Increased temperature and other environmental effects of global climate change (GCC) have documented impacts on many species (e.g., polar bears, amphibians, coral reefs) as well as on ecosystem processes and species interactions (e.g., the timing of predator–prey interactions). A challenge for ecotoxicologists is to predict how joint effects of climatic stress and toxicants measured at the individual level (e.g., reduced survival and reproduction) will be manifested at the population level (e.g., population growth rate, extinction risk) and community level (e.g., species richness, food-web structure). The authors discuss how population- and community-level responses to toxicants under GCC are likely to be influenced by various ecological mechanisms. Stress due to GCC may reduce the potential for resistance to and recovery from toxicant exposure. Long-term toxicant exposure can result in acquired tolerance to this stressor at the population or community level, but an associated cost of tolerance may be the reduced potential for tolerance to subsequent climatic stress (or vice versa). Moreover, GCC can induce large-scale shifts in community composition, which may affect the vulnerability of communities to other stressors. Ecological modeling based on species traits (representing life-history traits, population vulnerability, sensitivity to toxicants, and sensitivity to climate change) can be a promising approach for predicting combined impacts of GCC and toxicants on populations and communities. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2013;32:49–61. © 2012 SETAC
The ecosystem services (ES) concept holds much promise for environmental decision making. Even so, the concept has yet to gain full traction in the decisions and policies of environmental agencies in the United States, Europe, and elsewhere. In this paper we examine the opportunities for and implications of including ES in risk assessments and the risk management decisions that they inform. We assert that use of ES will: 1) lead to more comprehensive environmental protection; 2) help to articulate the benefits of environmental decisions, policies, and actions; 3) better inform the derivation of environmental quality standards; 4) enable integration of human health and ecological risk assessment; and 5) facilitate horizontal integration of policies, regulations, and programs. We provide the technical basis and supporting rationale for each assertion, relying on examples taken from experiences in the United States and European Union. Specific recommendations are offered for use of ES in risk assessment and risk management, and issues and challenges to advancing use of ES are described together with some of the science needed to improve the value of the ES concept to environmental protection. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2017;13:62-73. © 2016 SETAC.
Management strategies for addressing contaminated sediments can include a wide range of actions, ranging from no action, to the use of engineering controls, to the use of more aggressive, intrusive activities related to removing, containing, or treating sediments because of environmental or navigation considerations. Risk assessment provides a useful foundation for understanding the environmental benefits, residual hazards, and engineering limitations of different remedy alternatives and for identifying or ranking management options. This article, part of a series of panel discussion papers on sediment remediation presented at the Third International Conference on Remediation of Contaminated Sediments held 20-25 January 2005 in New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, reviews 2 types of risk that deserve careful consideration when evaluating remedy alternatives. The evaluation of remedy implementation risks addresses predominantly short-term engineering issues, such as worker and community health and safety, equipment failures, and accident rates. The evaluation of residual risks addresses predominantly longer-term biological and environmental issues, such as ecological recovery, bioaccumulation, and relative changes in exposure and effects to humans, aquatic biota, and wildlife. Understanding the important pathways for contaminant exposure, the human and wildlife populations potentially at risk, and the possible hazards associated with the implementation of different engineering options will contribute to informed decision making with regard to short- and long-term effectiveness, implementability, and potential environmental hazards.
Management strategies for addressing contaminated sediments can include a wide range of actions, ranging from no action, to the use of engineering controls, to the use of more aggressive, intrusive activities related to removing, containing, or treating sediments because of environmental or navigation considerations. Risk assessment provides a useful foundation for understanding the environmental benefits, residual hazards, and engineering limitations of different remedy alternatives and for identifying or ranking management options. This article, part of a series of panel discussion papers on sediment remediation presented at the Third International Conference on Remediation of Contaminated Sediments held 20-25 January 2005 in New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, reviews 2 types of risk that deserve careful consideration when evaluating remedy alternatives. The evaluation of remedy implementation risks addresses predominantly short-term engineering issues, such as worker and community health and safety, equipment failures, and accident rates. The evaluation of residual risks addresses predominantly longer-term biological and environmental issues, such as ecological recovery, bioaccumulation, and relative changes in exposure and effects to humans, aquatic biota, and wildlife. Understanding the important pathways for contaminant exposure, the human and wildlife populations potentially at risk, and the possible hazards associated with the implementation of different engineering options will contribute to informed decision making with regard to short-and long-term effectiveness, implementability, and potential environmental hazards.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.