Public participation in life cycle assessment and risk assessment: a shared need.

Life cycle assessment (LCA) and risk assessment are operationally different but share the common purpose of supporting decisions about reducing threats to human welfare. Both analysis methods also involve a complex mixture of science and value judgments reflecting epistemological as well as moral and esthetic values. The inability of risk assessment and LCA to be "value free" has been a source of considerable controversy in both communities. Recognition of the contingent and social nature of human interpretation of the risks and environmental impacts created by public and private decisions has led to an increased appreciation of the importance of involving interested and affected parties in risk characterization. Comparison of the value-based nature of LCA and risk assessment demonstrates the need for participation in LCA. Although the need for participation by affected parties in decision-making processes is gaining acceptance, there is little agreement as to how participation should be structured. Risk assessment and LCA have a shared need for research examining the design and analysis of participation processes appropriate to a given decision context. A proposed framework recommends participation strategies designed to enhance the effectiveness of policy-driven analyses such as risk assessment and LCA based on the level of trust that interested and affected parties have for other policy participants.     

Understanding the Participation of Critical Task Specialists in Strategic Decision Making*

This paper explores the role of critical task specialists in strategic decision making and presents a theoretical model relating critical task specialist participation in decision making to the organization's overall strategy and the nature of the decision. This exploratory study examines scope and intensity of physician participation in hospital decision making. Intensity of critical task specialist participation is explained by content of the decision and by the organization's strategy, while scope of participation is explained by decision content. The findings suggest the need for more complex models of participation than are normally used in decision-making research. The findings also suggest that executives, in managing strategic decision-making processes, should pay attention to questions of both scope and intensity of participation. The results suggest that critical task specialists play a different role in the decision process, depending on specific decision content and organization strategy.     

Can Carbon Nanomaterials Improve CZTS Photovoltaic Devices? Evaluation of Performance and Impacts Using Integrated Life‐Cycle Assessment and Decision Analysis

In emergent photovoltaics, nanoscale materials hold promise for optimizing device characteristics; however, the related impacts remain uncertain, resulting in challenges to decisions on strategic investment in technology innovation. We integrate multi‐criteria decision analysis (MCDA) and life‐cycle assessment (LCA) results (LCA‐MCDA) as a method of incorporating values of a hypothetical federal acquisition manager into the assessment of risks and benefits of emerging photovoltaic materials. Specifically, we compare adoption of copper zinc tin sulfide (CZTS) devices with molybdenum back contacts to alternative devices employing graphite or graphene instead of molybdenum. LCA impact results are interpreted alongside benefits of substitution including cost reductions and performance improvements through application of multi‐attribute utility theory. To assess the role of uncertainty we apply Monte Carlo simulation and sensitivity analysis. We find that graphene or graphite back contacts outperform molybdenum under most scenarios and assumptions. The use of decision analysis clarifies potential advantages of adopting graphite as a back contact while emphasizing the importance of mitigating conventional impacts of graphene production processes if graphene is used in emerging CZTS devices. Our research further demonstrates that a combination of LCA and MCDA increases the usability of LCA in assessing product sustainability. In particular, this approach identifies the most influential assumptions and data gaps in the analysis and the areas in which either engineering controls or further data collection may be necessary.     

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.     

Life cycle impact assessment: a challenge for risk analysts.

Modern technology, together with an advanced economy, can provide a good or service in myriad ways, giving us choices on what to produce and how to produce it. To make those choices more intelligently, society needs to know not only the market price of each alternative, but the associated health and environmental consequences. A fair comparison requires evaluating the consequences across the whole "life cycle"--from the extraction of raw materials and processing to manufacture/construction, use, and end-of-life--of each alternative. Focusing on only one stage (e.g., manufacture) of the life cycle is often misleading. Unfortunately, analysts and researchers still have only rudimentary tools to quantify the materials and energy inputs and the resulting damage to health and the environment. Life cycle assessment (LCA) provides an overall framework for identifying and evaluating these implications. Since the 1960s, considerable progress has been made in developing methods for LCA, especially in characterizing, qualitatively and quantitatively, environmental discharges. However, few of these analyses have attempted to assess the quantitative impact on the environment and health of material inputs and environmental discharges Risk analysis and LCA are connected closely. While risk analysis has characterized and quantified the health risks of exposure to a toxicant, the policy implications have not been clear. Inferring that an occupational or public health exposure carries a nontrivial risk is only the first step in formulating a policy response. A broader framework, including LCA, is needed to see which response is likely to lower the risk without creating high risks elsewhere. Even more important, LCA has floundered at the stage of translating an inventory of environmental discharges into estimates of impact on health and the environment. Without the impact analysis, policymakers must revert to some simple rule, such as that all discharges, regardless of which chemical, which medium, and where they are discharged, are equally toxic. Thus, risk analysts should seek LCA guidance in translating a risk analysis into policy conclusions or even advice to those at risk. LCA needs the help of RA to go beyond simplistic assumptions about the implications of a discharge inventory. We demonstrate the need and rationale for LCA, present a brief history of LCA, present examples of the application of this tool, note the limitations of LCA models, and present several methods for incorporating risk assessment into LCA. However, we warn the reader not to expect too much. A comprehensive comparison of the health and environmental implications of alternatives is beyond the state of the art. LCA is currently not able to provide risk analysts with detailed information on the chemical form and location of the environmental discharges that would allow detailed estimation of the risks to individuals due to toxicants. For example, a challenge for risk analysts is to estimate health and other risks where the location and chemical speciation are not characterized precisely. Providing valuable information to decisionmakers requires advances in both LCA and risk analysis. These two disciplines should be closely linked, since each has much to contribute to the other.     

