Trends in the Development of Ecological Risk Assessment and Management Frameworks

Ecological risk assessment and management have grown from a long history of assessment and management activities aimed at improving the everyday lives of humans. The background against which ecological risk assessment and management has developed is discussed and recent trends in the development of risk assessment and management frameworks documented. Seven frameworks from five different countries are examined. All maintain an important role for science, suggest adaptive approaches to decision-making and have well-defined analytical steps. Differences in approaches toward the separation of policy and science, the preference for management over assessment, the inclusion of stakeholders, the iterative nature of the analytical cycle, the use of decision criteria and economic information suggest considerable evolution in framework design over time. Despite the changes, no consensus on the design of a framework is apparent and work remains to be done on refining an integrative framework that effectively incorporates both policy and science considerations for environmental management purposes.     

An aggregation framework to link indicators associated with multifunctional land use to the stakeholder evaluation of policy options

In the last decade efforts have been carried out by the scientific community aimed at building integrated frameworks to support the decision-making process when sustainability issues are addressed. This paper proposes a further advancement in integrated assessment procedures by setting up an operational multi-scale and transparent framework, which comprises the assessment of European regions in terms of sustainability, and the identification of the impact that policy options might have on the sustainability of these regions. The framework is designed for use in ex ante sustainability impact assessment of policy scenarios on multifunctionality of land use and integrates economic, environmental and social issues across a variety of sectors (agriculture, forestry, transport, tourism and energy). The proposed method provides a conceptual framework applicable at different scales (European, regional), and takes into account the great variability of European regions. The described methodology is based on linear additive models to weight and aggregate selected indicators to a set of land use functions identified to describe the goods and services provided by the different land uses that summarise the most relevant economic, environmental and social issues of a region. The framework is designed to allow the evaluation of impacts at an international scale (e.g. the European Union), or on selected regions.The aggregation framework can be used to evaluate the impact that policy options have on the sustainability of multifunctional land use systems with competing demands. A conceptual envelope, called the “trade-off evaluation space”, delineates all possible developments in the functions of the land. The sustainability limits identify the subset of ‘acceptable’ policy options within the trade-off evaluation space, so that the distance of each land use function from sustainability limits can be estimated and trade-offs between the different functions of the multifunctional land use system can be identified. The proposed methodology is adaptable to different contexts: if the assumption is taken that all land use functions are equally weighted the framework can be used to analyse policy cases and take decisions on policy options at the European or regional level. However, at the local-scale the framework can also be applied through a participatory approach and the distribution of weights can be rediscussed with local stakeholders. In both cases the proposed system can be used as a tool for discussion among all interested parties.     

Farming system design for innovative crop-livestock integration in Europe

The development of integrated crop–livestock systems (ICLS) is a major challenge for the ecological modernisation of agriculture but appears difficult to implement at a large scale. A participatory method for ICLS design has been developed and implemented in 15 case studies across Europe, representing a range of production systems, challenges, constraints and resources for innovation. Local stakeholders, primarily farmers, but also cooperatives, environmental-association representatives and natural-resource managers, were involved in the identification of challenges and existing initiatives of crop-livestock integration; in the design of new options at field, farm and territory levels; and then in qualitative multicriteria assessment of these options. A conceptual framework based on a conceptual model (crops, grasslands, animals) was developed to act as a boundary object in the design step and invite innovative thinking in ‘metabolic’ and ‘ecosystemic’ approaches. A diversity of crops and grasslands interacting with animals appeared central for designing sustainable farming systems at the territory level, providing and benefitting from ecosystem services. Within this diversity, we define three types of integrated systems according to their degrees of spatial and temporal coordination: complementarity, local synergy, territorial synergy. Moreover, the options for cooperation and collective organisation between farmers and other stakeholders in territories to organise and manage this diversity of land use revealed opportunities for smart social innovation. The qualitative multicriteria assessment identified farmer workload as the main issue of concern while demonstrating expected benefits of ICLS simultaneously for economic, agronomic, environmental and social criteria. This study concludes that participatory design of ICLS based on a generic multi-level and multi-domain framework and a methodology to deal with a local context can identify new systems to be tested. Further assessment and redesign work will be performed in later stages of the European FP7 CANTOGETHER project.     

