Assessing the environmental risks associated with contaminated sites

A risk assessment strategy considering the impact of chemicals on the whole ecosystem has been developed in order to create a sound and useful method for quantifying and comparing global risks posed by the main different hazardous chemicals found in the environment. This index, called the Environmental Risk Index for a Complete Assessment (ERICA), merges in a single number the environmental assessment, the human health risk assessment and the uncertainty caused by missing or unreliable data. ERICA uses a scoring system with parameters for the main characteristics of the pollutants. The main advantage is that it preserves a simple approach by condensing in this single value an analysis of the risk for the area under observation. The availability and reliability of the data is an important part of the work done to build the index. Experimental and predictive data were compared to evaluate the reliability. Data were derived both from literature sources (experimental models mainly) and predictive models. ERICA can be considered a diagnostic and prognostic tool for environmental contaminants in critical and potentially dangerous sites, such as incinerators, landfills and industrial areas or in broader geographical areas. The application of the proposed integrated index provides a preliminary quantitative analysis of possible environmental alerts due to the presence of one or more pollutants in the investigated site. This thesis presents the method and the equations behind the index and a first case study based on the Italian legislation and a pilot study on a location on the Italian seacoast

Pragmatic Use of Planetary Health and Nature-Based Solutions for Future Pandemics Using COVID-19 Case Scenario

https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpubh.2021.62012

ERICA: A multiparametric toxicological risk index for the assessment of environmental healthiness

n/

Framework to Define Structure and Boundaries of Complex Health Intervention Systems: The ALERT Project

Health intervention systems are complex and subject to multiple variables in different phases of implementation. This constitutes a concrete challenge for the application of translational science in real life. Complex systems as health-oriented interventions call for interdisciplinary approaches with carefully defined system boundaries. Exploring individual components of such systems from different viewpoints gives a wide overview and helps to understand the elements and the relationships that drive actions and consequences within the system. In this study, we present an application and assessment of a framework with focus on systems and system boundaries of interdisciplinary projects. As an example on how to apply our framework, we analyzed ALERT [an integrated sensors and biosensors’ system (BEST) aimed at monitoring the quality, health, and traceability of the chain of the bovine milk], a multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary project based on the application of measurable biomarkers at strategic points of the milk chain for improved food security (including safety), human, and ecosystem health (1). In fact, the European food safety framework calls for science-based support to the primary producers’ mandate for legal, scientific, and ethical responsibility in food supply. Because of its multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary approach involving human, animal, and ecosystem health, ALERT can be considered as a One Health project. Within the ALERT context, we identified the need to take into account the main actors, interactions, and relationships of stakeholders to depict a simplified skeleton of the system. The framework can provide elements to highlight how and where to improve the project development when project evaluations are required

General ecosystem health indicators – A scoping review

Background: Assessing the health status of a natural ecosystem is important across all natural fields of study. Ecologists have discussed and used a variety of terms to describe the health of ecosystems, yet consistent use or adoption of a set of terms has not been established. A common vernacular is necessary to convey the status of an ecosystem to any audience, particularly to influence policy. The purpose of this review is to explore the terms associated with general ecosystem health metrics. Methods: A scoping literature review was performed within three databases, using a search string informed by place, interest, and outcome, a modified PICO (Place, Interest, Comparison, Outcome) structure. A three-stage review process was conducted, at title only, abstract, and full text, respectively. The second and third stages were conducted by two independent reviewers. Key ecosystem health indicator terms were extracted from the final article list and categorized into composite terms or individual indicators for the assessment of general ecosystem health. Results: The initial search yielded 4733 articles, of which 701 were included for screening at the abstract level. A subsequent full-text review of 118 peer-reviewed articles found 95 distinct indicators and 109 multi-metric index systems that qualify under the study search criteria from a total of 64 scientific journals over 20 years. Conclusions: We found a substantial diversity of ecological health terminologies and concepts, reflecting various scientific traditions and disciplines, which highlight not only the necessity to standardize the language for communication but also the opportunity for cross-fertilization. Single distinct indicators were as frequently used as multi-metric index systems. For academic purposes, this raises the question of how underlying value statements and ethical dimensions differ between integrated health terminologies and concepts. For advocacy, we emphasize the need of a consistent core terminology to improve the effectiveness of our messaging

Environmental sustainable decision making– The need and obstacles for integration of LCA into decision analysis

Decision analysis is often used to help decision makers choose among alternatives, based on the expected utility associated to each alternative as function of its consequences and potential impacts. Environmental impacts are not always among the prioritized concerns of traditional decision making. This has fostered the development of several environmental problems and is nowadays a reason of concern. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) can assess an extensive range of environmental impacts associated with a product or service system and support a life cycle perspective on the alternative products or service systems, revealing potential problem shifting between life cycle stages. Through the integration with traditional risk based decision analysis, LCA may thus facilitate a better informed decision process. In this study we explore how environmental impacts are taken into account in different fields of interest for decision makers to identify the need, potential and obstacles for integrating LCA into conventional approaches to decision problems. Three application areas are used as examples: transportation planning, flood management, and food production and consumption. The analysis of these cases shows that environmental impacts are considered only to a limited extent in traditional evaluation of transport and food projects. They are rarely, if at all, addressed in flood risk management. Hence, in each of the three cases studied, there is a clear need for the inclusion of a better and systematic assessment of environmental impacts. Some LCA studies have been conducted in all three research areas, mainly on infrastructures and production systems. The three cases show the potential of integrating LCA into existing decision analysis by providing the environmental profiles of the alternatives. However, due to different goals and scopes of LCA and other decision analysis approaches, there is a general lack of consistency in study system scoping in terms of considered elements and boundaries, in uncertainty treatment, and in applied metrics. In the present paper, we discuss the obstacles arising when trying to integrate LCA with conventional evaluation tools and we propose a research agenda to eventually make such integration feasible and consistent