A Protocol for the Global Sensitivity Analysis of Impact Assessment Models in Life Cycle Assessment

The life cycle assessment (LCA) framework has established itself as the leading tool for the assessment of the environmental impact of products. Several works have established the need of integrating the LCA and risk analysis methodologies, due to the several common aspects. One of the ways to reach such integration is through guaranteeing that uncertainties in LCA modeling are carefully treated. It has been claimed that more attention should be paid to quantifying the uncertainties present in the various phases of LCA. Though the topic has been attracting increasing attention of practitioners and experts in LCA, there is still a lack of understanding and a limited use of the available statistical tools. In this work, we introduce a protocol to conduct global sensitivity analysis in LCA. The article focuses on the life cycle impact assessment (LCIA), and particularly on the relevance of global techniques for the development of trustable impact assessment models. We use a novel characterization model developed for the quantification of the impacts of noise on humans as a test case. We show that global SA is fundamental to guarantee that the modeler has a complete understanding of: (i) the structure of the model and (ii) the importance of uncertain model inputs and the interaction among them.     

Tools for Comparative Analysis of Alternatives: Competing or Complementary Perspectives?

A third generation of environmental policy making and risk management will increasingly impose environmental measures, which may give rise to analyzing countervailing risks. Therefore, a comprehensive analysis of all risks associated with the decision alternatives will aid decision-makers in prioritizing alternatives that effectively reduce both target and countervailing risks. Starting with the metaphor of the ripples caused by a stone that is thrown into a pond, we identify 10 types of ripples that symbolize, in our case, risks that deserve closer examination: direct, upstream, downstream, accidental risks, occupational risks, risks due to offsetting behavior, change in disposable income, macro-economic changes, depletion of natural resources, and risks to the manmade environment. Tools to analyze these risks were developed independently and recently have been applied to overlapping fields of application. This suggests that either the tools should be linked in a unified framework for comparative analysis or that the appropriate field of application for single tools should be better understood. The goals of this article are to create a better foundation for the understanding of the nature and coverage of available tools and to identify the remaining gaps. None of the tools is designed to deal with all 10 types of risk. Provided data suggest that, of the 10 types of identified risks, those associated with changes in disposable income may be particularly significant when decision alternatives differ with respect to their effects on disposable income. Finally, the present analysis was limited to analytical questions and did not capture the important role of the decision-making process itself.     

Use of Advances in Technology for Maritime Risk Assessment

The maritime industry is moving toward a "goal-setting" risk-based regime. This opens the way to safety engineers to explore and exploit flexible and advanced risk modeling and decision-making approaches in the design and operation processes. In this article, following a brief review of the current status of maritime risk assessment, a design/operation selection framework and a design/operation optimization framework are outlined. A general discussion of control engineering techniques and their application to risk modeling and decision making is given. Four novel risk modeling and decision-making approaches are then outlined with illustrative examples to demonstrate their use. Such approaches may be used as alternatives to facilitate risk modeling and decision making in situations where conventional techniques cannot be appropriately applied. Finally, recommendations on further exploitation of advances in general engineering and technology are suggested with respect to risk modeling and decision making.     