城市综合生态风险评价——以淮北市城区为例

城市面临复杂的生态风险,为了保障城市安全,需要对单一灾害或污染源的生态风险评估结果进行整合。基于城市复合生态系统特性,将当前城市地域常见的生态风险区分为自然灾害、环境污染及生态退化等3种主要类型,以土地利用单元作为风险受体,整合自然、人文、景观及环境因子,在现有生态风险评价研究方法基础上,构建了城市综合生态风险评价的空间分析框架。研究中选择淮北市城区作为研究区,针对研究区内存在的洪涝、干旱、水污染、大气污染、采煤塌陷及生态服务降低等生态风险类型,定量评价其空间差异,并提出相应的风险防范措施。案例分析结果表明,研究区综合生态风险较高的区域包括龙河、岱河、龙岱河与闸河等过境河流流经塌陷密集带的河段,北湖、东湖、中湖及南湖等人工湖泊沿岸,化家湖湖岸,及土型、新蔡、北杨新杨煤矿及其外围地区。由降低生态风险保障城市生态安全角度,在未来城市的整体规划中,建议结合城市外围绿地与城市内部的高风险区域,划设禁建或限建区域,共同构建淮北城市生态风险防范的空间结构。     

生态风险评价研究进展

20多年来,生态风险评价研究经历了从环境风险到生态风险到区域生态风险评价的发展历程,风险源由单一风险源扩展到多风险源,风险受体由单一受体发展到多受体,评价范围由局地扩展到区域景观水平.区域生态风险评价就是大尺度上研究复杂环境背景下包含多风险源、多风险受体的综合风险研究.目前,区域生态风险评价的理论框架已经搭建起来,统计方法多采用相对评价法.区域生态风险评价未来的发展方向为继续加强实验和野外调查,进一步减小不确定性,逐步解决尺度推移问题.区域生态风险评价必须与经济、社会、文化相结合,才能充分发挥它在管理决策中的作用.     

Plan for an Integrated Human and Environmental Risk Assessment in the S. Domingos Mine Area (Portugal)

The need for the integration of the assessment of human and ecological risks in contaminated areas, such as derelict mines, widely increases. The risk assessment process is becoming a powerful tool to provide sound scientific bases for decision-making processes. In Portugal, the risk assessment process is in its early years and the lack of multidisciplinary teams of experts is frequently mentioned as the main obstacle to its implementation. Therefore, the majority of the reclamation actions are based on impact assessment studies that usually are characterized by few biological and toxicological considerations. In order to account for some of these constraints, the ecological risk assessment framework proposed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was used to plan the assessment of human and ecological risks posed by the high concentrations of metals scattered in the vicinity of S. Domingos mine, a cuprous pyrite mine located in the Southeast Alentejo (Portugal). This study presents the problem formulation phase of the assessment. It includes all the scientific information available for the area, a conceptual model, and an analysis plan for the risk assessment process. Following a tiered approach, several tasks were planned in order to acquire chemical, toxicological, and ecological information, in order to compensate for the lack of toxicity data for site-specific species.     

Ecological assessment of groundwater ecosystems – Vision or illusion?

Environmental policy and in particular the European water legislation, in the framework of the EU Groundwater Directive, has started to consider groundwater not only as a resource but as a living ecosystem. A precondition for comprehensive groundwater protection is thus the assessment of the biological and ecological state. The assessment of ecosystems requires consideration of ecological criteria, which so far are not available for groundwater systems. In the framework of a national project, the German Federal Environment Agency (UBA) supports a consortium of scientists and stakeholders from water boards and regional environmental authorities to develop a first concept for an ecological assessment scheme for groundwater ecosystems. The attempts towards an integrative concept include the following steps: (i) selection of appropriate biological and ecological parameters, (ii) typology of groundwater ecosystems, (iii) derivation of a reference status (Leitbild) and natural background values for biological variables, (iv) identification of potential bioindicators and definition of threshold values, and (v) development of an assessment model. These proposed steps are discussed on the basis of a data set from two groundwater landscapes in Southern Germany. Investigations considered three different spatial units, i.e. the habitat unit at the local scale, and the aquifer type unit as well as the landscape unit at the regional scale. Fauna as well as bacterial communities could provide valuable ecological information on the ecosystems status. The paper reviews ‘state of the art’ knowledge and evaluates the near future perspectives for the development and implementation of groundwater ecosystems assessment programmes.     

