Application of a Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach for Ranking Environmental Risks Caused by Petrochemical Industries: A Case Study of a Sodium Carbonate Production Unit

The occurrence of accidents in petrochemical industries that cause environmental catastrophes has persuaded experts to use risk-oriented approaches. The approach is to rank the key elements of risk assessment by which the priority of each risk is specified compared to the other ones. The present study was performed to test the applicability of a multi-criteria decision-making approach for prioritizing environmental risks of a petrochemical complex in southwestern Iran. Accordingly, all risky activities of the Sodium Carbonate Production Unit (SCPU) were identified initially. Afterward, the relevant environmental components affected by the risky activities were specified. According to the specification, the most significant risks were shortlisted using experts’ judgment based on three criteria: “impact intensity,” “occurrence probability,” and the “extent of contamination dispersion in the environment.” The shortlisted environmental risks were then prioritized by the Method “Elimination et Choice Translating Reality (Elimination and Choice Expressing Reality)” abbreviated as ELECTRE. Based on the obtained results, “decreased air quality” and “manpower health threatening” are the top-priority risks while “poor quality of groundwater” was identified as the least priority risk. In a general conclusion, a multi-criteria decision-making approach is quite useful for assessing environmental risks of petrochemical industries.     

In Defense of Risk Assessment: A Reply to the Environmental Justice Movement's Critique

The environmental justice movement believes risk assessment is undemocratic. The movement believes risk assessment is a way of trading human health for profit and a means of legitimizing exposure to toxic chemicals. The movement considers risk assessment an evil industry and a tool developed by those who wish to oppress racial and ethnic minorities. These beliefs are wrong and the environmental justice movement is a Luddite enterprise. Risk assessment is a fundamentally democratic process and enables all people, regardless of race, ethnicity, income or social status, to enjoy the benefits of technology and also suffer its drawbacks within a framework of equality and democracy. “A savage servility slides by on grease.” -Robert Penn Warren For the Union Dead

     

Socioeconomic and Racial Disparities in Environmental Health: Is Risk Assessment Part of the Problem or Part of the Solution?

The term “environmental justice” is a relatively recent addition to the lexicon of public health and risk-based decision making. Although it is currently a prominent public policy issue, there is no consensus-derived definition, nor is there general agreement about viable mechanisms for putting worthwhile social goals (e.g., fairness, equity, and justice) into operation. Nevertheless, the concept of environmental justice has focused attention on important questions of whether economically and politically disadvantaged communities bear a disproportionate burden of environmental pollution, and whether past environmental policies, programs and practices have been fair and equitable. Among individuals and organizations involved with issues of environmental justice there is a spectrum of strong and often contradictory convictions about the nature and role of risk assessment. Critics are convinced it is part of the problem and are inclined to see it as an ethically suspect, resource-intensive, elitist, never-ending process used to maintain the status quo. Advocates, on the other hand, contend that risk assessment is an essential policy and regulatory tool for identifying, evaluating, and resolving instances of environmental injustice, and that it provides a unifying conceptual framework and a common language for constructive dialogue on the issue. This article argues that, in practice, risk assessment has contributed to both the reality and the perception of environmental justice problems because of the overly narrow and restricted manner in which it has been applied. In principle, however, risk assessment is part of the solution to environment injustices because it provides a beneficial construct for framing key questions and fostering constructive debate about how to answer them. Well-designed research studies and high-quality risk assessments are necessary to define the dimensions of the problem, to understand the root causes, and to identify effective, efficient, and equitable solutions. Ultimately, attaining the goal of environmental justice depends on putting risk assessment principles into practice.     

The properties of global risk networks and corresponding risk management strategies

Global risks interconnect with one another and threaten our society as a highly interdependent system. However, knowledge on how risk materializations influence one another is limited. Thus, this study provides a network model to measure risk interdependence and presents recommendations on the integrative risk management framework.

This study develops a global risk network and calculates its key indicators of structural characteristics. Results show that global risks are closely interconnected and a particular triangle relationship exists among environmental, geopolitical, and societal risks. To improve the resilience of a risk system, the systematic important risks, which are “man-made environmental catastrophes” and “interstate conflict” in this study, should be monitored and controlled. Furthermore, we simplify the risk system by entirely managing risks in the same group based on our reclassification. Our method is considerably effective in detecting upcoming crisis and assists supervisors take timely action to prevent crisis.     

