The Anna Karenina principle applied to ecological risk assessments of multiple stressors

Human and Ecological Risk Assessment (HERA)

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 231-237

  Moore, Dwayne R J ^a  

^a Cadmus Group   (Canada)

Author keywords

Ecological risk assessment; Environmental decision making; Multiple stressors

Indexed keywords

EID: 23044527811     PISSN: 10807039     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Barnthouse LW, Marmorek DR, and Peters CN. 2000. Assessment of multiple stresses at regional scales. In: Foran JA and Ferenc SA (eds), Multiple Stressors in Ecological Risk and Impact Assessment, pp 1-26. Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Pensacola, FL
2. CENR (Committee on Environment and Natural Resources). 1999. Ecological Risk Assessment in the Federal Government. CENR/5-99/001. National Science and Technology Council, National Academy Press, Washington, DC
3. Diamond JM. 1997. Guns, Germs, and Steel. W.W. Norton and Company, NY, NY
4. Environment Canada. 1997. Environmental risk assessments of priority substances under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act: Guidance Manual. Commercial Chemicals Evaluation Branch, Environment Canada, Ottawa, ON
5. Fairbrother A and Bennett RS. 2000. Multivariate statistical applications for addressing multiple stresses in ecological risk assessments. In: Foran JA and Ferenc SA (eds), Multiple Stressors in Ecological Risk and Impact Assessment, pp 67-115. Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Pensacola, FL
6. Foran JA and Ferenc SA (eds). 1999. Multiple Stressors in Ecological Risk and Impact Assessment. Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Pensacola, FL
7. Foran JA and Ferenc SA (eds). 2000. Ecological Risk and Impact Assessment: Approaches to Risk Estimation. Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Pensacola, FL
8. Harwell MA. 1998. Science and environmental decision-making in South Florida. Ecol Appl 8:580-90
9. Harwell MA and Gentile JH. 2000. Environmental decision-making for multiple stressors: Framework, tools, case studies, and prospects. In: Foran JA and Ferenc SA (eds), Multiple Stressors in Ecological Risk and Impact Assessment, pp 169-235. Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Pensacola, FL
10. Lackey RT. 1996. Is ecological risk assessment useful for resolving complex ecological problems? In: Stouder DJ, Bisson PA, and Naiman RJ (eds), Pacific Salmon and Their Ecosystems: Status and Future Options, pp 525-540. Chapman and Hall, NY.
11. Lackey RT. 1997. Ecological risk assessment: Use, abuse, and alternatives. Environ Manage 21(6): 808-12
12. Landis WG and Wiegers JA. 1997. Design considerations and a suggested approach for regional and comparative ecological risk assessment. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 3:287-97
13. Landis WG, Moore DRJ, and Norton SB. 1998. Ecological risk assessment: Looking in, looking out. In: Douben PET (ed), Pollution Risk Assessment and Management, pp 273-309. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK
14. Moore DRJ and Bartell SM. 2000. Estimating ecological risks of multiple stressors: Advanced methods and difficult issues. In: Foran JA and Ferenc SA (eds), Multiple Stressors in Ecological Risk and Impact Assessment, pp 117-168. Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Pensacola, FL
15. Munnkittrick KR and McMaster ME. 2000. Effects-driven assessment of multiple stressors using fish populations. In: Foran JA and Ferenc SA (eds), Multiple Stressors in Ecological Risk and Impact Assessment, pp 27-65. Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Pensacola, FL
16. O'Brien MH. 1995. Ecological alternatives assessment rather than ecological risk assessment: Considering options, benefits, and hazards. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 1:357-66
17. Renner R. 1996. Ecological risk assessment struggles to define itself. Environ Sci Technol 30(4): 172A-4A
18. Suter GW. 2001. Review of: Making Better Environmental Decisions: An Alternative to Risk Assessment by Mary O'Brien. SETAC Globe 2(1):23
19. USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1998. Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment. EPA/630/R- 95/002F. Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC
20. USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1999. Volume 2E - Baseline Ecological Risk Assessment: Hudson River PCBs Reassessment RI/FS. Prepared by TAMS Consultants, Inc. and Menzie-Cura & Associates, Inc. for USEPA, Region II and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City District. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, NY, NY