A Dominance-Based Rough Set Approach for an Enhanced Assessment of Seasonal Influenza Risk

Accounting for about 290,000–650,000 deaths across the globe, seasonal influenza is estimated by the World Health Organization to be a major cause of mortality. Hence, there is a need for a reliable and robust epidemiological surveillance decision-making system to understand and combat this epidemic disease. In a previous study, the authors proposed a decision support system to fight against seasonal influenza. This system is composed of three subsystems: (i) modeling and simulation, (ii) data warehousing, and (iii) analysis. The analysis subsystem relies on spatial online analytical processing (S-OLAP) technology. Although the S-OLAP technology is useful in analyzing multidimensional spatial data sets, it cannot take into account the inherent multicriteria nature of seasonal influenza risk assessment by itself. Therefore, the objective of this article is to extend the existing decision support system by adding advanced multicriteria analysis capabilities for enhanced seasonal influenza risk assessment and monitoring. Bearing in mind the characteristics of the decision problem considered in this article, a well-known multicriteria classification method, the dominance-based rough set approach (DRSA), was selected to boost the existing decision support system. Combining the S-OLAP technology and the multicriteria classification method DRSA in the same decision support system will largely improve and extend the scope of analysis capabilities. The extended decision support system has been validated by its application to assess seasonal influenza risk in the northwest region of Algeria.     

Comparative Human Health Impact Assessment of Engineered Nanomaterials in the Framework of Life Cycle Assessment

For safe innovation, knowledge on potential human health impacts is essential. Ideally, these impacts are considered within a larger life‐cycle‐based context to support sustainable development of new applications and products. A methodological framework that accounts for human health impacts caused by inhalation of engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) in an indoor air environment has been previously developed. The objectives of this study are as follows: (i) evaluate the feasibility of applying the CF framework for NP exposure in the workplace based on currently available data; and (ii) supplement any resulting knowledge gaps with methods and data from the li fe c ycle a pproach and human r isk a ssessment (LICARA) project to develop a modified case‐specific version of the framework that will enable near‐term inclusion of NP human health impacts in life cycle assessment (LCA) using a case study involving nanoscale titanium dioxide (nanoTiO₂). The intent is to enhance typical LCA with elements of regulatory risk assessment, including its more detailed measure of uncertainty. The proof‐of‐principle demonstration of the framework highlighted the lack of available data for both the workplace emissions and human health effects of ENMs that is needed to calculate generalizable characterization factors using common human health impact assessment practices in LCA. The alternative approach of using intake fractions derived from workplace air concentration measurements and effect factors based on best‐available toxicity data supported the current case‐by‐case approach for assessing the human health life cycle impacts of ENMs. Ultimately, the proposed framework and calculations demonstrate the potential utility of integrating elements of risk assessment with LCA for ENMs once the data are available.     

Technology assessment: Need and motivation of industry

The problems of decision making when the decision concerns large-scale technical plants have increased, largely due to the difficulties of assessing environmental factors. Technology assessment is an approach which can assist in undertaking the necessary analysis which will expose the social impact, participation of affected groups, and the evaluation of political processes for large-scale technical developments. This paper examines the obstacles to the use of Technology assessment techniques by industry and in particular concentrates upon the problems of forecasting future technological change. The paper examines the view that TA is primarily a concept of political decision making and places the concepts of politics in the broadest sense, not merely in a narrow partly political framework. Finally, the paper examines the arguments for and against quantitative evaluation and claims that TA, used properly, can provide valuable qualitative as well as quantitative insights into the impact of processes upon the political, social and economic environment. Thus, suggesting that TA is a technique of forecasting which companies that are involved in the development of major, and therefore heavy resource-consuming, projects should consider the use of this technique as part of their appraisal process.     

A Resilience-Based Approach to Risk Assessments—Building Resilient Organizations under Arctic Conditions

Reliability and higher levels of safety are thought to be achieved by using systematic approaches to managing risks. The assessment of risks has produced a range of different approaches to assessing these uncertainties, presenting models for how risks affect individuals or organizations. Contemporary risk assessment tools based on this approach have proven difficult for practitioners to use as tools for tactical and operational decision making. This article presents an alternative to these assessments by utilizing a resilience perspective, arguing that complex systems are inclined to variety and uncertainty regarding the results they produce and are therefore prone to systemic failures. A continuous improvement approach is a source of reliability when managing complex systems and is necessary to manage varieties and uncertainties. For an organization to understand how risk events occur, it is necessary to define what is believed to be the equilibrium of the system in time and space. By applying a resilience engineering (RE) perspective to risk assessment, it is possible to manage this complexity by assessing the ability to respond, monitor, learn, and anticipate risks, and in so doing to move away from the flawed frequency and consequences approach. Using a research station network in the Arctic as an example illustrates how an RE approach qualifies assessments by bridging risk assessments with value-creation processes. The article concludes by arguing that a resilience-based risk assessment can improve on current practice, including for organizations located outside the Arctic region.     

