ReviewThe significance of information frameworks in integrated risk assessment and management
Introduction
Providing information on risks is a challenging task. Risk concepts are used in a wide range of meanings, and different uses and users emphasize different aspects of risks. The contexts in which information on risks is used also influence its contents (Hildén, 1997, Jasanoff, 1998, Arquette et al., 2002, Jardine et al., 2003). One common response to the challenges of risk information is to call for integrated assessments (Garrod et al., in press).
The dictionary definition of integration as “the making up or composition of a whole by adding together or combining the separate parts or elements; combination into an integral whole: a making whole or entire” (Oxford English Dictionary) shows that integration can emphasize different elements. Integrated assessments of environmental or health risks have thus been studied and developed in various contexts from global to local levels (compare for instance Ankley et al., 1992 and Harvey et al., 1995; cf. Fedra, 1998, Eduljee, 2000, Sekizawa and Tanabe, 2005). In consequence, integrated risk assessments have also been defined in different ways (if at all). The degree of inclusiveness and the level of analysis differ greatly, for instance regarding the scope of the risks treated and the manner of treating complex risks and uncertainties. The kinds of interactions between assessment and policy that are accounted for, including the information flows in these interactions, also vary.
The variation in approaches raises the question whether it is possible to clarify what kind of integration is demanded under different circumstances? The interaction between demands on (integrated) assessments and policy development are of particular interest as they may affect both the development and application of risk assessment methods. Few studies have so far explicitly analyzed methodological and policy issues related to the generation and use of information in relation to integrated treatment of risks.
We focus on regulatory assessment and management procedures on the EU level. However, even within this general context one can identify different demands on and treatment of information. Assessments are linked to research and to policy, and they are influenced by the general societal context as well as more specific drivers affecting management (Fig. 1).
In order to deal with the different conceptual and procedural constructs that process and give meaning to information on risks we introduce the concept of frameworks for information. These frameworks affect the constitution of risks and also set different requirements on the use and outputs of methods for risk assessments in general and integrated assessments in particular. Our intention is to examine issues that need to be considered when providing information on risks in policy and management settings. A point of departure is a contextualized view of information according to which information acquires its meanings in social processes and more or less formalized frameworks. Our purpose is not to propose a single normative framework for the use of risk information and integrated assessments, but to clarify and display different interpretations.
The starting point for the analysis is a review of pertinent theoretical concepts and constructs (Section 2). In Section 3 we focus on the different meanings and dimensions of integration, with references to the EU chemicals control. Section 4 analyzes comparison and evaluation of risks. In Section 5 we analyze uncertainty management. Section 6 provides an overall discussion of the significance of understanding frameworks for risk information from the point of view of integrated assessments of risks.
Section snippets
Risks and uncertainties
Risk has been defined as “the probability of an adverse effect in an organism, system or population caused under specified circumstances by exposure to an agent.” (IPCS and OECD, 2003; cf. Christensen et al., 2003). In quantitative analyses risk is defined as a function (usually the product) of the probability and consequences of an adverse event or process. A chain of events or stages of risk formation can be discerned, from exposures to effects and even beyond, such as from root causes to
The role of context
Assessment and management interact in the social policy context, and communication becomes crucial in their multi-way interaction (Fig. 1, Fig. 2). The initial analysis in Section 2 suggests that there are strong interactions between science-oriented and management-oriented frameworks, blurring a division between assumed value-neutral and value-laden information. Demands for information on risks obviously arise not only in the scientific community as the result of new findings, but also in
Evaluation of risks
Ultimately integrated assessments are expected to contribute to evaluations of risk and risk management. This means judging the significance of the risk and determining the merit and worth of policies and measures aimed at addressing risks. Thus risks are evaluated on many levels, from a general policy level in setting management priorities to technical evaluations of outcomes of risk management measures. Also the closeness to management and the intentionality of evaluations vary. Many
Uncertainty management
Integrated risk assessments and evaluations strive to grasp risks in a broader, more balanced and thereby more relevant and true manner. This introduces new kinds of uncertainties, and adds challenges to the identification, quantification, characterization and, as far as feasible, reduction of the uncertainties (van der Sluijs et al., 2004). There is thus a certain trade-off between integration and uncertainties. However, uncertainties do not increase linearly with integration. For example,
Putting integration in context
Applying the classification and characterization of information frameworks used throughout the analysis some conclusions can be drawn on the kind of frameworks that are used in chemical control in EU (Table 5).