A Strategy for Using Weight-of-Evidence Methods in Ecological Risk Assessments

Our review of existing approaches and regulatory uses of weight-of-evidence (WOE) methods suggested the need for a practical strategy for deploying WOE within a predictive ecological risk assessment (ERA). WOE is the process of considering strengths and weaknesses of various pieces of information in order to inform a decision being made among competing alternatives. A predictive ERA uses existing information relating cause and effect to estimate the probability that today's action X will lead to tomorrow's adverse outcome Y. There appears to be no practical guidance for use of WOE in predictive assessments. We therefore propose a strategy for using a WOE approach, within an ERA framework, to weigh and integrate outcomes from various lines of evidence to estimate the probability of an adverse outcome in an assessment endpoint. An ERA framework is necessary to connect the results of an assessment to the management goals of concern to decision-makers and stakeholders. Within that framework, a WOE approach provides a consistent and transparent means of interpreting the myriad types of data and information gathered during a complex ecological assessment. Impediments to application of WOE are discussed, including limited regulatory guidance, limited prior regulatory use, and persistent reliance on threshold-based decision-making.     

Integrated Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: A Case Study of Organophosphorous Pesticides in the Environment

This study was chosen as an example of integrated risk assessment because organophosphorous esters (OPs) share exposure characteristics for different species, including human beings and because a common mechanism of action can be identified. The “Framework for the integration of health and ecological risk assessment” is being tested against a deterministic integrated environmental health risk assessment for OPs used in a typical farming community. It is argued that the integrated approach helps both the risk manager and the risk assessor in formulating a more holistic approach toward the risk of the use of OP-esters. It avoids conclusions based on incomplete assessments or on separate assessments. The database available can be expanded and results can be expressed in a more coherent manner. In the integrated exposure assessment of OPs, the risk assessments for human beings and the environment share many communalities with regards to sources and emissions, distribution routes and exposure scenarios. The site of action of OPs, acetylcholinesterase, has been established in a vast array of species, including humans. It follows that in the integrated approach the effects assessment for various species will show communalities in reported effects and standard setting approaches. In the risk characterization, a common set of evidence, common criteria, and common interpretations of those criteria are used to determine the cause of human and ecological effects that co-occur or are apparently associated with exposure to OPs. Results of health and ecological risk assessments are presented in a common format that facilitates comparison of results. It avoids acceptable risk conclusions with regard to the environment, which are unacceptable with regard to human risk and vice versa. Risk managers will be prompted to a more balanced judgement and understanding and acceptance of risk reduction measures will be facilitated.     

Can we measure ecological sustainability? Landscape pattern as an indicator for naturalness and land use intensity at regional,national and European level

European landscapes have been shaped over the centuries by processes related to human land use, which are reflected in regionally distinct landscape patterns. Since landscape pattern has been linked to biodiversity and other ecological values of the landscapes, this paper explores landscape pattern as a tool for ecological sustainability assessments at the regional (Austrian Cultural Landscapes), national (Austria) and European (European Union + Norway, Switzerland) level with focus on agricultural landscapes. A set of landscape metrics served as a basis to assess naturalness and geometrisation of Austrian and European landscapes as a proxy for their sustainability. To achieve an accurate spatially explicit assessment, we applied a spatial reference framework consisting in units that are homogeneous in biophysical and socio-economic contexts, adapted the regional approach for its application at European level, and developed relative sustainability thresholds for the landscape metrics. The analyses revealed that several landscape metrics, particularly the “Number of Shape Characterising Points” showed a high correlation with the degree of naturalness. The sustainability map of Austria based on an ordinal regression model revealed well-known problem regions of ecological sustainability. At the European level, the relative deviation from the average pattern showed clearly the simplification processes in the landscapes. However, a better spatial resolution of land cover data would add to the refinement of pattern analysis in regions and therefore the assessment of sustainability. We recommend the combination of information of different scales for the formulation and implementation of sustainability policies.     

