风险评估和监管标准制定的概率方法:当前的应用、差距和机会。

IF 3.3 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management Pub Date : 2025-11-01 DOI:10.1093/inteam/vjaf016
Camille Flinders, Brad Barnhart, Emily B Morrison, Paul D Anderson, Wayne G Landis
{"title":"风险评估和监管标准制定的概率方法:当前的应用、差距和机会。","authors":"Camille Flinders, Brad Barnhart, Emily B Morrison, Paul D Anderson, Wayne G Landis","doi":"10.1093/inteam/vjaf016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Traditional ecological and human health risk assessment often relies on deterministic frameworks that preclude the presence of variability or uncertainty among input parameters characterizing exposure, effects, and risk. To promote increased realism and generate more robust risk management decisions, probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) has been introduced as a foundational grouping of techniques that seeks to broadly characterize variability among its components. Although multiple methods exist (e.g., Monte Carlo simulations, Bayesian networks), along with some federal and state regulatory guidance, gaps remain in prescriptive regulatory recommendations for the implementation of PRA methods. This article describes specific probabilistic approaches for risk characterization and assessment, regulatory support of PRA, challenges that may limit more widespread use, and opportunities for its expanded use in regulatory areas where it is not currently applied. Taken together, we hope to advance the understanding of probabilistic methodologies and their versatility for robust, transparent, data-based environmental risk assessment and standards derivation across a range of media that align with regulatory objectives to protect aquatic and terrestrial biota, human health, and vulnerable populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":13557,"journal":{"name":"Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management","volume":" ","pages":"1281-1292"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Probabilistic approaches for risk assessment and regulatory criteria development: current applications, gaps, and opportunities.\",\"authors\":\"Camille Flinders, Brad Barnhart, Emily B Morrison, Paul D Anderson, Wayne G Landis\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/inteam/vjaf016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Traditional ecological and human health risk assessment often relies on deterministic frameworks that preclude the presence of variability or uncertainty among input parameters characterizing exposure, effects, and risk. To promote increased realism and generate more robust risk management decisions, probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) has been introduced as a foundational grouping of techniques that seeks to broadly characterize variability among its components. Although multiple methods exist (e.g., Monte Carlo simulations, Bayesian networks), along with some federal and state regulatory guidance, gaps remain in prescriptive regulatory recommendations for the implementation of PRA methods. This article describes specific probabilistic approaches for risk characterization and assessment, regulatory support of PRA, challenges that may limit more widespread use, and opportunities for its expanded use in regulatory areas where it is not currently applied. Taken together, we hope to advance the understanding of probabilistic methodologies and their versatility for robust, transparent, data-based environmental risk assessment and standards derivation across a range of media that align with regulatory objectives to protect aquatic and terrestrial biota, human health, and vulnerable populations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13557,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1281-1292\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/inteam/vjaf016\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/inteam/vjaf016","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

传统的生态和人类健康风险评估往往依赖于确定性框架,排除了表征暴露、影响和风险的输入参数之间存在变异性或不确定性。为了促进增加的现实性和产生更稳健的风险管理决策,概率风险评估(PRA)已经被引入作为一种基本的技术分组,旨在广泛地表征其组成部分之间的可变性。虽然存在多种方法(例如,蒙特卡罗模拟,贝叶斯网络)以及一些联邦和州的监管指导,但在实施PRA方法的规范性监管建议方面仍然存在差距。本文描述了风险表征和评估的具体概率方法、PRA的监管支持、可能限制其更广泛使用的挑战,以及在目前尚未应用PRA的监管领域扩大使用的机会。综上所述,我们希望促进对概率方法及其多功能性的理解,以便在符合保护水生和陆地生物群、人类健康和弱势群体的监管目标的一系列媒体上进行稳健、透明、基于数据的环境风险评估和标准制定。
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
Probabilistic approaches for risk assessment and regulatory criteria development: current applications, gaps, and opportunities.

Traditional ecological and human health risk assessment often relies on deterministic frameworks that preclude the presence of variability or uncertainty among input parameters characterizing exposure, effects, and risk. To promote increased realism and generate more robust risk management decisions, probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) has been introduced as a foundational grouping of techniques that seeks to broadly characterize variability among its components. Although multiple methods exist (e.g., Monte Carlo simulations, Bayesian networks), along with some federal and state regulatory guidance, gaps remain in prescriptive regulatory recommendations for the implementation of PRA methods. This article describes specific probabilistic approaches for risk characterization and assessment, regulatory support of PRA, challenges that may limit more widespread use, and opportunities for its expanded use in regulatory areas where it is not currently applied. Taken together, we hope to advance the understanding of probabilistic methodologies and their versatility for robust, transparent, data-based environmental risk assessment and standards derivation across a range of media that align with regulatory objectives to protect aquatic and terrestrial biota, human health, and vulnerable populations.

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
Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management
Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCESTOXICOLOGY&nbs-TOXICOLOGY
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
6.50%
发文量
156
期刊介绍: Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management (IEAM) publishes the science underpinning environmental decision making and problem solving. Papers submitted to IEAM must link science and technical innovations to vexing regional or global environmental issues in one or more of the following core areas: Science-informed regulation, policy, and decision making Health and ecological risk and impact assessment Restoration and management of damaged ecosystems Sustaining ecosystems Managing large-scale environmental change Papers published in these broad fields of study are connected by an array of interdisciplinary engineering, management, and scientific themes, which collectively reflect the interconnectedness of the scientific, social, and environmental challenges facing our modern global society: Methods for environmental quality assessment; forecasting across a number of ecosystem uses and challenges (systems-based, cost-benefit, ecosystem services, etc.); measuring or predicting ecosystem change and adaptation Approaches that connect policy and management tools; harmonize national and international environmental regulation; merge human well-being with ecological management; develop and sustain the function of ecosystems; conceptualize, model and apply concepts of spatial and regional sustainability Assessment and management frameworks that incorporate conservation, life cycle, restoration, and sustainability; considerations for climate-induced adaptation, change and consequences, and vulnerability Environmental management applications using risk-based approaches; considerations for protecting and fostering biodiversity, as well as enhancement or protection of ecosystem services and resiliency.
期刊最新文献
Integrated assessment of wastewater pollution in a karstic coastal lagoon: linking nutrients, caffeine, stable isotopes, and fish physiological responses. Navigating through Safe-and-Sustainable-by-Design (SSbD): Scoping Analysis with functionalized graphene oxide as a case study. Factors governing the transition from active remediation of petroleum contamination in the subsurface to natural source zone depletion. Nanotechnology and Plant-Microbe Interactions: Enhancing Symbiotic Relationships for Crop Resilience. AHP-Driven Decision Framework for Integrated Management of Parahypopta caestrum in Asparagus officinalis cultivation.
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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