TY - JOUR
T1 - Assessing chemical risk within an ecosystem services framework
T2 - Implementation and added value
AU - Maltby, Lorraine
AU - Brown, Ross
AU - Faber, Jack H.
AU - Galic, Nika
AU - Van den Brink, Paul J.
AU - Warwick, Oliver
AU - Marshall, Stuart
PY - 2021/10/15
Y1 - 2021/10/15
N2 - An ecosystem services (ES) approach to chemical risk assessment has many potential advantages, but there are also substantial challenges regarding its implementation. We report the findings of a multi-stakeholder workshop that evaluated the feasibility of adopting an ES approach to chemical risk assessment using currently available tools and data. Also evaluated is the added value such an approach would bring to environmental decision making. The aim was to build consensus across disparate stakeholders and to co-produce a common understanding of the regulatory benefits and feasibility of implementing an ES approach in European chemicals regulation. Workshop discussions were informed by proof of concept studies and resulted in the development of a novel tiered framework for assessing chemical risk to ES delivery. There was consensus on the substantial added value of adopting an ES-based approach for regulatory decision making. Ecosystem services provide a common currency and a ‘unifying approach’ across environmental compartments, stressors and regulatory frameworks. The ES approach informs prioritisation of risk and remedial action and aids risk communication and risk management. It facilitates a more holistic assessment, enables ES trade-offs to be compared across alternative interventions, and supports comparative risk assessments and a socio-economic analysis of management options and decisions. Key to realising this added value is a shift away from using a single threshold value to categorise risk, towards a consideration of the exposure-effect distribution for individual ES of interest. Also required is the development of an integrated systems-level approach across regulatory frameworks and agreement on specific protection goals and scenarios for framing environmental risk assessments. The need to further develop tools for extrapolating toxicity data to service providers and ES delivery, including logic chains and ecological production functions, was highlighted. Also agreed was the need for methods and metrics for ES valuation to be used in assessing trade-offs.
AB - An ecosystem services (ES) approach to chemical risk assessment has many potential advantages, but there are also substantial challenges regarding its implementation. We report the findings of a multi-stakeholder workshop that evaluated the feasibility of adopting an ES approach to chemical risk assessment using currently available tools and data. Also evaluated is the added value such an approach would bring to environmental decision making. The aim was to build consensus across disparate stakeholders and to co-produce a common understanding of the regulatory benefits and feasibility of implementing an ES approach in European chemicals regulation. Workshop discussions were informed by proof of concept studies and resulted in the development of a novel tiered framework for assessing chemical risk to ES delivery. There was consensus on the substantial added value of adopting an ES-based approach for regulatory decision making. Ecosystem services provide a common currency and a ‘unifying approach’ across environmental compartments, stressors and regulatory frameworks. The ES approach informs prioritisation of risk and remedial action and aids risk communication and risk management. It facilitates a more holistic assessment, enables ES trade-offs to be compared across alternative interventions, and supports comparative risk assessments and a socio-economic analysis of management options and decisions. Key to realising this added value is a shift away from using a single threshold value to categorise risk, towards a consideration of the exposure-effect distribution for individual ES of interest. Also required is the development of an integrated systems-level approach across regulatory frameworks and agreement on specific protection goals and scenarios for framing environmental risk assessments. The need to further develop tools for extrapolating toxicity data to service providers and ES delivery, including logic chains and ecological production functions, was highlighted. Also agreed was the need for methods and metrics for ES valuation to be used in assessing trade-offs.
KW - Chemical regulation
KW - Ecological models
KW - Environmental risk assessment
KW - Prospective
KW - Retrospective
KW - Tiered framework
U2 - 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148631
DO - 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148631
M3 - Article
C2 - 34243988
AN - SCOPUS:85103134662
SN - 0048-9697
VL - 791
JO - Science of the Total Environment
JF - Science of the Total Environment
M1 - 148631
ER -