Risk Assessment of Human Activities on Protected Areas: A Case Study

No study has been done on the impact of anthropogenic risks on protected areas. This may be due to complexity and diversity of risk assessment indices. In this research, using multicriteria decision-making methods, qualitative and complex indices were converted to simple and quantitative indices by which anthropogenic risks affecting the Helleh Protected Area in Iran were analyzed. To this end, a questionnaire was prepared and delivered to Delphi panelists consisting of environmental expertise. In order to prioritize the identified risks, Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), and Simple Additive Weighting Technique (SAW) were used as a subset of Multiple Attribute Decision-making methods (MADM). In this study, risk factors were evaluated using three criteria of severity, probability of occurrence, and sensitivity of the recipient environment. In order to reach enough transcendence (consensus on priority of risks), an integrated approach comprising average, Borda, and Copeland methods was used. The obtained results suggested that “dam inundation upstream of the study area” is a top-priority risky factor threatening the wetland. “Stopping water pumps from the wetland” and “use of modern irrigation systems” were recommended as the most effective managerial strategies to control the identified risk.     

Analysis of Determining Factors of the Public's Risk Acceptance Level in China

This work will characterize risk acceptance in China, based on the psychometric paradigm, and explore the determining factors that influence the risk acceptable level to the Chinese public. For this purpose, a survey was conducted including 12 hazards, 10 risk attributes (including risk acceptance), and demographic variables. First, the research attempted to explore Nanjing citizens’ average risk acceptable level for 12 hazards in China. Second, intercorrelation analysis and factor analysis of nine risk attributes were performed to obtain the suitable risk perception factors as independent variables. Three risk perception models of acceptance were constructed, which were named “Environmental risk model,” “Daily risk model,” and “Technical risk model,” that explained 59.0–69.6% of variance separately. In general, the variables of Knowledge, Benefit, and Trust were found to be significant in all models, implying that these variables are the main determining factors. However, in the environmental risk model, the variable of effect was also significant, which means the determining factors would change for different types of hazards. These results could help the Chinese government to improve the communication of risks with the public and make effective mitigation policies to improve people's rational judgment on the acceptability of risks.     

Assessing the Environmental Risks of Silver from Clothes in an Urban Area

The environmental risks from the use of silver-containing clothes (“silver clothes”) were assessed for an urban area. First, we evaluated whether the use of silver clothes may cause contamination of wastewater treatment sludge that exceeds certain risk thresholds. Second, we assessed the risk of silver exposure to earthworms from applying the sludge as fertilizer to agricultural land. The most critical parameter was the concentration of silver in silver clothes, for which estimates in the literature vary by more than five orders of magnitude. For concentrations at the high end of that parameter range, there is considerably increased concentration of silver in the sludge, and toxic effects on earthworms even at modest use rates of silver clothes suggest high risk. At the low end, no risks can be expected. The main recommendation from this study is that if silver is used in clothes, the silver concentration must be kept at the lower end of the range applied in this study if risks are to be avoided. This can be done either by design choices of companies, or by regulation. If the function of the applied silver is not maintained at these lower levels, the use of silver clothes should be minimized.     

An Environmental Justice Paradigm For Risk Assessment

Environmental justice poses dramatic challenges to the field of risk assessment. Risk assessment techniques can either benefit or harm the cause for environmental justice, depending upon how they are deployed. If such techniques are used within the context of community leadership, with sensitivity to community needs and priorities, and with an understanding of the limitations of these techniques, then there are many practical and useful applications. In contrast, when risk assessment technologies are used by corporate and government elites that are not accountable to the communities in which risks are present or proposed, such techniques often exacerbate existing inequalities in the distribution of risks and benefits. This article explores the evidence behind these hypotheses, and their implications for the fields of risk assessment and environmental justice.