环渤海五省市生态风险评价

生态风险评价是近20年来兴起的一个研究热点,是地理学、生态学、环境风险评价等领域的综合交叉点。对生态风险进行研究,有助于了解研究区内的生态环境状况,从而降低生态风险,改善人地关系。环渤海地区是人地矛盾非常突出的典型区域。本文参考美国环保署(USEPA)的框架,根据相对风险评价模型的分级排序思想,评估环渤海五省市的单项及综合生态风险值。采用生态资产表征生态终点,进行风险受体的损失度量;通过构建评价指标体系,采用主成分分析和ArcGIS加权叠加的方法,进行受体环境的脆弱性评价;基于土地利用和植被斑块数据,利用景观格局指数法评价生态系统的结构易损性。结果表明:海陆交错带、山地丘陵区和城市是典型的高生态风险区域;低风险区域主要分布在地形、水热、植被状况好、灾害频次低的平原和部分丘陵地区。对于高风险的区域,做好风险防范至关重要。     

基于土地破坏的矿区生态风险评价:理论与方法

矿区生态风险评价已成为区域生态风险研究的热点领域。如何合理选择和表征区域生态风险源和风险受体,量化多风险源和多风险受体的交互作用,是目前区域生态风险评价研究的焦点。为此,在总结矿区生态风险评价研究成果的基础上,构建了矿区生态风险源、风险受体及作用对象与过程的因果链模型,结合矿区生态环境问题产生过程的独特性,将土地挖损、占用及塌陷等土地破坏作为矿区的直接生态风险源。基于土地破坏类型提出了适宜矿区的区域生态风险评价流程、指标体系与计算方法;并专门在定量化多风险源与多风险受体交互作用上做出探讨,构建了生态系统单元暴露指数和土地破坏累积作用指数来评价矿区土地破坏与生态系统单元间的暴露与危害作用关系。为矿区生态风险评价的实证研究提出了理论基础与方法框架,未来可结合实证研究对此方法及相关指标参数做出完善与改进,为矿区生态环境管理与生态安全建设提供科学的参考依据。     

Integrating Environmental Impact Assessment within Kuwait Master Plans as a Tool for Human and Ecological Risk Control

Although it was claimed that the Kuwait Master Plans have helped guide the development in Kuwait from a small mud brick town of 150,000 inhabitants to today's modern metropolis of about 3 million inhabitants, this article argues that the implementation of the first plan in 1952 planted the seeds of human and ecological risk problems in Kuwait, which were intensified later in the 1960s and 1970s. As the latest 2007 Master Plan comprises major development projects, which could certainly have adverse ecological impacts on the environment and human well-being, this article highlights the importance of integrating environmental impact assessment (EIA) and the development projects within the Master Plan as a tool for sustainable development and as an assessment of human and ecological risks before the implementation of such projects. According to the current status, the level of collaboration among the concerned organizations responsible for preparing the Master Plans and conducting the EIA is behind the ambition. This article recommends setting out documented environmental criteria for land use planning and major development projects implementation, so as to control pollution and prevent any environmental change that might impair the public's health or influence future ecological stability.     

Regional Eco-Security Assessment Based on the Perspective of Complex System Science: A Case Study of Chongming in China

The objective of this study is to evaluate eco-security of Chongming in China and identify eco-security grades of the relevant subareas. In addition, the study aims to put forward the framework for a regional eco-security assessment system that is suitable for the analysis and evaluation of a man–land complex ecosystem. From the perspective of complex system science, this study puts forward the ANP-PRS-SENCE framework for a regional eco-security assessment. Based on the framework, a compressive assessment index system and a spatial variation assessment index system for Chongming's eco-security were established. Additionally, the eco-security threshold of Chongming was determined through the approach of system dynamics simulation. The assessment results show that in recent years the comprehensive score of eco-security has been on a gradual rise. With respect to the second-grade indices, the ecological risk and ecological protection indices are still relatively low. Therefore, in order to reduce the ecological risk, ecological construction needs to be strengthened and management measures need to be improved. The spatial variation assessment of eco-security shows that although the eco-security levels of most subareas remain between 0.3 and 0.6, regional variations are still quite obvious.     

The potential role of life cycle assessment in regulation of chemicals in the European union

