Ecological Risk Assessment toward a Landscape Perspective

Environmental Risk Assessment and Management from a Landscape Perspective

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 11-31

  Kapustka, Lawrence A ^a  

^a LK Consultancy   (Canada)

Author keywords

Consensus based environmental decision making (CBED) process stakeholder empowered, community specific process to assess, prioritize and select actions; Different degrees of rigor in EcoRA and actual environmental concentrations; Ecological risk assessment toward a landscape perspective

Indexed keywords

EID: 79953751972     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1002/9780470593028.ch2     Document Type: Chapter

References (30)

1. Allard P, Fairbrother A, Hope BK, Hull RN, Johnson MS, Kapustka L, Mann G, McDonald B, Sample BE. 2010. Recommendations for the development and application of wildlife toxicity reference values. Integr Environ Assess Manage 6:28-37.
2. ASTM-I (American Society for Testing and Materials-International). 2006. E2248-06 standard guide for framework for a consensus-based environmental decision-making process. In The ASTM Annual Book of Standards. ASTM-I, West Conshohocken, PA.
3. ASTM-I (American Society for Testing and Materials-International). 2008. E1689-08 standard guide for developing conceptual models for contaminated sites. In The ASTM Annual Book of Standards. ASTM-I, West Conshohocken, PA.
4. Froese K, Ornstein M. 2010. Integrating health in environmental risk assessments. Chapter 8, this volume.
5. Gladwell M. 2005. Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking. Back Bay Books, Little Brown and Company, New York.
6. Hope BK. 2009. Will there ever be a role for risk assessments? Human Environ Risk Assess 15:1-6.
7. Kapustka L. 2003. Rationale for use of wildlife habitat characterization to improve relevance of ecological risk assessments. Human Ecol Risk Assess 9:1425-1430.
8. Kapustka LA. 2005. Assessing ecological risks at the landscape scale: Opportunities and technical limitations. Ecol Society 10:11. [Online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol10/iss2/art11/.
9. Kapustka LA. 2006. Current developments in ecotoxicology and ecological Risk assessment. In Arapis G, Goncharova N (Eds.), Ecotoxicology, Ecological Risk Assessment, and Multiple Stressors. Kluwer Press, The Netherlands, pp. 3-24.
10. Kapustka LA, Galbraith H, Luxon M, Yocum J. 2001. Using landscape ecology to focus ecological risk assessment and guide risk management decision-making. Toxicol Indust Health 17:236-246.
11. Kapustka LA, Galbraith H, Luxon M, Yocum J, Adams B. 2004. Application of habitat suitability index values to modify exposure estimates in characterizing ecological risk. In Kapustka LA, Galbraith H, Luxon M, Biddinger GR (Eds.), Landscape Ecology and Wildlife Habitat Evaluation: Critical Information for Ecological Risk Assessment, Land-Use Management Activities, and Biodiversity Enhancement Practices. ASTM-I STP 1458, American Society for Testing and Materials-International, West Conshohocken, PA, pp. 169-194.
12. Kapustka L, McCormick R, Froese K. 2008. Social and ecological challenges within the realm of environmental security. In Linkov I, Ferguson E, Magar VS (Eds.), Real-Time and Deliberative Decision Making. Springer, The Netherlands, pp. 203-211.
13. Kelly KE. 1991. The myth of 10-6 as a definition of "acceptable risk." Presented at the 84th Air & Waste Management Association Meeting, Vancouver, BC. June 16-21, 1991, 91-175.4, 10 pp.
14. Linkov I, Kapustka LA, Grebenkov A, Andrizhievski A, Loukashevich A, Trifono A. 2004. Incorporating habitat characterization into risk-trace: Software for spatially explicit exposure assessment. In Linkov I, Ramadan A (Eds.), Comparative Risk Assessment and Environmental Decision Making. Kluwer Press, The Netherlands, pp. 253-265.
15. MacKenzie G. 1996. Orbiting the Giant Hairball: A Corporate Fool's Guide to Surviving with Grace. Penguin Putnam, New York.
16. McCormick RJ, Zellmer AJ, Allen TFH. 2004. Type, scale, and adaptive narrative: Keeping models of salmon, toxicology, and risk alive to the world. In Kapustka LA, Galbraith H, Luxon M, Biddinger GR (Eds.), Landscape Ecology and Wildlife Habitat Evaluation: Critical Information for Ecological Risk Assessment, Land-Use Management Activities, and Biodiversity Enhancement Practices. ASTM-I STP 1458, American Society for Testing and Materials-International, West Conshohocken, PA, pp. 69-83.
17. NRC (National Research Council). 1983. Committee on the Institution of Means for Assessment of Risks to Public Health. Risk Assessment in the Federal Government:Managing the Process. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
18. NRC (National Research Council). 1994. Science and Judgment in Risk Assessment. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.
19. NRC (National Research Council). 2005. Superfund and Mining Megasites: Lessons from the Coeur D'Alene River Basin. National Research Council of the National Academies, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
20. Schwabe CW, Riemann HP, Franti E. 1977. Epidemiology in Veterinary Practice. Lee and Febiger, Philadelphia.
21. Suter GW. 1989. Ecological endpoints. In Warren-Hicks W, Parkhurst BR, Baker SS (Eds.). Ecological Assessments of Hazardous Waste Sites: A Field and Laboratory Reference. EPA/600/3-89/013. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, pp. 2-1 to 2-28.
22. Suter GW. 1993. Ecological Risk Assessment. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL.
23. Suter GW. 2008. Ecological risk assessment in the United States Environmental Protection Agency: A historical overview. Integr Environ Assess Manage 4:285-289.
24. US EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1992. Framework for Ecological Risk Assessment. EPA/630/R-92/001, Washington, DC.
25. US EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1998. Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment. EPA/630/R-95/002F, Washington, DC. US EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2001a. Improved Science-Based Environmental Stakeholder Processes. EPA-SAB-EC-COM-01-006.
26. US EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2001b. Understanding Public Values and Attitudes Related to Ecological Risk Management: An SAB Workshop Report of an EPA/SAB Workshop. EPA-SAB-EC-WKSP-01-001.
27. US EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2002. Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans. EPA/40/R-02/009, Washington, DC. Also see http://epa.gov/quality/qsdocs/g4-final.pdf.
28. US EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2003. Generic Ecological Risk Assessment Endpoints (GEAEs) for Ecological Risk Assessment. EPA/630/P-02/004F, Washington, DC.
29. US EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2006. Guidance for Systematic Planning Using the Data Quality Objective Process. EPA/240/B-06/001, Washington, DC. Also see http://epa.gov/quality/dqos.html.
30. US Presidential/Congressional Commission on Risk Assessment and Risk Management. 1997. Final Report, Vols. 1 and 2, Washington, DC.