     

Raw material criticality assessment as a complement to environmental life cycle assessment: Examining methods for product‐level supply risk assessment

The diversity of raw materials used in modern products, compounded by the risk of supply disruptions—due to uneven geological distribution of resources, along with socioeconomic factors like production concentration and political (in)stability of raw material producing countries—has drawn attention to the subject of raw material “criticality.” In this article, we review the state of the art regarding the integration of criticality assessment, herein termed “product‐level supply risk assessment,” as a complement to environmental life cycle assessment. We describe and compare three methods explicitly developed for this purpose—Geopolitical Supply Risk (GeoPolRisk), Economic Scarcity Potential (ESP), and the Integrated Method to Assess Resource Efficiency (ESSENZ)—based on a set of criteria including considerations of data sources, uncertainties, and other contentious methodological aspects. We test the methods on a case study of a European‐manufactured electric vehicle, and conclude with guidance for appropriate application and interpretation, along with opportunities for further methodological development. Although the GeoPolRisk, ESP, and ESSENZ methods have several limitations, they can be useful for preliminary assessments of the potential impacts of raw material supply risks on a product system (i.e., “outside‐in” impacts) alongside the impacts of a product system on the environment (i.e., “inside‐out” impacts). Care is needed to not overlook critical raw materials used in small amounts but nonetheless important to product functionality. Further methodological development could address regional and firm‐level supply risks, multiple supply‐chain stages, and material recycling, while improving coverage of supply risk characterization factors.     

Identification of Risks in the Life Cycle of Nanotechnology‐Based Products

In order to realize the projected market potential of nanotechnology, the environmental, health, and safety (EHS) uncertainties posed by a nano‐product (i.e., a nanotechnology‐enabled product) need to be characterized through the identification of risks and opportunities in early stages of product development. We present a methodology to identify risks from nano‐products using a scenario analysis approach that allows for expert elicitation on a set of preidentified use and disposal scenarios and what we have labeled “risk triggers” to obtain scores on their likelihood of occurrence and severity. Use and disposal scenarios describe product life‐cycle stages that could result in risk attributed to the nano‐product, whereas risk triggers are particular to nanoparticle properties. These are potential risks, as the risk assessment community is currently debating the specific risks attributed to nanotechnology. Through such a framework, our goal is to identify which products pose greater risks, where these risks occur in the product life cycle, and the impacts of these environmental risks on society. The comparison of risk triggers across nano‐products allows relative risk ranking on axes of exposure‐ and hazard‐related risk triggers. For the specific case of air fresheners, areas of acute risks resulted from bioavailability of nanoparticles in air release and water entrainment exposure scenarios; catalytic activity of nanoparticles in inhalation and air release exposure scenarios; the harmful effects due to the antibacterial property on useful bacteria particularly in susceptible populations; and, finally, risks from the lack of nanoparticle coating stability in air release scenarios.     

Territory surveillance and prey management: Wolves keep track of space and time

Identifying behavioral mechanisms that underlie observed movement patterns is difficult when animals employ sophisticated cognitive‐based strategies. Such strategies may arise when timing of return visits is important, for instance to allow for resource renewal or territorial patrolling. We fitted spatially explicit random‐walk models to GPS movement data of six wolves (Canis lupus; Linnaeus, 1758) from Alberta, Canada to investigate the importance of the following: (1) territorial surveillance likely related to renewal of scent marks along territorial edges, to reduce intraspecific risk among packs, and (2) delay in return to recently hunted areas, which may be related to anti‐predator responses of prey under varying prey densities. The movement models incorporated the spatiotemporal variable “time since last visit,” which acts as a wolf's memory index of its travel history and is integrated into the movement decision along with its position in relation to territory boundaries and information on local prey densities. We used a model selection framework to test hypotheses about the combined importance of these variables in wolf movement strategies. Time‐dependent movement for territory surveillance was supported by all wolf movement tracks. Wolves generally avoided territory edges, but this avoidance was reduced as time since last visit increased. Time‐dependent prey management was weak except in one wolf. This wolf selected locations with longer time since last visit and lower prey density, which led to a longer delay in revisiting high prey density sites. Our study shows that we can use spatially explicit random walks to identify behavioral strategies that merge environmental information and explicit spatiotemporal information on past movements (i.e., “when” and “where”) to make movement decisions. The approach allows us to better understand cognition‐based movement in relation to dynamic environments and resources.     