Existing frameworks are strongly dominated by natural scientific contents and approaches, and hence risk information that can be made to fit quantitative approaches is relatively easily adopted and used also in management-oriented frameworks (Table 5). This also means that further
Acknowledgements
This paper has been produced as a deliverable in the EU Integrated Project NoMiracle (Novel Methods for Integrated Risk Assessment of Cumulative Stressors in Europe). Additional support for the work has been obtained from SYKE. The inputs of Jari Lyytimäki, Ad Ragas and two anonymous referees are gratefully acknowledged.
Timo Assmuth Studied geology and chemistry in University of Turku and environmental sciences in University of Helsinki, earning his PhD on risk assessment of contaminated sites. He is a Senior Researcher at the Finnish Environmental Institute where he has worked for over 20 years mainly on wastes, soil, chemicals and risks. Current research interests include comparative risk analysis, health, history of ideas, science policy, and psychological and cultural studies related to environmental
References (93)
- et al.
Integrated assessment of contaminated sediments in the lower Fox River and Green Bay, Wisconsin
Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf.
(1992) - et al.
Addressing uncertainty in environmental modelling: a case study of integrated assessment of strategies to combat long-range transboundary air pollution
Atmos. Environ.
(2002) - et al.
Integrative risk and uncertainty analysis for complex public sector operational systems
Socio-Econ. Plann. Sci.
(1999) A new approach to risk assessment integrating scientific evaluation and economic assessment of costs and benefits
Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol.
(1996)- et al.
Integrating technical analysis and public values in risk-based decision making
Rel. Eng. Syst. Saf.
(1998) - et al.
Risk terminology—a platform for common understanding and better communication
J. Hazard. Mater.
(2003) - et al.
Integrating human health and ecological concerns in risk assessments
J. Hazard. Mater.
(2000) Trends in risk assessment and risk management
Sci. Total Environ.
(2000)Integrated risk assessment and management: overview and state of the art
J. Hazard. Mater.
(1998)- et al.
Evaluating the risk decision process
Toxicology
(2006)
Ethical aspects of scientific incertitude in environmental analysis and decision making
J. Cleaner Product.
Holistic risk assessment: an emerging process for environmental decisions
Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol.
Population risk and physiological rate parameters for colon cancer. The union of an explicit model for carcinogenesis with the public health records of the United States
Mutat. Res./Fundam. Mol. Mech. Mutagen.
Level of detail in ecological risk assessments
Mar. Pollut. Bull.
Meaning and contextualisation in risk assessment
Rel. Eng. Syst. Saf.
Are societal judgments being incorporated into the uncertainty factors used in toxicological risk assessment?
Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol.
The political science of risk perception
Rel. Eng. Syst. Saf.
The Bayesian population approach to physiological toxicokinetic–toxicodynamic models––an example using the MCSim software
Toxicol. Lett.
Standardization of procedures and structures for risk evaluation in Germany—the work of the Risk Commission
Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health.
A new perspective on Renn and Klinke's approach to risk evaluation and management
Rel. Eng. Syst. Saf.
Indicators of uncertainty in chemical risk assessments
Regulat. Toxicol. Pharmacol.
Risk assessment dosimetry model for inhaled particulate matter. Part I. Human subjects
Toxicol. Lett.
Assessing aggregate and cumulative pesticide risks using a probabilistic model
Ann. Occup. Hyg.
A comparison between integrated risk assessment and classical health/environmental assessment: emerging beneficial properties
Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol.
Adapting ecological risk assessment for ecosystem valuation
Ecol. Econ.
Methylmercury and the health of indigenous peoples: a risk management challenge for physical and social sciences and for public health policy
Sci. Total. Environ.
