Risk-based approaches to managing contaminants in catchments

Human and Ecological Risk Assessment

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 66-73

  Hart, Barry T ^a   Burgman, Mark ^b   Grace, Michael ^a   Pollino, Carmel ^a   Thomas, Colette ^a   Webb, J Angus ^a  

^a MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Bayesian models; Cathment; Contaminants; Ecological risk assessment; Stakeholders

Indexed keywords

EID: 31544442209     PISSN: 10807039     EISSN: 15497860     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10807030500428595     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (26)

1. ANZECC. 2000. Australian and New Zealand Water Quality Guidelines. Canberra, Australia, and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council & Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand, Canberra, Australia.
2. Bacon PJ, Cain JD, and Howard DC. 2002. Belief network models of land manager decisions and land use change. J Environ Manage 65(1):1-23
3. Borsuk M, Clemen R, Maguire L, et al. 2001. Stakeholder values and scientific modeling in the Neuse River watershed. Group Decision & Negotiation 10:355-73
4. Borsuk ME, Powers SP, and Peterson CH. 2002. A survival model of the effects of bottom-water hypoxia on the population density of an estuarine clam (Macoma balthica). Canadian J Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 59(8):1266-74
5. Borsuk ME, Stow CA, and Reckhow KH. 2004. A Bayesian network of eutrophication models for synthesis, prediction, and uncertainty analysis. Ecol Modelling 173:219-39.
6. Breen PA, Kim SW, and Andrew NL. 2003. A length-based Bayesian stock assessment model for the New Zealand abalone Haliotis iris. Marine Freshwater Res 54(5):619-34
7. Burgman MA. 2001. Flaws in subjective assessments of ecological risks and means for correcting them. Aust J Environ Manage 8:219-26
8. Burgman MA. 2005. Risks and Decisions: For Conservation and Environmental Management. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
9. Cain J, Batchelor C, and Waughra, D. 1999. Belief networks: a framework for the participatory development of natural resource management strategies. Environ Development & Sustainability 1 (2):123-33
10. Cramer VA and Hobbs RJ. 2002. Ecological consequences of altered hydrological regimes in fragmented ecosystems in southern Australia: Impacts and possible management responses. Austral Ecol 27:546-64
11. Fernandes L, Ridgley MA, and van'tHoff T. 1999. Multiple criteria analysis integrates economic, ecological and social objectives for coral reef managers. Coral Reefs 18:393-402
12. Glicken J. 2000. Getting stakeholder participation 'right': a discussion of participatory processes and pitfalls. Environ Sci Policy 3:395-410
13. Grimble R and Wellard K. 1997. Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: a review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities. Agricultural Systems 55:173-93
14. Hart BT. 2004. Environmental risks associated with new irrigation schemes in Northern Australia. Ecological Management & Restoration 5:107-11.
15. Hart BT, Grace MR, Breen P, et al. 2001. Application of ecological risk assessment in river management. In: Rutherfurd I, Sheldon F, Brierley G, et al. (eds), Proc Third Australian Stream Management Conference - Value of Healthy Streams, pp 289-95. CRC for Catchment Hydrology, Melbourne, Australia
16. Hart BT, Lake P S, Webb A, et al. 2003. Use of risk assessment to assess the ecological impacts of salinity on aquatic systems. Aust J Botany 51:689-702
17. Hart BT, Burgman M, Grace M, et al. 2005. Ecological Risk Management Framework for the Irrigation Industry, Technical Report, Land & Water Australia, Canberra, Australia (available www.sci.monash.edu.au/wsc)
18. Maguire L. 2003. Interplay of science and stakeholder values in the Neuse River total maximum daily load process. J Water Resources Planning Manage 129:261-70
19. Marcot BG, Holthause, RS, Raphael MG, et al. 2001. Using Bayesian belief networks to evaluate fish and wildlife population viability under land management alternatives from an environmental impact statement. Forest Ecol Manage 153:29-42
20. Pollino CA, Woodberry O, Nicholson AE, Korb KB, Hart BT. 2006. Parameterisation and evaluation of a Bayesian network for use in an ecological risk assessment. Environmental Modelling & Software (in press)
21. Reckhow KH. 2003. Bayesian approaches to ecological analysis and modelling. In: Canham CD, Cole JJ, and Lauenroth WK (eds), Models in Ecosystem Science, pp 168-83.. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA
22. Roy B. 1999. Decision-aiding today: what should we expect? In: Gal T, Stewart TJ, and Hanne T (eds), Multicriteria Decision-Making: Advances in MCDM Models, Algorithms, Theory and Applications, pp 1-35. Kluwer, Boston, MA, USA
23. Suter GW. 1993. Ecological Risk Assessment. Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI, USA
24. USEPA (US Environmental Protection Agency). 1998. Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment. EPA/630/R-95/002F. Washington, DC, USA
25. Vic EPA. 2003. State Environmental Protection Policy (Waters of Victoria). No. S107-WoV. Environment Protection Authority, Melbourne, Australia
26. Walter M, Recknagel F, Carpenter C, et al. 2001. Predicting eutrophication effects in the Burrinjuck Reservoir (Australia) by means of the deterministic model SALMO and the recurrent neural network model ANNA. Ecol Modelling 146:97-113