Ecological Risk
Assessment
Presented by
Sumyia Ashraf
Introduction
Agreat deal of environmental toxicology is performed with
the eventual goal of making a risk assessment.
Much of the research performed in the field is geared toward
the determination of the risk of producing a new product or
releasing a pesticide or effluent to the environment.
Because of the interaction between environmental toxicology
and risk assessment, a basic and clear understanding of
ecological risk assessment is necessary.
Two points should be considered carefully regarding the relationship between
environmental toxicology and risk assessment.
First, environmental toxicology should not be seen as dependent upon risk
assessment for its jus- tification. Risk assessment is a management tool used
for making decisions, often with a great deal of uncertainty.
The science of environmental toxicol- ogy, as with any science, attempts to
answer specific questions. In the case of environmental toxicology, the
question is primarily how xenobiotics will interact with the components of
ecological systems. Second, risk assessment is not a strictly scientific pursuit.
The endpoints of risk assessment are often set by societal perceptions and
values.
Basic risk assessment
Perhaps the easiest definition of ecological risk assessment is the probability
of an effect occurring to an ecological system. Note that the word "probabil-
ity" is key here. Important components of a risk assessment are the estima-
tions of hazard and exposure due to a stressor.
A stressor is a substance, circumstance, or energy field that causes impacts,
either positive or negative, upon a biological system. Stressors could be as
wide ranging as chemical effects, ionizing radiation, or rapid changes in
temperature. Hazard is the potential of a stressor to cause particular effects
upon a bio- logical system.
The determination of an LD50 or the mutagenicity of a mater- ial is an attempt
to estimate the hazard posed by a stresser
Exposure is a measure of the concentrations or
persistence of a stressor within the defined system.
Exposure can be expressed as a dose, but in envi-
ronmental toxicology it is often possible to measure
environmental concen- tration.
One of the advantages of determining tissue
concentrations in fish and mammals is that it is possible
to estimate the actual dose of a chemical to the organism.
Biomarkers may also provide clues to dosage .
Ecological risk Assessment
Two basic frameworks for ecological risk assessment have been proposed over
the last 10 years. The first wasbased upon the National Academy of Sciences
report detailing risk assessments for federal agencies.
Though simple, this framework forms the basis of human health and ecological
risk assessments. formulation determines the specific questions that are to be
asked during the risk assessment process. Second, the hazard assessment
details the biological effects of the stressor under examination. Simultaneously,
the exposure poten- tial of the material to the critical biological components is
calculated as part of an exposure assessment. Last, the probabilistic
determination of the likelihood of an effect is formalized as risk characterizations .
Ecological risk Assessment Framework
The ecological risk assessment framework
attempts to incorporate refinements to the
original ideas of risk assessment and apply them
to the general case of ecological risk
assessment.
Problem Formulation
The problem formulation component of the risk assessment process is, hope- fully,
the beginning of an iterative process. This critical step defines the question under
consideration and directly affects the scientific validity and policy-making usefulness
of the risk assessment. Initiation of the process can begin due to numerous causes
such as a request to introduce a new material into the environment, examination of
cleanup options for a previously conta- minated site, or as a component of
examining land use options.
The process of formulation is itself comprised of several subunits (Figure 12.3):
discus- sion between the risk assessor and risk manager, stressor characteristics,
iden- tification of the ecosystems potentially at risk, ecological effects, endpoint
selection, conceptual modeling, and input from data acquisition, verification, and
monitoring.
The design and selection of measurement endpoints should be
based on the following criteria
:Relevance to assessment endpoint
..Measurement of indirect
..Sensitivity and response time
..Signal-to-noise ratio
..Consistency with assessment endpoint exposures
Data Acquisition verification and monitoring
In the above outline the importance of the data acquisition, verification, and
monitoring process in the development of accurate risk assessments has been
emphasized. The importance of this aspect, often overlooked, is crucial to the
development of risk assessments that reflect ecological reality. Models, no matter
how sophisticated, are simply attempts to understand processes and codify
relationships in a very specific language. Ptolemaic (earth-centered) astronomy
accurately predicted many aspects of the stars and planets and served to make
accurate predictions of celestial events
. However, the revers- ing of direction in the celestial sphere of the planets was
difficult to account for, given the earth-centered model.
Eventually, the Copernican (sun- centered) model replaced
the Ptolemaic model as the description of solar sys- tem
dynamics, and the insights from the new framework led to
other discov- eries about the nature of gravity and the motion
of the planets. How many of our current models are earth-
centered? Only the reiteration of the predictive (risk
assessment) and experimental (data acquisition, verification,
and mon- itoring) process can answer that questions
A General model for Regional Risk Assessment
. List the important management goals for the region. What do you care about
and where?
2. Make a map. Include potential sources and habitats relevant to the
management goals.
3. Break the map into regions based upon a combination of managementgoals,
sources, and habitats.
4. Make a conceptual model that links sources of stressors to the recep- tors and
to the assessment endpoints.
5. Decide on a scheme to allow the calculation of relative risks to the assessment
endpoints.Calculate the relative risks.
. 7Evaluate uncertainty and sensitivity analysis of the relative
rankings.
8. Generate testable hypotheses for future field and
laboratory investi-. 8Generate testable hypotheses for future
field and laboratory investi- gation to reduce uncertainties
and to confirm the risk rankings.
9. Test the hypotheses listed in Step 8.
10. Communicate the results in a fashion that portrays the
relative risks
Life cycle Assessment is a decision making tool
Life-cycle assessment (LCA) is an additional assessment
approach for mak- ing environmental decisions. LCA can be
defined as an inventory of all the steps in the development,
manufacture, use, and disposal of a product or a commodity
with a determination of the environmental consequences
(Todd and Curan 1999). The purpose of an LCA is to provide
information to a deci- sion maker so that choices can be
made in the design of a manufacturing process to minimize
environmental impacts or risks.
Todd, J.A. and M.A. Curran. 1999. Streamlined Life-Cycle Assessment: A Final
Report from the SETAC North America Streamlined LCA Workgroup. Society of
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Pensacola, FL.
U.S. EPA. 1992. Framework for ecological risk assessment. Washington, D.C.
Risk Assessment Forum, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/630/
R-92/001.
U.S. EPA. 1994. Ecological risk assessment issue papers. Washington, D.C. Risk
Assessment Forum, US. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/630/R- 94/009.
U.S. EPA. 1998. U.S. EPA Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment. EPA/630/
R- 95/002F. Published on May 14, 1998, Federal Register 63(93): 26846-26924).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
U.S. EPA. 2000. Stressor Identification Guidance Document. EPA 822-B-00-025.
