Multi-criteria decision analysis and environmental risk assessment for nanomaterials

Journal of Nanoparticle Research

Volumn 9, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 543-554

  Linkov, Igor ^a,b   Satterstrom, F Kyle ^a   Steevens, Jeffery ^c   Ferguson, Elizabeth ^c   Pleus, Richard C ^b  

^a Intertox Inc   (United States)

^b Intertox Inc   (United States)

^c US ARMY ENGINEER RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Decision analysis; Nanotechnology; Prioritization; Risk assessment; Science and technology governance; Weight of evidence

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; DECISION THEORY; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; INFORMATION MANAGEMENT; RISK ASSESSMENT; SOCIAL ASPECTS;

NANOMATERIAL DEVELOPMENT; PRIORITIZATION; SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY GOVERNANCE;

NANOTECHNOLOGY;

NANOMATERIAL;

DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH; NANOTECHNOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 34249063652     PISSN: 13880764     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11051-007-9211-0     Document Type: Review

References (24)

1. Belton V., Stewart T.J. (2002) Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: An Integrated Approach. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers
2. BFR, 2006. Exercise Caution when Using "Nano-Sealing Sprays" Containing a Propellant! Bundesinstitut für Risikobewertung. http://www.bfr.bund.de/cms5w/sixcms/detail.php/7699
3. ETC Group, 2006. EPA's Nanotech Regs: Ironic Parameters, Clean-up - Clam-up - Screw-up? October 18. http://www.etcgroup.org/en/issues/ nanotechnology.html
4. Figueira J., Greco S., Ehrgott M. (2005) Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys. New York: Springer
5. Friends of the Earth Europe, 2006. Potentially toxic nanomaterials found on our bathroom shelves: Friends of the Earth calls for ban until proper safety checks take place. May 17. http://www.foeeurope.org/activities/nanotechnology/ index.htm
6. Kiker, G.A., T.S. Bridges, A. Varghese, P.T. Seager & I. Linkov, 2005. Application of multicriteria decision analysis in environmental decision making. Integr. Environ. Assess. Manage. 1(2), 95-108.
7. Linkov, I., A. Bakr Ramadan & North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Scientific Affairs Division, 2004. Comparative Risk Assessment and Environmental Decision Making, NATO Science Series. Series IV, Earth and Environmental Sciences; vol. 38, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Boston
8. Linkov, I., F.K. Satterstrom, G. Kiker, C. Batchelor, T. Bridges & E. Ferguson, 2006a. From comparative risk assessment to multi-criteria decision analysis and adaptive management: Recent developments and applications. Environ. In. 32(8), 1072-1093.
9. Linkov, I., F.K. Satterstrom, G. Kiker, T.P. Seager, T. Bridges, K.H. Gardner, S.H. Rogers, D.A. Belluck & A. Meyer, 2006b. Multicriteria decision analysis: A comprehensive decision approach for management of contaminated sediments. Risk Anal. 26(1), 61-78.
10. Linkov, I., F.K. Satterstrom, G.A. Kiker, T.S. Bridges, S.L. Benjamin & D.A. Belluck, 2006c. From optimization to adaptation: Shifting paradigms in environmental management and their application to remedial decisions. Integr. Environ. Assess. Manage. 2(1), 92-98
11. Linkov, I., K. Satterstrom, S. Zemba & J. Steevens, 2006d. Use of multi-criteria decision analysis tools to facilitate weight-of-evidence evaluation in nanotechnology risk assessment. NSTI Nanotechnology Conference and Trade Show, Boston, MA. http://www.nsti.org/Nanorech 2006/showabstract.html: absno=1611
12. Morgan, K., 2005. Development of a preliminary framework for informing the risk analysis and risk management of nanoparticles. Risk Anal. 25(6), 1621-1635.
13. NRDC, 2005. Nanotechnologies: Tiny particles promise much, but could pose big risk. Natural Resources Defense Council, March 20. http://www.nrdc.org/ health/science/nano.asp
14. ODPM, 2004. DLTR Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Manual. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. http://www.communities.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1142251
15. Renn, O. & M.C. Roco, 2006. Nanotechnology and the need for risk governance. J. Nanoparticle Res. 8(3-4), 153-191
16. Saaty, T.L., 1994. Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory with the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 1st edn. Analytic Hierarchy Process Series; vol. 6. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, PA
17. Schulte, P.A. & F. Salamanca-Buentello, 2006. Ethical and scientific issues of nanotechnology in the workplace. Environ. Health Perspect. http://www.ehponline.org/docs/2006/9456/abstract.html
18. US EPA, 1997. Ecological Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Process for Designing and Conducting Ecological Risk Assessments - Interim Final. http://www.epa.gov/oswer/riskassessment/ecorisk/pdf/st5_glos.pdf
19. US EPA, 2005a. Nanotechnology White Paper, External Review Draft. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Nanotechnology Workgroup. http://www.epa.gov/osa/pdfs/ EPA_nanotechnology_white_paper_external_review_draft_12-02-2005.pdf
20. US EPA, 2005b. Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment. EPA/630/P-03/001F: United States Environmental Protection Agency, Risk Assessment Forum. http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=116283
21. Weiss, R., 2006. Nanotech raises worker-safety questions. Washington Post, April 8. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/07/ AR2006040701725.html
22. Yatsalo, B., G. Kiker, J. Kim, T. Bridges, T. Seager, K. Gardner, F.K. Satterstrom & I. Linkov, 2007. Application of multi-criteria decision analysis tools for management of contaminated sediments. Integr. Environ. Assess. Manage. [In press]
23. Yoe, C., 2002. Trade-Off Analysis Planning and Procedures Guidebook. Prepared for Institute for Water Resources. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
24. Yokota, F. & K.M. Thompson, 2004. Value of information analysis in environmental health risk management decisions: Past, present, and future. Risk Anal. 24(3), 635-650