基于改进教学式方法的可解释信用风险评价模型构建

信用风险评价是金融机构风险防控的重要环节之一。近年来，基于机器学习的信用风险评价模型以其准确的预测效果受到越来越多的关注，但机器学习模型具有可解释性不强的弊端，导致投资者无法完全信任其预测结果。针对上述问题，本文提出了一种改进的教学式方法，利用机器学习模型指导生成一个兼顾准确性与可解释性的信用风险评价决策树模型，以辅助投资者决策。为提高决策树对机器学习模型中正确功能的学习能力，提出了基于Weight Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique（Weight-SMOTE）的伪数据集生成方法，以提高伪数据集中可信度高的功能所标记的伪样本比例；为实现所生成的决策树在准确性、可解释性以及其与机器学习模型一致性间的有效权衡，在决策树生成过程中提出了一种新的决策树剪枝方法；同时针对保真度评价指标的局限性，提出了真保真度评价指标，来有效的衡量决策树与机器学习模型正确功能的近似程度。最后使用3个真实信用风险评价数据集对改进的教学式方法进行验证，实验结果表明所提出方法能够生成准确且可解释的信用风险评价模型，以满足投资者的决策偏好与实际需求。     

一种语言评价信息不完全的多属性群决策方法

针对语言评价信息不完全的多属性群决策问题,提出了一种基于D-S理论的新决策方法。该方法首先对多个决策者给出不完全的语言评价信息进行分析,得到不同属性下各焦元的基本概率分配函数值,然后通过Dempster-Shafer合成法则对其值进行合成,计算决策方案的信度函数和似真函数值,并据此对所有决策方案进行排序。最后,通过一个算例验证该方法的可行性和有效性。     

Risk Analysis, Life Cycle Assessment—The Common Challenge of Dealing with the Precautionary Frame (Based on the Toxicity Controversy in Sweden and the Netherlands)

Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) and comparative risk assessment (RA) use the same building blocks for analyzing fate and potential effects of toxic substances. It is tacitly assumed that emission-effect calculations can give uniform and decisive answers in debates on toxicity problems. For several decades, mainstream policy sciences have taken a different starting point when analyzing decision making on complex, controversial societal issues. Such controversies in essence are thought to be caused by the fact that different actor coalitions adhere to a different, but in scientific terms equally reasonable, conceptualization or "framing" of the problem. A historical, argumentative analysis of the Dutch chlorine debate and the Swedish PVC debate shows that this is also true in the discussions on toxic substances. Three frames have been identified, which were coined the "risk assessment frame," "the strict control frame," and the "precautionary frame." These frames tacitly disagree about the extent of knowledge/ignorance about the impacts of substances, the robustness/fallibility of emission-reduction schemes, and the robustness/vulnerability of nature. The latter frame, adhered to by environmentalists, seeks to judge substances mainly on their inherent safety. Under the current institutional arrangements and practices, RA and LCIA are executed mainly in line with the philosophy expressed by the risk assessment frame. This article gives various suggestions for dealing with framing in debates on toxic substances. One of the options is elaborated in somewhat more detail, i.e., the development of multiple indicators and calculation schemes for RA and LCIA that reflect the different frames. An outline is given for a possible indicator system reflecting the precautionary principle.     

Ecological Risk Assessment,Prediction, and Assessing Risk Predictions

Ecological risk assessment embodied in an adaptive management framework is becoming the global standard approach for formally assessing and managing the ecological risks of technology and development. Ensuring the continual improvement of ecological risk assessment approaches is partly achieved through the dissemination of not only the types of risk assessment approaches used, but also their efficacy. While there is an increasing body of literature describing the results of general comparisons between alternate risk assessment methods and models, there is a paucity of literature that post hoc assesses the performance of specific predictions based on an assessment of risk and the effectiveness of the particular model used to predict the risk. This is especially the case where risk assessments have been used to grant consent or approval for the construction of major infrastructure projects. While postconstruction environmental monitoring is increasingly commonplace, it is not common for a postconstruction assessment of the accuracy and performance of the ecological risk assessment and underpinning model to be undertaken. Without this “assessment of the assessment,” it is difficult for other practitioners to gain insight into the performance of the approach and models used and therefore, as argued here, this limits the rate of improvement of risk assessment approaches.     

