Risk uncertainty matters: an engineer’s view

International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management

Volumn 5, Issue 2-4, 2005, Pages 167-192

  Moschandreas, Demetrios ^a   Karuchit, Sudjit ^a  

^a ILLINOIS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

deterministic and probabilistic estimates; dose; exposure; risk; uncertainty

Indexed keywords

EID: 53149117162     PISSN: 14668297     EISSN: 17415241     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1504/ijram.2005.007166     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Anderson, E.L. and Hattis, D. (1999) ‘When and how can you specify a probability distribution when you don’t know much?, Foundations: a. uncertainty and variability’, Risk Analysis, Vol. 19, No. 1.
2. Ari, H. and Moschandreas, D.J. (2004) ‘On predicting the effectiveness of a corrective action to reduce public health risk’, in preparation.
3. Bogen, K.T. (1990) Uncertainty in Environmental Health Risk Assessment, Garland Publishing, Inc.
4. Bogen, K.T. and Spear, R.C. (1987) ‘Integrating uncertainty and interindividual variability in environmental risk assessment’, Risk Analysis, Vol. 7, pp.427–436.
5. Bradshaw, G.A. and Borchers, J.G. (2000) ‘Uncertainty as information: narrowing the science-policy gap’, Conservation Ecology, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp.7–19.
6. Brumaster, B. (1995) Benefits and Costs of Using Probabilistic Techniques in Human Health Risk Assessment with Emphasis on Site Specific Risk Assessment, commentary invited by Ecological Risk, 24 July 1995.
7. Burmaster, D.E. and Wilson, A.M. (1996) ‘An introduction to second-order random variables in human health risk assessments’, Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp.892–919.
8. Byrd, D.M. and Cothern, C.R. (2000) Introduction to Risk Analysis: A Systematic Approach to Science-Based Decision Making, Rockville, MD: Government Institutes.
9. Cox, D.C. and Baybutt, P. (1981) ‘Methods for uncertainty analysis: a comparative survey’, Risk Analysis, Vol. 1, No. 4.
10. Cullen, C.A. and Frey, H.C. (1998) Probabilistic Techniques in Exposure Assessment: A Handbook for Dealing with Variability and Uncertainty in Models and Inputs, Plenum Press.
11. EPA, US Environmental Protection Agency (1986) ‘Guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment’, Federal Register, Vol. 51, p.185, September 24.
12. EPA, US Environmental Protection Agency (1989) Risk Assessment Guidelines for Superfund. Vol. 1: Human Health Evaluation Manual, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response.
13. EPA, US Environmental Protection Agency (1992a) Guidelines for Exposure Assessment, Notice, Part VI. Federal Register, Vol. 57, No. 104, May, Washington, DC.
14. EPA, US Environmental Protection Agency (1992b) Dermal Exposure Assessment: Principles and Application.
15. EPA, US Environmental Protection Agency (1992c) Guidelines for Exposure Assessment.
16. EPA, US Environmental Protection Agency (1997a) Exposure Factors Handbook.
17. EPA, US Environmental Protection Agency (1997b) Guiding Principles for Monte Carlo Analysis, EPA/630/R-97/001.
18. EPA, US Environmental Protection Agency (1999) Guidance for Performing Aggregate Exposure and Risk Assessments.
19. EPA, US Environmental Protection Agency (2000a) Proposed Guidance on Cumulative Risk Assessment of Pesticide Chemicals that have Common Mechanism of Toxicity, June.
20. EPA, US Environmental Protection Agency (2000b) Proposed Guidance on Cumulative Risk Assessment of Pesticide Chemicals That Have a Common Mechanism of Toxicity, Office of Pesticide Programs, June 22.
21. EPA, US Environmental Protection Agency (2001) Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Volume Ill-Part A, Process for Conducting Probabilistic Risk Assessment, EPA 540-R-02-002, Washington, DC: Office of Emergency Remedial Response.
22. EPA, US Environmental Protection Agency (2004) An Examination of EPA Risk Assessment Principles and Practices, EPA/1 – B-04 001, March.
23. Feynman, R. (1998) The Meaning of It All, Thoughts of a Citizen Scientist, Addison Wesley Publishing Co.
24. Finkel, A.M. (1990) Confronting Uncertainty in Risk Management: A Guide for Decision-Makers, Center for Risk Management Resources for the Future.
25. Hamby, D.M. (1994) ‘A review of techniques for parameter sensitivity analysis of environmental models’, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, Vol. 32, pp.135–154.
26. Hammonds, J.H., Hoffman, F.O. and Bartell, S.M. (1994) An Introductory Guide to Uncertainty Analysis in Environmental and Health Risk Assessment, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, December.
27. Hanna, S.R. (1989) ‘Plume dispersion and concentration fluctuations in the atmosphere’, in P.N. Cheremisinoff (Ed.) Encyclopedia of the Environmental Control Technology, Vol. 2, Air Pollution Control, Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing Co.
28. Iman, R.L. and Helton, J.C. (1988) ‘An investigation of uncertainty and sensitivity analysis techniques for computer models’, Risk Analysis, Vol. 8, No. 1.
29. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (1989) Evaluating the Reliability of Predictions Using Environmental Transfer Model, Safety Practice Publications of IAEA, Safety Series No. 100.
30. Kaplan, S. and Garrick, B.J. (1981) ‘On the quantitative definition of risk’, Risk Analysis, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.11–27.
31. Macintosh, D.L., Xue, J., Ozkaynak, H., Spengler, J.D. and Ryan, P.B. (1995) ‘A population-based exposure model for benzene’, Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp.375–403.
32. Morgan, M.G. and Henrion, M. (1990) Uncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis, Cambridge University Press.
33. Moschandreas, D. and Karuchit, S. (2002) ‘Scenario-model-parameter, a new method of cumulative risk uncertainty analysis’, Environment International, Vol. 28, pp.247–261.
34. NAS (National Research Council) (1983) Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
35. NAS (National Research Council) (1994) Science and Judgement in Risk Assessment, Student Edition, Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.
36. NAS (2004) Science and Judgment in Risk Assessment, The National Academy of Sciences.
37. National Research Council (NRC) (1983) Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process, National Academy Press.
38. National Research Council (NRC) (1994) Science and Judgment in Risk Assessment, National Academy Press.
39. Sexton, K., Olden, K. and Johnson, B.L. (1993) ‘Environmental justice: the central role of research in establishing a credible scientific foundation for informed decision making’, Toxicology and Industrial Health, Vol. 9, No. 5, pp.685–727.
40. Zannetti, P. (1990) Air Pollution Modeling, Theories, Computational Methods and Available Software, New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
41. Scenario is defined here is a future event or series of future events.
42. An uncertainty analysis refers to an evaluation of uncertainty associated with a model output (e.g. a risk estimate) and the relative contribution of each model variable to the uncertainty (Cox and Baybutt, 1981).
43. This term denotes all scientists and engineers who are involved in the steps outlined above.
44. Stakeholders are interested groups affected by the risk analysis outcome; members of the public including individuals from affected communities, other concerned citizens, and representatives of consumer groups, industry, academia and non-governmental agencies.
45. Common mechanism of toxicity refers to substances that cause a common toxic effect by the same sequence of major biochemical events.
46. A chemical, physical, mineralogical or biological entity that may cause deleterious effects in an organism after the organism is exposed to it.