Environmental priority-setting through comparative risk assessment

Citation
Dl. Feldman et al., Environmental priority-setting through comparative risk assessment, ENVIR MANAG, 23(4), 1999, pp. 483-493
Citations number
33
Categorie Soggetti
Environment/Ecology
Journal title
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ISSN journal
0364152X → ACNP
Volume
23
Issue
4
Year of publication
1999
Pages
483 - 493
Database
ISI
SICI code
0364-152X(199905)23:4<483:EPTCRA>2.0.ZU;2-R
Abstract
More than three dozen states and communities in the United Stales have unde rtaken comparative risk projects to establish environmental priorities and, thus, to address their most important environmental problems. This trend h as been supported by a growing consensus among subnational governments that they are increasingly encumbered with prescriptive, top-down environmental regulations and policies without regard to the policies' efficacy, benefit , or cost. Despite the rising use of comparative risk projects, few studies have systematically analyzed and compared them. The purpose of our researc h was to fill this void. We examined key elements of comparative risk proje cts including how they were administered; how they involved the public; how they characterized, ranked, and prioritized risks; whether and how they im plemented ranking results; and whether and how they evaluated project resul ts. The research team reviewed project reports and independent studies and undertook a survey of risk project participants. Results showed that while many priority-setting projects have successfully identified environmental p roblems and characterized and ranked their risks, few have developed risk-m anagement strategies. Successes to date include increasing environmental aw areness among participants; building consensus and establishing collaborati on among diverse stakeholders; and establishing novel means of public invol vement. However, no project that we evaluated has, as yet, documented achie vement of a system for developing and implementing environmental priorities in order to mitigate their most significant environmental problems. Furthe r, ii may be difficult to know ii and when this objective is met unless pro jects establish mechanisms for evaluating their results, a project element that was often missing or limited in scope. We also discuss the challenges to developing implementable risk-management strategies and conclude by citi ng future research needs.