for Risk Analysis

An omnibus spending bill in 2014 directed the Department of Energy to analyze how effectively Department of Energy (DOE) identifies, programs, and executes its plans to address public health and safety risks that remain as part of DOE's remaining environmental cleanup liabilities. A committee identified two dozen issues and associated recommendations for the DOE, other federal agencies, and the U.S. Congress to consider, as well as other stakeholders such as states and tribal nations. In regard to risk assessment, the committee described a risk review process that uses available data, expert experience, identifies major data gaps, permits input from key stakeholders, and creates an ordered set of risks based on what is known. Probabilistic risk assessments could be a follow‐up from these risk reviews. In regard to risk management, the states, in particular, have become major drivers of how resources are driven. States use different laws, different priorities, and challenge DOE's policies in different ways. Land use decisions vary, technology choices are different, and other notable variations are apparent. The cost differences associated with these differences are marked. The net result is that resources do not necessarily go to the most prominent human health and safety risks, as seen from the national level.     

Health Risk Assessment for Planned Waste Incinerators: Getting the Right Science and the Science Right

Health risk assessment is widely advocated in the United Kingdom as the most comprehensive means of assessing the health risks posed by the emissions of a planned waste incinerator. Its main advantage over other methods of assessment, such as air quality impact assessment, is its ability to address explicitly the direct (inhalation) and indirect (ingestion and dermal contact) health risks posed by different chemicals, including those that are not thought to have a threshold below which no adverse effect will take place. This article examines the level and quality of the emissions assessments included in 61 waste incinerator environmental statements (ESs); in particular, it focuses on the quality of the exposure assessment and risk characterization stages of the health risk assessment process. The article concludes that the ES has not always provided interested stakeholders with the best available information upon which to determine the tolerability of the health risks posed by waste incinerator emissions Some recommendations are made as to how this problem might be addressed in future environmental impact assessment (EIA) processes.     

Risk assessment for handling hazardous substances within the European industry: Available methodologies and research streams

After the Seveso disaster occurred more than 40 years ago, there has been an increasing awareness of the potential impacts that similar accident events can occur in a wide range of process establishments, where the handling and production of hazardous substances pose a real threat to society and the environment. In these industrial sites denominated “Seveso sites,” the urgent need for an effective strategy emerged markedly to handle hazardous activities and to ensure safe conditions. Since then, the main challenging research issues have focused on how to prevent such accident events and how to mitigate their consequences leading to the development of many risk assessment methodologies. In recent years, researchers and practitioners have tried to provide useful overviews of the existing risk assessment methodologies proposing several reviews. However, these reviews are not exhaustive because they are either dated or focus only on one specific topic (e.g., liquefied natural gas, domino effect, etc.). This work aims to overcome the limitations of the current reviews by providing an up-to-date and comprehensive overview of the risk assessment methodologies for handling hazardous substances within the European industry. In particular, we have focused on the current techniques for hazards and accident scenarios identification, as well as probability and consequence analyses for both onshore and offshore installations. Thus, we have identified the research streams that have characterized the activities of researchers and practitioners over the years, and we have then presented and discussed the different risk assessment methodologies available concerning the research stream that they belong to.     

