Decision support systems for contaminated land management: A review

Decision Support Systems for Risk-Based Management of Contaminated Sites

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 137-156

  Agostini, Paola ^a,b   Critto, Andrea ^a   Semenzin, Elena ^a,c   Marcomini, Antonio ^a  

^a CA' FOSCARI UNIVERSITY OF VENICE   (Italy)

^b Venice Research Consortium (CVR)   (Italy)

^c University Ca' Foscari of Venice ^*  (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84887889183     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-09722-0_7     Document Type: Chapter

References (39)

1. Ascough, J C, Rector H, Hoag D L, McMaster G S, Vanderberg B C, Shaffer MJ Weltz M A and Ahjua L R. 2002. Multicriteria spatial decision support systems: overview, applications and future research directions. In: Rizzoli, A Eand Jakeman, A J (eds.), Integrated Assessment and Decision Support, Proceedings of the First Biennial Meeting of the International Environmental Modelling and Software Society, iEMSs, 2002 3:175-180.
2. Bardos, R P, Mariotti C, Marot F and Sullivan T. 2001. Framework for decision support used in contaminated land management in Europe and North America. Land Contamination and Reclamation 9(1):149-162.
3. Bonano, E J, Apostolakis G E, Salter P F, Ghassemi A and Jennings S. 2000. Application of risk assessment and decision analysis to the evaluation, ranking and selection of environmental remediation alternatives. Journal of Hazardous Materials 71:35-57.
4. Bridges, J. 2003. Human health and environmental risk assessment: the need for a more harmonised and integrated approach. Chemosphere 52:1347-1351.
5. Bruntland, G. (ed.). 1987. Our common future: The World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
6. Carlon, C, Critto, A, Ramieri, E and Marcomini, A. 2007. DESYRE decision support system for the rehabilitation of contaminated mega-sites. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management 3:211-222.
7. (CLARINET) Contaminated Land Rehabilitation Network for Environmental Technologies. 2002a. Sustainable Management of Contaminated Land: An Overview. A report from the Contaminated Land Rehabilitation Network for Environmental Technologies, p. 128.
8. (CLARINET) Contaminated Land Rehabilitation Network for Environmental Technologies. 2002b. Review of Decision Support Tools for Contaminated Land Management, and Their Use in Europe. A Report from the Contaminated Land Rehabilitation Network for Environmental Technologies, p. 180.
9. Dietrich, J, Schumann, A and Lotov, A. 2004. Workflow oriented participatory decision support for the integrated river basin planning. Proceeding of the IFAC Workshop Modelling and Control for Participatory Planning and Managing Water Systems, Venice September 29th-October 1st, 2004.
10. Georgekakos, A. (2004). Decision support systems for integrated water resources management with an application to the Nile basin. In Proceeding of the IFAC Workshop Modelling and Control for Participatory Planning and Managing Water Systems, Venice September 29th-October 1st, 2004.
11. Giove, S, Agostini, P, Critto, A, Semenzin, E and Marcomini, A. 2006. Decision Support System for the management of contaminated sites: a multi-criteria approach. In: Linkov, I, Kiker, G A and Wenning, R J (eds.), Environmental Security in Harbors and Coastal Areas: Management Using Comparative Risk Assessment and Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Springer, pp. 267-273.
12. Jensen, R A, Krejcik J, Malmgren-Hansen, A, Vanecek, S, Havnoe, K and Knudsen, J. 2002. River Basin Modelling in the Czech Republic to Optmise Interventions Necessary to Meet the EU Environmental Standards. In Proceedings of the International Conference of Basin Organizations, Madrid 4-6 November 2002, DH ref 39/02.
13. Johnson, C D, Bagaasen, L M, Chan, T C, Lamar, D A, Buelt, J L, Freeman, C J and Skeen, R S. 1994. Overview of technology modeling in the Remedial Action Assessment System (RAAS). In: Proceedings Spectrum'94: Nuclear and Hazardous Waste Management International Topical Meeting, volume 2. American Nuclear Society: La Grange Park, IL, pp. 1078-1085.
14. Khadam, I and Kaluarachchi, J J. 2003. Applicabilityofrisk-based management and the need for risk-based economic decision analysis at hazardous waste contaminated sites. Environment International 29:503-519.
15. Khan, F I, Husain, T and Hejazi, R. 2004. An overview and analysis of site remediation technologies. Journal of Environmental Management 71:95-122.
16. Kiker, G A, Bridges, T S, Varghese, A, Seager, T P and Linkov, I. 2005. Application of Multicriteria Decision Analysis in Environmental Decision Making. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management 1(2):95-108.
17. Kontoleon, A., Macrory, R., Swanson, T. 2001. Individual preferences, expert opinions and environmental decision making: an overview of the issues. Paper presented at the Symposium on Law and economics of environmental policy, UCL, 6-7 September 2001.