Risk Assessment and Risk Governance of Liquefied Natural Gas Development in Gladstone,Australia

This article is a retrospective analysis of liquefied natural gas development (LNG) in Gladstone, Australia by using the structure of the risk governance framework developed by the International Risk Governance Council (IRGC). Since 2010 the port of Gladstone has undergone extensive expansion to facilitate the increasing coal export as well as the new development of three recently completed LNG facilities. Significant environmental and socio‐economic impacts and concerns have occurred as a result of these developments. The overall aim of the article, therefore, is to identify the risk governance deficits that arose and to formulate processes capable of improving similar decision‐making problems in the future. The structure of the IRGC framework is followed because it represents a broad analytical approach for considering risk assessment and risk governance in Gladstone in ways that include, but also go beyond, the risk approach of the ISO 31000:2009 standard that was employed at the time. The IRGC risk framework is argued to be a consistent and comprehensive risk governance framework that integrates scientific, economic, social, and cultural aspects and advocates the notion of inclusive risk governance through stakeholder communication and involvement. Key aspects related to risk preassessment, risk appraisal, risk tolerability and acceptability, risk management, and stakeholder communication and involvement are considered. The results indicate that the risk governance deficits include aspects related to (i) the risk matrix methodology, (ii) reflecting uncertainties, (iii) cumulative risks, (iv) the regulatory process, and (v) stakeholder communication and involvement.     

Multicriteria Decision Analysis: A Comprehensive Decision Approach for Management of Contaminated Sediments

Contaminated sediments and other sites present a difficult challenge for environmental decisionmakers. They are typically slow to recover or attenuate naturally, may involve multiple regulatory agencies and stakeholder groups, and engender multiple toxicological and ecotoxicological risks. While environmental decision-making strategies over the last several decades have evolved into increasingly more sophisticated, information-intensive, and complex approaches, there remains considerable dissatisfaction among business, industry, and the public with existing management strategies. Consequently, contaminated sediments and materials are the subject of intense technology development, such as beneficial reuse or in situ treatment. However, current decision analysis approaches, such as comparative risk assessment, benefit-cost analysis, and life cycle assessment, do not offer a comprehensive approach for incorporating the varied types of information and multiple stakeholder and public views that must typically be brought to bear when new technologies are under consideration. Alternatively, multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) offers a scientifically sound decision framework for management of contaminated materials or sites where stakeholder participation is of crucial concern and criteria such as economics, environmental impacts, safety, and risk cannot be easily condensed into simple monetary expressions. This article brings together a multidisciplinary review of existing decision-making approaches at regulatory agencies in the United States and Europe and synthesizes state-of-the-art research in MCDA methods applicable to the assessment of contaminated sediment management technologies. Additionally, it tests an MCDA approach for coupling expert judgment and stakeholder values in a hypothetical contaminated sediments management case study wherein MCDA is used as a tool for testing stakeholder responses to and improving expert assessment of innovative contaminated sediments technologies.     

Performance measurement of supply chain management using the analytical hierarchy process

Performance measurement of supply chain management (SCM) is a rapidly growing multi-criteria decision-making problem owing to the large number of factors affecting decision-making. The right choice of performance metrics and measures is critical to the success and competitiveness of the firms in the era of globalisation. Recognising the multiple objective nature of the problem, this paper proposes the use of the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) methodology as aid in making SCM evaluation decisions. For pair-wise comparison in AHP, a survey methodology is used. The methodology presented can help firms to prioritise and formulate viable performance measurement strategies in the volatile and complex global decision environment from different balanced scorecard (BSC) perspectives. A demonstration of the application of this methodology in a real life problem is presented.     

The Role of Environmental Accidental Risk Assessment in the Process of Granting Development Consent

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is a procedure that must be followed for certain types of development before they are granted development consent. The procedure requires the developer to compile an environmental impact report (EIR) describing the likely significant effects of the project on the environment. A regulatory requirement in Slovenia is that an accidental risk assessment for a new installation should be a part of an EIR. The article shows how risk assessment (RA) related to accidental release of methylene diphenyl diisocyanate (MDI) or a polyvalent alcohol mixture from a new planned unit of a chemical factory in the Alpine region of Slovenia was performed in the framework of an EIA for the purpose of obtaining a construction permit. Two accidental scenarios were considered: (a) a spill of 20 m³ of MDI or polyvalent alcohol mixture into the river Soča (the river runs close to the chemical factory) and (b) a fire in the warehouse storing the raw material, where emission of toxic gases HCN, NO_x, and CO is expected during combustion of MDI. One of the most important results of this case is the agreement among the developer, the competent authority, and a consultant in the field of EIA and RA to positively conclude the licensing process despite the absence of formal (regulatory) limit values for risk. It has been approved that transparent, reasonably uncertain, and semi-quantitative environmental risk assessment is an inevitable component of an EIA, and an essential factor in informed, licensing-related decision making.