Aggregate, Disaggregate, and Hybrid Analyses of Ecological Risk Perceptions

Laypeople's perceptions of health and safety risks have been widely studied, but only a few studies have addressed perceptions of ecological hazards. We assembled a list of 39 attributes of ecological hazards from the literatures on comparative risk assessment, ecological health, environmental conservation and management, environmental psychology, and risk perception. In Study 1, 125 laypeople evaluated 83 hazards on subsets of this attribute set. Factor analysis of attribute ratings (averaged over participants) revealed six oblique factors: ecological impacts, human impacts, human benefits, aesthetic impacts, scientific understanding, and controllability. These factors predicted mean judgments of overall riskiness, ecological riskiness, acceptability, and regulatory strictness. In Study 2, 30 laypeople each evaluated 34 hazards on 17 attributes and 3 dependent variables. Aggregate-level factor analysis of these data replicated the appropriate portion of the factor solution and yielded similar regression results. Parallel analyses at the individual-participant level yielded factors that explained less variance in judgments of overall riskiness, ecological riskiness, and acceptability. However, the decrease in explanatory power was much less than is often reported for disaggregate-level analyses of psychometric data. This discrepancy illustrates the importance of distinguishing between the level of analysis (aggregate versus disaggregate) and the focus of analysis (distinctions among hazards versus distinctions among participants). In a hybrid analysis, aggregate-level factor scores predicted individual participants' riskiness judgments reasonably well. Psychometric studies such as these provide a sound empirical basis for selecting attributes of ecological hazards for use in comparative risk assessment.     

Risk analysis of PCB exposure via the soil-food crop pathway, and alternatives for remediation at Serpukhov, Russian Federation.

A risk assessment was conducted to determine the likelihood of certain health risks resulting from exposure to soils and food crops contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs). PCBs have contaminated soils, river sediments, and air in the past as a result of industrial activities at a capacitor plant located in the City of Serpukhov, Russian Federation. This risk assessment and suggestions for remediation are designed to aid in decision-making efforts by a joint Russian-American research team developing a community, national, and international response to industrial contamination. Bobovnikova et al. (The Science of the Total Environment 139/140, 357-364, [1993]) have reported that PCBs are elevated in soils and sediments, breast milk, and locally grown foods in the Serpukhov area. Data from these and other investigators have been used in this risk assessment to calculate a potential cancer risk resulting from exposure to PCBs. Our assessment indicates that members of the local population may be at increased risk of cancer, and possibly other adverse health effects, as a result of PCB contamination of their environment. Because previously unassessed environmental contamination is a common problem in the former Soviet Republics, as well as many other areas of the world, we believe this type of evaluation, using known methods, can serve as a model for assessment efforts in other parts of the globe and result in remediative efforts in regions constrained by faltering economies.     

Life-Cycle Assessment in Relation to Risk Assessment: An Evolving Perspective

A life-cycle approach takes a cradle-to-grave perspective of a product's numerous activities from the raw material extraction to final disposal. There have been recent efforts to develop life-cycle assessment (LCA) to assess both environmental and human health issues. The question then arises: what are the capabilities of LCA, especially in relation to risk assessment? To address this question, this paper first describes the LCA mass-based accounting system and then analyzes the use of this approach for environmental and human health assessment. The key LCA limitations in this respect are loss of spatial, temporal, dose-response, and threshold information. These limitations affect LCA's capability to assess several environmental issues, and human health in particular. This leads to the conclusion that LCA impact assessment does not predict or measure actual effects, quantitate risks, or address safety. Instead, LCA uses mass loadings with simplifying assumptions and subjective judgments to add independent effects and exposures into an overall score. As a result, LCA identifies possible human health issues on a systemwide basis from a worst case, hypothetical hazard perspective. Ideally, the identified issues would then be addressed by more detailed assessment methods, such as risk assessment.     

Direct Inference, Probability, and a Conceptual Gulf in Risk Communication

Differences in the conceptual frameworks of scientists and nonscientists may create barriers to risk communication. This article examines two such conceptual problems. First, the logic of "direct inference" from group statistics to probabilities about specific individuals suggests that individuals might be acting rationally in refusing to apply to themselves the conclusions of regulatory risk assessments. Second, while regulators and risk assessment scientists often use an "objectivist" or "relative frequency" interpretation of probability statements, members of the public are more likely to adopt a "subjectivist" or "degree of confidence" interpretation when estimating their personal risks, and either misunderstand or significantly discount the relevance of risk assessment conclusions. If these analyses of inference and probability are correct, there may be a conceptual gulf at the center of risk communication that cannot be bridged by additional data about the magnitude of group risk. Suggestions are made for empirical studies that might help regulators deal with this conceptual gulf.     

