提高比较暴露评估在替代方案评估中的价值

Q. Meng, Xiaoying Zhou
{"title":"提高比较暴露评估在替代方案评估中的价值","authors":"Q. Meng, Xiaoying Zhou","doi":"10.3389/frsus.2023.983218","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Reducing chemical exposure is a crucial principle in alternatives assessment (AA) frameworks. Since the release of the report, A Framework to Guide Selection of Chemical Alternatives by the National Research Council in 2014, comparative exposure assessment (CEA) has been increasingly viewed as an essential part of selecting safer alternatives to chemicals of concern in consumer products. However, CEA has not been fully integrated into existing AA frameworks. CEA remains merely a technical step, disconnected from other AA components. This paper advocates for the integration of CEA as an essential part of AA, providing a holistic approach to identifying safer alternatives. The paper aims to illustrate the connection between CEA and other AA components, such as problem formulation, hazard assessment, life cycle assessment, economic assessment, and decision-making. It suggests systematic integration of CEA with cross-cutting AA considerations, including transparency, uncertainty, chemical mixtures, and sensitive receptors. This integration will enable the selection of a fit-for-purpose CEA approach based on the decision context and foster a more comprehensive approach to identifying safer alternatives. While the examples provided are not exhaustive, they aim to encourage further discussion on the integration of CEA into AA.","PeriodicalId":253319,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Sustainability","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Enhancing the value of comparative exposure assessment in alternatives assessment\",\"authors\":\"Q. Meng, Xiaoying Zhou\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/frsus.2023.983218\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Reducing chemical exposure is a crucial principle in alternatives assessment (AA) frameworks. Since the release of the report, A Framework to Guide Selection of Chemical Alternatives by the National Research Council in 2014, comparative exposure assessment (CEA) has been increasingly viewed as an essential part of selecting safer alternatives to chemicals of concern in consumer products. However, CEA has not been fully integrated into existing AA frameworks. CEA remains merely a technical step, disconnected from other AA components. This paper advocates for the integration of CEA as an essential part of AA, providing a holistic approach to identifying safer alternatives. The paper aims to illustrate the connection between CEA and other AA components, such as problem formulation, hazard assessment, life cycle assessment, economic assessment, and decision-making. It suggests systematic integration of CEA with cross-cutting AA considerations, including transparency, uncertainty, chemical mixtures, and sensitive receptors. This integration will enable the selection of a fit-for-purpose CEA approach based on the decision context and foster a more comprehensive approach to identifying safer alternatives. While the examples provided are not exhaustive, they aim to encourage further discussion on the integration of CEA into AA.\",\"PeriodicalId\":253319,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Sustainability\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Sustainability\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2023.983218\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Sustainability","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2023.983218","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

减少化学品接触是替代品评估框架中的一个关键原则。自2014年美国国家研究委员会发布《化学替代品选择指导框架》报告以来,比较暴露评估(CEA)越来越被视为选择更安全的消费品化学品替代品的重要组成部分。然而,CEA并没有完全集成到现有的AA框架中。CEA仍然只是一个技术步骤,与其他AA组件无关。本文主张将CEA整合为AA的重要组成部分,提供一种整体方法来确定更安全的替代方案。本文旨在说明CEA与AA其他组成部分(如问题制定、危害评估、生命周期评估、经济评估和决策)之间的联系。它建议将CEA与跨领域AA考虑系统整合,包括透明度、不确定度、化学混合物和敏感受体。这种集成将使基于决策上下文的适合目的的CEA方法得以选择,并促进更全面的方法来确定更安全的替代方案。虽然所提供的例子并不详尽,但它们旨在鼓励进一步讨论将CEA整合到AA中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Enhancing the value of comparative exposure assessment in alternatives assessment
Reducing chemical exposure is a crucial principle in alternatives assessment (AA) frameworks. Since the release of the report, A Framework to Guide Selection of Chemical Alternatives by the National Research Council in 2014, comparative exposure assessment (CEA) has been increasingly viewed as an essential part of selecting safer alternatives to chemicals of concern in consumer products. However, CEA has not been fully integrated into existing AA frameworks. CEA remains merely a technical step, disconnected from other AA components. This paper advocates for the integration of CEA as an essential part of AA, providing a holistic approach to identifying safer alternatives. The paper aims to illustrate the connection between CEA and other AA components, such as problem formulation, hazard assessment, life cycle assessment, economic assessment, and decision-making. It suggests systematic integration of CEA with cross-cutting AA considerations, including transparency, uncertainty, chemical mixtures, and sensitive receptors. This integration will enable the selection of a fit-for-purpose CEA approach based on the decision context and foster a more comprehensive approach to identifying safer alternatives. While the examples provided are not exhaustive, they aim to encourage further discussion on the integration of CEA into AA.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Campus sustainability at Rhodes University, South Africa: perceptions, awareness level, and potential interventions PET and polyolefin plastics supply chains in Michigan: present and future systems analysis of environmental and socio-economic impacts COP28 and the global stocktake: a weak attempt to address climate change Strengthening resilience: decentralized decision-making and multi-criteria analysis in the energy-water-food nexus systems Tomato disease detection with lightweight recurrent and convolutional deep learning models for sustainable and smart agriculture
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1