Americans' Nanotechnology Risk Perception:

Although proposed nanotechnology applications hold great promise, little is known about the potential associated risks. This lack of clarity on the level of risk associated with nanotechnology has forced people to make decisions about consumption with incomplete information. A national random digit dialing telephone survey (N= 1014) was conducted in the United States to assess knowledge of nanotechnology and perception of risk in August 2006. This investigation looks critically at individuals' responses to questions about the balance of risks and benefits of nanotechnology, both at the outset of the survey and after respondents were given a brief introduction to the potential benefits and risks of the technology. Models were created to characterzise respondents who said they did not know how nanotechnology's risks and benefits balanced in the “preinformation” condition but who, in the postinformation condition, had a different opinion. Respondents who were highly educated, members of the Republican Party, or male were more likely to switch from “don't know” in the preinformation condition to “benefits outweigh risks” in the postinformation condition, whereas respondents who were less educated, members of the Democratic Party, or female were more likely to switch from “don't know” in the preinformation condition to “risks outweigh benefits” in the postinformation condition. This is the first study to our knowledge to develop a significant model of nanotechnology risk perception change, specifically with regard to gender differences. The power of information provision to sway opinions is also supported, highlighting the importance of developing educational efforts targeting vulnerable populations.     

Defining risk: Normative considerations

The public thinks about (i.e., defines) environmental human health risks in different terms than the “experts.”; And because the manner in which we conceive of risk goes a long way in determining how risk management is conceived and carried out, any definition of risk has important normative elements. I argue that environmental policy based on the public's conception of risk fails to adequately protect fundamental human rights to health and liberty, by taking undue account of certain psychological factors that enter into the public's perception of risk. A survey of some of these factors is offered in an attempt to determine their policy relevance. The traditional scientific conception of risk, although not adequate to entirely define risk policy, serves as an important anchor for the protection of these rights by focusing on the probability or number of adverse health effects.     

Environmental,health, and safety risks of the power lines nearby the human settlements

Advances in technology have not always been in favor of human beings and can lead to the emergence of “emerging contaminants” in human dwellings. These contaminants have taken a new form that is colorless, tasteless, and odorless and invisibly pollute the environment. Due to being intangible, their control and measurement are more difficult than the other types of pollutants. This study is an attempt to identify and assess the risks induced by high-voltage power lines crossing a residential area in southern Iran. To this end, the process of power transmission and the equipment used was initially identified. Afterward, the failure modes of the equipment resulting in the occurrence of risk were detected. In order to measure the strength of the magnetic field, the 3D EMF TESTER was used. The identified risks were scored based on the Environmental failure mode and effects analysis (EFMEA) parameters and a risk priority number (RPN) was assigned to each risk. In the final step, SPSS version 16 software was applied to calculate the risk level and identify the top priority risks. The highest RPN values obtained were related to the health risks so that all identified risks in this group were subjected to an emergency situation. The highest RPN was 360 assigned to “cable (no privacy)” and “power transmission line (non-compliance with privacy standards)”, while the lowest RPN was 60 subjected to disconnect switch (disconnector). Since majority of the identified risks has a high RPN, some mitigating measures were proposed to reduce the risk intensities as much as possible.     

Comparative Risk Assessment Methods and Their Applicability to Dredged Material Management Decision-Making

This article reviews the status of comparative risk assessment within the context of environmental decision-making; evaluates its potential application as a decision-making framework for selecting alternative technologies for dredged material management; and makes recommendations for implementing such a framework. One of the most important points from this review for decision-making is that comparative risk assessment, however conducted, is an inherently subjective, value-laden process. There is some objection to this lack of total scientific objectivity (“hard version” of comparative risk assessment). However, the “hard versions” provide little help in suggesting a method that surmounts the psychology of choice in decision-making schemes. The application of comparative risk assessment in the decision-making process at dredged material management facilities will have an element of value and professional judgment in the process. The literature suggests that the best way to incorporate this subjectivity and still maintain a defensible comparative framework is to develop a method that is logically consistent and allows for uncertainty by comparing risks on the basis of more than one set of criteria, more than one set of categories, and more than one set of experts. It should incorporate a probabilistic approach where necessary and possible, based on management goals.     