18. Lahmer, W. 2004. Multi-disciplinary approaches in River Basin Management - an example. Presentation at the International Conference on Water Observation and Information System for Decision Support, Ohrid, Macedonia, 25-29 May 2004.
19. Linkov, I, Varghese, A, Jamil, S, Seager, T P, Kiker, G, and Bridges, T. 2004. Multi-criteria decision analysis: a framework for structuring remedial decisions at contaminated sites. In: Linkov, I and Ramadan, A (eds.), Comparative Risk Assessment and Environmental Decision Making. Kluwer, pp. 15-54.
20. Loucks, D P. 1995. Developing and implementing decision support systems: a critique and a challenge. Water Resources Bulletin 31(4):571-582.
21. Morvai, B, Kriszt, B and Szoboslay, S. 2005. NORISC revitalization strategy for contaminated sites In: Proceeding of CABERNET 2005: The International Conference on Managing Urban Land. Compiled by Oliver, L, Millar, K, Grimski, D, Ferber, U and Nathanail, C P. Land Quality Press, Nottingham. ISBN 0-9547474-1-0.
22. (NRC-NAS) National Research Council of the National Academy of Science. 1983. Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA.
23. Njikamp, L, Rodenburg, C A and Wagtendonk, A J. 2002. Success factors for sustainable urban brownfield redevelopment. A comparative case study approach to polluted sites. Ecological Economics 40:235-252.
24. Pereira, A G and Quintana, S C. 2002. From technocratic to participatory decision support systems: Responding to the new governance initiatives. Journal of Geographic Information and Decision Analysis 6(2):95-107.
25. Pollard, S J T, Brookes, A, Earl, N, Lowe, J, Kearny, T and Nathanail, C P. 2004. Integrating decision tools for the sustainable management of land contamination. Science of the Total Environment 325:15-28.
26. Rutgers, M and Den Besten, P. 2005. Approach to legislation in a global context. The Netherlands perspective - soils and sediments. In: Thompson, K C, Wadhia, K and Loibner, A P (eds.), Environmental Toxicity Testing. Blakwell Publishing CRC Press, Oxford, pp. 269-289.
27. Salewicz, K A and Nakayama, M. 2003. Development ofaweb-based decision support system (DSS) for managing large international rivers. Global Environmental Change 14:25-37.
28. Semenzin, E, Critto, A, Carlon, C, Mesman, M, Schouten, T, Rutgers, M, Giove, S and Marcomini, A. 2005. ERA-MANIA DSS: a decision support system for site-specific Ecological Risk Assessment (ERA) for contaminated sites. Extended abstract, 9th International conference on soil-water systems "ConSoil 2005", 3-7 October 2005, Bordeaux, France, pp. 627-630.
29. Shim, J P, Warkentin, M, Courtney, J F, Power, D J, Sharda, R and Carlsson, C. 2002. Past present and future of decision support technology. Decision Support Systems 33:111-126.
30. Siller, D, Blodgett, C, Cziganyik, N and Omeroglu, G. 2004. Factors involved in urban regeneration: remediation and redevelopment of contaminated urban sites - a comparison of France and the Netherlands. In: Proceeding of CABERNET 2005: The International Conference on Managing Urban Land. Compiled by Oliver, L, Millar, K, Grimski, D, Ferber, U and Nathanail, C P. Land Quality Press, Nottingham. ISBN 0-9547474-1-0.
31. Simonovic, S P. 1996. Decision Support Systems for sustainable management of water resources: 1. General principles. Water International 21(4):223-232.
32. SMARTe project. 2007. www.smarte.org, visited on August 2007.
33. Stewart, R. 2001. Geospatial decision frameworks for remedial design and secondary sampling. In NATO/CCMS Pilot Study Evaluation of demonstrated and emerging technologies for the treatment of contaminated land and groundwater. Special Session Decision Support Tools. Committee on the challenges of modern society, p. 139.
34. Sullivan, T M, Gitten, M and Moskowitz, P D. 1997. Evaluation of selected environmental decision support software. BN-64613, Brookhaven National Laboratory, p. 46.
35. (US-EPA) US Environmental Protection Agency. 1989. Risk assessment guidance for Superfund (RAGS): volume 1 - Human health evaluation manual (HHEM) (Part A, baseline risk assessment). Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. EPA/540/1-89/002. Washington, DC.
36. (US-EPA) US Environmental Protection Agency. 1998. Guidelines for ecological risk Assessment. EPA630-R-95-002F. Risk Assessment Forum. Washington DC.
37. (US-EPA) US Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. A sustainable Brownfields model framework, Sustainable redevelopment linking the community and business for a brighter future, EPA500-R-99-001. Washington DC.
38. Vrije Universitat Amsterdam. 2005. REC decision support system for comparing soil remediation alternatives, http://www.falw.vu.nl/ Onderzoeksinstituten/index.cfm/home-file. cfm/fileid/EA9 454E9-7E6F-4DBF- A34D63D78A93D022/subsectionid/602C4835-C246-41FA-8DD706E7084B0D06
39. WELCOME project. 2005. http://euwelcome.nl/kims/index.php, visited on March 2005.