A comparison of partial order technique with three methods of multi-criteria analysis for ranking of chemical substances

Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences

Volumn 42, Issue 5, 2002, Pages 1086-1098

  Lerche, Dorte ^a,c   Brüggemann, Rainer ^b   Sørensen, Peter ^c   Carlsen, Lars ^d   John Nielsen, Ole ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^b LEIBNIZ INSTITUTE OF FRESHWATER ECOLOGY AND INLAND FISHERIES   (Germany)

^c NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Denmark)

^d ROSKILDE UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MULTI-CRITERIA ANALYSIS;

ALGORITHMS; CHEMICAL INDUSTRY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; MONTE CARLO METHODS; PROBABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT;

CHEMICALS;

DRUG;

ARTICLE; CHEMICAL INDUSTRY; CHEMICAL MODEL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EUROPE; HUMAN; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PROBABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MANAGEMENT;

CHEMICAL INDUSTRY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EUROPE; HUMANS; MODELS, CHEMICAL; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATIONS; PROBABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MANAGEMENT;

EID: 0036708524     PISSN: 00952338     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ci010268p     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93. Official Journal No. L84, 05/ 04/1993.
2. European Commission. Technical Guidance Documents in support of Directive 93/67/EEC on risk assessment of new notified substances and Regulation (EC) No. 1488/94 on risk assessment of existing substances (Part I, II, III and IV). The European Commission: Luxembourg, 1996.
3. European Commission. The European Union System for the Evaluation of Substances (EUSES). European Chemical Bureau: Ispra, 1996.
4. European Commission. EINECS. Vol I and II. The European Commission: Luxembourg, 1981.
5. World Commission on Environment and Development. Our Common future; Oxford University Press: Oxford, 1987.
6. European Commission. The white paper on Chemical Strategy, COM200188. European Commission: Luxembourg, 2001.
7. Hansen, B.G.; van Haelst, A.G.; van Leeuwen, K.; van der Zandt, P. Priority Setting for Existing Chemicals: European Union Risk Ranking Method. Environ. Toxicol. Chem., 1999, 18, 772-779.
8. Mackay, D. Multimedia Environmental Models - The Fugacity Approach; Lewis Publishers: Michigan, 1991.
9. European Commission. Study on the Prioritisation of Substances Dangerous to the Aquatic Environment. European Commission: Luxembourg, 1999.
10. Swanson, M.B.; Davis, G.A.; Kincaid, L.E.; Schultz, T.W.; Bartmess, J.E.; Jones, S.L.; Georges, E.L. A screening method for ranking and scoring chemicals by potential human health and environmental impacts. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 1997, 16, 372-383.
11. Bradbury, S.P. Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationships and Ecological Risk Assessment: An Overview of Predictive Aquatic Toxicology Research. Toxicol. Lett. 1995, 79, 229-237.
12. Gustafson, D.I. Groundwater ubiquity score: A simple method for assessing pesticide leachability. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 1989, 8, 339-357.
13. Brüggemann, R.; Halfon, E.; Welzl, G.; Voigt, K.; Steinberg, C.E.W. Applying the Concept of Partially Ordered Sets on the Ranking of Near-Shore Sediments by a Battery of Tests. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2001, 41, 918-925.
14. Halfon, E.; Brüggemann, R. On Ranking Chemicals for Environmental Hazard. Comparison of Methodologies. In Proceeding of the Workshop on Order Theoretical Tools in Environmental Science, November 16th, 1998 in Berlin. Bericht des IGB, Heft 6, Sonderheft I, 1998.
15. Schneeweiss. Planung 1 - Systemanalytische und entscheidungstheoretische Grundlagen; Spinger-Verlag: Berlin, 1991.
