Use of Multicriteria Decision Analysis to Support Weight of Evidence Evaluation

Abstract

Weight of evidence (WOE) methods are key components of ecological and human health risk assessments. Most WOE applications rely on the qualitative integration of diverse lines of evidence (LOE) representing impact on ecological receptors and humans. Recent calls for transparency in assessments and justifiability of management decisions are pushing the community to consider quantitative methods for integrated risk assessment and management. This article compares and contrasts the type of information required for application of individual WOE techniques and the outcomes that they provide in ecological risk assessment and proposes a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework for integrating individual LOE in support of management decisions. The use of quantitative WOE techniques is illustrated for a hypothetical but realistic case study of selecting remedial alternatives at a contaminated aquatic site. Use of formal MCDA does not necessarily eliminate biases and judgment calls necessary for selecting remedial alternatives, but allows for transparent evaluation and fusion of individual LOE. It also provides justifiable methods for selecting remedial alternatives consistent with stakeholder and decision-maker values.

Application of Bayesian networks for hazard ranking of nanomaterials to support human health risk assessment

“…Several approaches have been proposed to classify NMs and to estimate their risks that include stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis (SMAA-TRI) (Tervonen et al, 2007), weight of evidence (WOE) (Hristozov et al, 2014;Linkov et al, 2011), grouping (Arts et al, 2014(Arts et al, , 2016, quantitative nanostructure-activity relationship (QSAR) (Singh & Gupta, 2014;Winkler et al, 2014) and Bayesian networks (Linkov et al, 2015;Low-Kam et al, 2015;Money et al, 2014). Combinations of these methods were proposed to integrate and collate heterogeneous information to estimate the risk of NMs under scarcity of data (Hristozov et al, 2012;Linkov et al, 2015).…”

Ecological status classification of the Taizi River Basin, China: a comparison of integrated risk assessment approaches

“…The IRA methodology implements a WoE approach (Burton et al 2002a, b;Linkov et al 2009Linkov et al , 2011) and a fuzzy inference system (FIS, Von Altrock 1995) to support the integration of heterogenous information from different domains to draw conclusions about environmental impacts in river basins. Specifically, monitoring data are used to calculate a set of indicators, which are grouped into five LoEs, namely, biology, physico-chemistry, chemistry, ecotoxicology, and hydromorphology.…”

Systematic Reviews for Occupational Safety and Health Questions: Resources for Evidence Synthesis

“…Researchers have proposed more-formalized approaches to weight-of-evidence approaches, such as quantitative frameworks using multi-criteria decision-analysis methodology, incorporating decision-analysis tools, using hypothesis-based assessments to better communicate uncertainties and inconsistencies, applying quantitative structure-activity relationship modeling, performing sequential analyses of lines of evidence to rule out risks, or using discriminant analyses to assign empirically based weights (Hull and Swanson, 2006;Matthews et al, 2007;Hujoel, 2009;Swaen and Van Amelsvoort, 2009;Rhomberg, Bailey, and Goodman, 2010;Linkov et al, 2011;Rhomberg et al, 2011;Pemberton, Bailey, and Rhomberg, 2013;Prueitt, Rhomberg, and Goodman, 2013;Rorije et al, 2013;Jiang et al, 2015;and Linkov et al, 2015). Others have advocated paradigm shifts, such as the use of Bayesian methods to integrate evidence from reviewed research and prior knowledge (Linkov et al, 2015).…”