Social Determinants of Health in Environmental Justice Communities: Examining Cumulative Risk in Terms of Environmental Exposures and Social Determinants of Health

Residents of environmental justice (EJ) communities may bear a disproportionate burden of environmental health risk, and often face additional burdens from social determinants of health. Accounting for cumulative risk should include measures of risk from both environmental sources and social determinants. This study sought to better understand cumulative health risk from both social and environmental sources in a disadvantaged community in Texas. Key outcomes were determining what data are currently available for this assessment, clarifying data needs, identifying data gaps, and considering how those gaps could be filled. Analyses suggested that the traditionally defined EJ community in Port Arthur may have a lower environmental risk from air toxics than the rest of the City of Port Arthur (although the entire city has a higher risk than the average for the state), but may have a larger burden from social determinants of health. However, the results should be interpreted in light of the availability of data, the definitions of community boundaries, and the areal unit utilized. Continued focus on environmental justice communities and the cumulative risks faced by their residents is critical to protecting these residents and, ultimately, moving toward a more equitable distribution and acceptable level of risk throughout society.     

An Evaluation of Risk Drivers from a Sample of Risk Assessments Conducted for the U.S. Army

We evaluate risk drivers at selected U.S. Army installations by developing a database containing contaminant-pathway-receptor combinations that exceed regulatory thresholds for ecological (toxicity quotient greater than one), human health cancer risk (predicted incremental lifetime cancer risk greater than one in ten thousand), and noncancer human health (hazard index greater than one). We compare the risk drivers from the database to reported corrective action objectives from available decision documents. For noncancer hazards, explosives (particularly in ground water) dominate the reported exceedances of regulatory thresholds in the database. PAHs in home-grown produce show the highest number of exceedances of regulatory thresholds for cancer risk. For ecological risks, PAHs in both terrestrial and aquatic environments dominate the exceedances of regulatory thresholds. All available cleanup levels were derived based on human health exposures rather than ecological exposures, except for one site. In general, ecological risks were considered to be “more uncertain,” and that was used as a basis for not relying on backcalculated target levels on the basis of ecological risk. The reverse was true for human health risks: the “conservative” assumptions incorporated into the modeling provided the justification for backcalculating health-protective target levels.     

“Solution-Focused Risk Assessment”: A Proposal for the Fusion of Environmental Analysis and Action

For 30 years, more attention and resources have been expended on dissecting problems (risk assessment) than on evaluating actual solutions that reduce risks. The basic dogma holds that risk assessment must precede risk management. But there is an opposite and perhaps better way: the opening question should not be “How bad is the problem?” but “How good are the solutions we might apply to the problem?” Rethinking risk assessment in this context offers three classes of benefits over the status quo. First, it can help break the endless cycle of analysis: when the goal is to know enough to decide, rather than to know everything, natural stopping points emerge. Second, it can lead to more decisions that actually achieve risk reduction, rather than pronouncements about how much risk reduction would be optimal. Third, it can highlight ways to resolve multiple risks simultaneously, avoid needless and tragic risk-risk tradeoffs, and involve affected stakeholders in debating what should be done. Arguably, the longer the disembodied analysis of risk information is allowed to proceed, the more likely it is that the “problem” will be defined in a way that blunts the free-wheeling discussion of solutions, to the detriment of human health, the environment, and the economy.     

Risk Analysis,Uncertainty Factors,and the Susceptibilities of Children

This article examines the use of uncertainty factors (UFs) by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) when developing health guidance values known as minimal risk levels (MRLs) in environmental risk analysis as it applies to children. Improvements in the chemical-specific databases often reveal new information and thereby reduce uncertainty or alternatively raise new concerns. As a result, MRLs can and will change. Children, in particular, are not “small adults” and in some instances demonstrate greater risks of exposure to environmental toxicants and greater susceptibility for adverse health effects once exposed. Recent experience with risk analysis for three toxicants (organic mercury, dioxin, and manganese) is recounted to demonstrate how ATSDR has revised MRLs as the emerging science generates greater knowledge and awareness of children's special vulnerabilities to toxic substances in the environment.