16. Brans, J.P.; Vincke, P.H. A Preference Ranking Organisation Method (The PROMETHEE Method for Multiple Criteria Decision - Making). Management Sci. 1985, 31, 6, 647-656.
17. Brans, J.P.; Vincke, P.H.; Mareschal, B. How to select and how to rank projects: The PROMETHEE method. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1986, 24, 228-238.
18. Opperhuizen, A.; Hutzinger, O.; Multi-criteria analysis and risk assessment. Chemosphere 1982, 11, 675-678.
19. European Communities. IUCLID CD-ROM Year 2000 Edition, Public data on high volume chemicals, EUR 19559EN. European Communities: Luxembourg, 2000.
20. Brüggemann, R.; Bartel, H.-G. A Theoretical Concept to Rank Environmentally Significant Chemicals. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1999, 39, 211-217.
21. Brüggemann, R.; Bücherl, C.; Pudenz, S.; Steinberg, C. Application of the concept of Partial Order on Comparative Evaluation of Environmental Chemicals. Acta Hydrochim. Hydrobiol. 1999, 27, 3, 170-178.
22. Halfon, E.; Reggiani, M.G. On ranking Chemicals for Environmental Hazard. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1986, 20, 1173-1179.
23. Davey, B.A.; Priestley, H.A. Introduction to Lattices and Order; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1990.
24. Winkler, P.M. Average height in a partially ordered set. Discrete Mathematics 1982, 39, 337-341.
25. Winkler, P.M. Correlation among partial orders. Siam. J. Alg. Disc. Methods 1983, 4, 1-7.
26. Simon, U.; Pudenz, S.; Brüggemann, R. Ansätze zur integrativen Bewertung wasserwirtschaftlicher Massnahmen am Beispiel Berlins. In Chemische Stressfaktoren in aquatischen Systemen - Proceedings des Symposiums vom 13. und 14; Weigert, B., Steinberg, C., Brüggemann, R., Eds.; April 2000 in Berlin; TU-Berlin: Berlin, 2000; pp 149-163.
27. Le Teno, J.-F., Visual Data Analysis and Decision Support Methods for Non-Deterministic LCA. Int. J. LCA. 1999, 4, 1, 41-47.
28. Drechsler, M. Die Bewertung von Biodiversitätsmassnahmen mit Hilfe multikriterieller Analyse, UFZ 9/2000; 2001; pp 1-18.
29. Poschmann, C.; Riebenstahl, C.; Schmidt-Kallert, E. Umweltplanung und -bewertung, 1st ed.; Klett-Perthes: Gotha, 1998; pp 1-152.
30. Munda, G. Multi-criteria Evaluation as a Multidimensional Approach to Welfare Measurements. In Economy and Ecosystems in Change Analytical and Historical Approaches; Bergh, J.V.D., Straaten J.V.D., Eds.; Edward Elgar: Cheltenham, 1997; pp 96-115.
31. Gershon, M.; Duckstein, L.; McAniff, R. Multiobjective River Basin Planning with Qualitative Data. Water Resour. Res. 2001, 18, 2, 193-202.
32. Brüggemann, R.; Münzer, B. A Graph-Theoretical Tool for Priority Setting of Chemicals. Chemosphere 1993, 27, 1729-1736.
33. Brüggemann, R.; Steinberg, C. Einsatz der Hassediagrammtechnik zur vergleichenden Bewertung von Analysendaten - am Beispiel der Umweltuntersuchungen in den Regionen Baden-Württembergs. In Analytiker Taschenbuch 21; Günzler, H., Ed.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 2000; pp 3-33.
34. Sørensen, P.B.; Mogensen, B.B.; Carlsen, L.; Thomsen, M. The influence on partial order ranking from input parameter uncertainty, definition of a robustness parameter. Chemosphere 2000, 41, 595-601.
35. Saaty, T.L. How to Make a Decision: The Analytical Hierarchy Process. Interfaces. 1994, 24, 19-43.
36. Banai-Kashani, R. A New Method for Site Suitability Analysis: The Analytical Hierarchy Process. Environ. Management 1989, 13, 685-693.
37. Pudenz, S.; Brüggemann, R.; Komossa, D.; Kreimes, K. An Algebraic/ Graphical Tool to Compare Ecosystems with Respect to Their Pollution by Pb, Cd III: Comparative Regional Analysis by Applying a Similarity Index. Chemosphere 1998, 36, 3, 441-450.
38. Halfon, E.; Brüggemann, R. Environmental Hazard Ranking of Chemicals Spilled in the Rhine River in November 1986. Acta Hydrochim. Hydrobiol. 1989, 17, 47-60.