Holistic risk-based environmental decision making: a native perspective
Environ. Health Perspect.
Dynamic risk zoom: combining wide angle with focus and depth-of-field for use-sensitive integrated assessment.
What do experts and stakeholders think about chemical risks and uncertainties?—an Internet survey
Finn. Environ.
Risk assessment—the mother of all uncertainties. Disciplinary perspectives on uncertainty in risk assessment
Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci.
Bayesian uncertainty assessment in multicompartment deterministic simulation models for environmental risk assessment
Environmetrics
Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity
A reflexive approach to dealing with uncertainties in environmental health risk science and policy
Int. J. Risk Assess. Manage.
Risk and Blame—Essays in Cultural Theory
Integration of effects-based and stressor-based approaches into a holistic framework for cumulative effects assessment in aquatic ecosystems
Human Ecol. Risk Assess.
Cited by (42)
Building risk precontrol management systems for safety in China's underground coal mines
2021, Resources PolicyCitation Excerpt :It strives for an optimal balance among “People”, “Machine”, “Environment”, and “Institution” (Liu and Li, 2014; Liu et al., 2016) by developing targeted control standards and measures. Moreover, it takes hazards identification and risk assessment as its basis, risk precontrol as its core, and humans’ unsafe behaviour controls as its focus (Assmuth and Hilden, 2008; Canbulat et al., 2013; Kirsch et al., 2015). More specifically, the Specification (AQ/T 1093–2011) is composed of four main parts—namely, scope, normative reference documents, terms and definitions, and management elements and requirements.
Implementing Bayesian networks for ISO 31000:2018-based maritime oil spill risk management: State-of-art, implementation benefits and challenges, and future research directions
2021, Journal of Environmental ManagementCitation Excerpt :However, the conventional risk management approaches, such that predominantly rely on the traditional, two-dimensional, risk definition, may not be the most suitable for assessing systemic risks characterized by complexity, high levels of uncertainty, and ambiguity (Aven and Renn 2010; ; Döll and Romero-Lankao 2017; Sperotto et al., 2017). Therefore, comprehensive risk management approaches based on stakeholder participation are needed, where the various sources of risk, the system interactions, as well as uncertainties related to the system, are considered in a systematic and iterative manner (Assmuth and Hilden 2008; Pollino and Hart 2008). Likewise, the need for new and integrated ways to assess and manage oil spill risks is increasingly highlighted due to the systemic and complex nature of the risks (IMO 2010; Davies and Hope 2015; Laine et al., 2018; Sepp Neves et al., 2015).
Development of indices for sustainability of transportation systems: A review of state-of-the-art
2020, Ecological IndicatorsThe science, policy and practice of nature-based solutions: An interdisciplinary perspective
2017, Science of the Total EnvironmentCo-constructing inclusive knowledge within converging fields: Environmental governance and health care
2015, Environmental Science and PolicyCitation Excerpt :For instance, KB tools in environmental health often focus on only one environmental stressor or one disease, calling for greater integration (cf. Liu et al., 2012). However, the principles and procedures also in evaluating evidence and knowledge may differ much between these sectors, depending on the context (cf. Assmuth and Hildén, 2008; Assmuth et al., 2010) so that categorical integration is not justified. The integrative solutions also depend on the administrative configurations and resources that have historical, structural and other contextual determinants.
Timo Assmuth Studied geology and chemistry in University of Turku and environmental sciences in University of Helsinki, earning his PhD on risk assessment of contaminated sites. He is a Senior Researcher at the Finnish Environmental Institute where he has worked for over 20 years mainly on wastes, soil, chemicals and risks. Current research interests include comparative risk analysis, health, history of ideas, science policy, and psychological and cultural studies related to environmental issues. He is an adjunct professor in University of Helsinki.
Mikael Hildén is a professor and Programme Director of the Research Department at the Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE). He has a PhD in Ecology/Resource Management based on the analysis of the importance of uncertainties in management. He has more than 20 years of experience in environmental research, management and training. His recent work has been related to environmental policy analysis and evaluation, with a focus on effects of policies on environmentally significant innovations.