Building a Human Health Risk Assessment Ontology (RsO): A Proposed Framework

Over the last decade the health and environmental research communities have made significant progress in collecting and improving access to genomic, toxicology, exposure, health, and disease data useful to health risk assessment. One of the barriers to applying these growing volumes of information in fields such as risk assessment is the lack of informatics tools to organize, curate, and evaluate thousands of journal publications and hundreds of databases to provide new insights on relationships among exposure, hazard, and disease burden. Many fields are developing ontologies as a way of organizing and analyzing large amounts of complex information from multiple scientific disciplines. Ontologies include a vocabulary of terms and concepts with defined logical relationships to each other. Building from the recently published exposure ontology and other relevant health and environmental ontologies, this article proposes an ontology for health risk assessment (RsO) that provides a structural framework for organizing risk assessment information and methods. The RsO is anchored by eight major concepts that were either identified by exploratory curations of the risk literature or the exposure‐ontology working group as key for describing the risk assessment domain. These concepts are: (1) stressor, (2) receptor, (3) outcome, (4) exposure event, (5) dose‐response approach, (6) dose‐response metric, (7) uncertainty, and (8) measure of risk. We illustrate the utility of these concepts for the RsO with example curations of published risk assessments for ionizing radiation, arsenic in drinking water, and persistent pollutants in salmon.     

The Interplay of Science, Values, and Experiences Among Scientists Asked to Evaluate the Hazards of Dioxin, Radon, and Environmental Tobacco Smoke

To investigate the extent to which personal values and experiences among scientists might affect their assessment of risks from dioxin, radon, and environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), we conducted an experiment through a telephone survey of 1461 epidemiologists, toxicologists, physicians, and general scientists. Each participant was read a vignette designed to reflect the mainstream scientific thinking on one of the three substances. For half of the participants (group A) the substance was named. For the other half (group B), the substance was not named but was identified only as Substance X, Y, or Z. Knowing the name of the substance had little effect on the scientists' evaluation of dioxin, although those who knew the substance to be dioxin were more likely to rate the substance as a serious environmental health hazard (51% vs. 42%, p = 0.062). For radon, those who knew the substance by name were significantly more likely to consider it an environmental health hazard than were those who knew it as substance Z (91% vs. 78%, p less than 0.001). Participants who knew they were being asked about ETS rather than substance X were significantly more likely to consider the substance an environmental health hazard (88% vs. 66%, p less than 0.001), to consider the substance a serious environmental health hazard (70% vs. 33%, p less than 0.001), to believe that background exposure required public health intervention (85% vs. 41%, p less than 0.001), and to believe that above-background exposure required public health intervention (90% vs. 74%, p less than 0.001). These findings suggest that values and experiences may be influencing health risk assessments for these substances, and indicate the need for more study of this phenomenon.     

Discrimination, Vulnerability, and Justice in the Face of Risk

Recent research finds that perceived risk is closely associated with race and gender. In surveys of the American public a subset of white males stand out for their uniformly low perceptions of environmental health risks, while most nonwhite and nonmale respondents reveal higher perceived risk. Such findings have been attributed to the advantageous position of white males in American social life. This article explores the linked possibility that this demographic pattern is driven not simply by the social advantages or disadvantages embodied in race or gender, but by the subjective experience of vulnerability and by sociopolitical evaluations pertaining to environmental injustice. Indices of environmental injustice and social vulnerability were developed as part of a U.S. National Risk Survey (n= 1,192) in order to examine their effect on perceived risk. It was found that those who regarded themselves as vulnerable and supported belief statements consistent with the environmental justice thesis offered higher risk ratings across a range of hazards. Multivariate analysis indicates that our measures of vulnerability and environmental injustice predict perceived risk but do not account for all of the effects of race and gender. The article closes with a discussion of the implications of these findings for further work on vulnerability and risk, risk communication, and risk management practices generally.