Weight-of-evidence evaluation in environmental assessment: Review of qualitative and quantitative approaches

被引:187
作者
Linkov, Igor [1 ]
Loney, Drew [1 ,2 ]
Cormier, Susan [3 ]
Satterstrom, F. Kyle [4 ]
Bridges, Todd [1 ]
机构
[1] USA, Engn Res & Dev Ctr, Vicksburg, MS 39180 USA
[2] MIT, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA
[3] US EPA, Natl Ctr Environm Assessment, Cincinnati, OH 45268 USA
[4] Harvard Univ, Sch Engn & Appl Sci, Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
关键词
Weight of evidence; Environmental risk assessment; Ecological risk assessment; Human health risk assessment; multi-criteria decision analysis; ECOLOGICAL RISK-ASSESSMENT; MULTICRITERIA DECISION-ANALYSIS; CONTAMINATED SITES; SEDIMENT QUALITY; BIOAVAILABILITY; SELECTION; EXPOSURE; CRITERIA; SYSTEM; SOIL;
D O I
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.05.004
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Assessments of human health and ecological risk draw upon multiple types and sources of information, requiring the integration of multiple lines of evidence before conclusions may be reached. Risk assessors often make use of weight-of-evidence (WOE) approaches to perform the integration, whether integrating evidence concerning potential carcinogenicity, toxicity, and exposure from chemicals at a contaminated site, or evaluating processes concerned with habitat loss or modification when managing a natural resource. Historically. assessors have relied upon qualitative WOE approaches, such as professional judgment, or limited quantitative methods, such as direct scoring, to develop conclusions from multiple lines of evidence. Current practice often lacks transparency resulting in risk estimates lacking quantified uncertainty. This paper reviews recent applications of weight of evidence used in human health and ecological risk assessment. Applications are sorted based on whether the approach relies on qualitative and quantitative methods in order to reveal trends in the use of the term weight of evidence, especially as a means to facilitate structured and transparent development of risk conclusions from multiple lines of evidence. Published by Elsevier B.V.
引用
收藏
页码:5199 / 5205
页数:7
相关论文
共 58 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2007, ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSE
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1998, Federal Register
[3]  
[Anonymous], EPA630R98003
[4]  
Bardos P., 2003, Land Contamination Reclamation, V11, P15
[5]  
Bernoulli D., 1738, ECONOMETRICA, V22, P22, DOI DOI 10.2307/1909829.JSTOR1909829
[6]  
*CA OFF ENV HLTH H, RISK ASS
[7]   Traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) and scientific weight of evidence determinations [J].
Chapman, Peter M. .
MARINE POLLUTION BULLETIN, 2007, 54 (12) :1839-1840
[8]   Determining when contamination is pollution - Weight of evidence determinations for sediments and effluents [J].
Chapman, Peter M. .
ENVIRONMENT INTERNATIONAL, 2007, 33 (04) :492-501
[9]   Weight-of-evidence issues and frameworks for sediment quality (and other) assessments [J].
Chapman, PM ;
McDonald, BG ;
Lawrence, GS .
HUMAN AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT, 2002, 8 (07) :1489-1515
[10]   Should the sediment quality triad become a tetrad, a pentad, or possibly even a hexad? [J].
Chapman, PM ;
Hollert, H .
JOURNAL OF SOILS AND SEDIMENTS, 2006, 6 (01) :4-8