Scope and Background  This paper presents the preliminary results from an ongoing feasibility study, investigating potential application of elements from the life cycle assessment (LCA) framework in European chemicals’ policy. Many policy areas affect manufacturing, marketing and use of chemicals. This article focuses on the general chemical legislation, especially issues related to regulatory risk assessment and subsequent decisions on risk reduction measures. Method  Current and upcoming chemical regulation has been reviewed and empirical knowledge has been gained from an ongoing case study and from dialogues with various stakeholders. Results and Discussion  LCAs are comparative and more holistic in view as compared to chemical risk assessments for regulatory purposes¹. LCAs may therefore potentially improve the basis for decisions between alternatives in cases where a risk assessment calls for risk reduction. In this process, LCA results might feed into a socio-economic analysis having similar objectives, but some methodological aspects related to system boundaries need to be sorted out. Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) of toxic effects has traditionally been inspired by the more regulatory-orientated risk assessment approaches. However, the increasing need for regulatory priority setting and comparative/ cumulative assessments might in the future convey LCIA principles into the regulatory framework. The same underlying databases on inherent properties of chemicals are already applied in both types of assessment. Similarly, data on the use and exposure of chemicals are needed within both risk assessments and LCA, and the methodologies might therefore benefit from a joint ‘inventory’ database. Outlook  The final outcome of the feasibility study will be an implementation plan suggesting incorporation of core findings in future chemical regulation and related policy areas.     

美国、加拿大环境和健康风险管理方法

对目前美国和加拿大多个部门使用的风险评价与风险管理方法进行了全面回顾和综合分析,论述各种不同方法的特征,深入探讨各种管理方法的基础、利弊、使用经验,辨识环境、人类健康和职业健康风险综合方法中应该包含的要素,阐述风险管理目标的确定方法,以期为中国的环境风险管理提供经验。     

基于改进的“证据-权重法”评估污染土壤生态风险:以江苏靖江某电镀场地为例

污染场地土壤生态风险评估能够为准确制定土壤环境质量标准、污染土壤修复目标、土壤修复后效果评估及安全利用提供科学依据,是保障土壤健康和安全的重要手段。“证据-权重法”由于具有系统性、整体性和科学性的特点在风险评估中应用广泛。然而,当前“证据-权重法”大多依赖专家打分法进行权重设置,并且在实际操作中难以获得定量化的、信息全面的完整证据链,风险评估结果缺乏客观性和可比性。针对以上问题,本研究耦合美国EPA的四步法与层级法构建了“证据-权重法”污染场地土壤生态风险评估框架,统一了每个层级的评估方法与程序。采用多标准决策分析对权重进行定量化,通过预先设置证据链之间的层级来保证其相对独立性,基于基质试验和野外调查保证场地的针对性。最后,以靖江某电镀场地为案例进行实证研究,结果表明: 所构建的方法具有较强的可操作性,评估结果具有较高的客观性、科学性和准确性。     

基于综合生态风险的云贵高原土地利用优化与持续利用对策

以云贵高原地区为研究对象,综合考虑区域自然特征、生态背景和社会经济发展状况,建立了以自然灾害、人为活动、生态敏感性和生态服务功能重要性为主要风险因子的综合生态风险评价指标体系与模型,并计算出云贵高原地区土地开发利用综合生态风险指数。通过与DEM和土地利用类型数据进行空间叠置分析,最终得到云贵高原地区实际可利用土地面积约为3586 km~2,不足该地区国土面积的1%,主要分布在楚雄、红河、曲靖、昆明、黔南等地。为确保区域土地资源的可持续利用,提出对策建议:(1)要转变粗放、低效的用地方式,节约集约利用坝区可开发用地;(2)要及时转变城乡建设用地方式,因地制宜的推动工业项目、城镇建设向山坡、丘陵发展;(3)要加强可开发利用地区生态保护与建设,在推进低丘缓坡荒滩等未利用土地的开发利用过程中,将地质灾害和水土流失防治、生态环境保护置于优先地位,制定防治措施。通过云贵高原地区的案例研究,提出了综合生态风险评价的方法,为基于生态风险的土地利用格局优化提供了技术借鉴。     

基于生态系统服务和生态系统健康的生态风险评价——以长株潭城市群为例

基于生态系统服务和生态系统健康的生态风险评估框架为城市群生态风险管理和国土生态修复提供新的视角。以生态风险评估框架为基础,综合运用生态系统服务、生态系统健康评估模型以及相关分析法对长株潭城市群展开生态风险评价,并对风险程度进行分类。结果表明:(1)城市群的城市化水平提升,区域生态风险也随之增加。生态系统服务价值、生态系统组织、生态系统活力、生态系统弹性等生态指数呈现下降趋势。(2)人工表面比率和生态指数之间的Pearson相关系数表明,人工表面比率与生态指数之间存在负相关关系,人工表面比率是生态风险提升的关键因素。(3)城市群人工表面比率要控制在36%以下,以进行生态风险管理和国土生态修复。总的来说,评价框架可以作为区域生态风险的评价终点。