Journal article
Assessing and managing multiple risks in a changing world — The Roskilde recommendations
University of Gothenburg1
Enviresearch Ltd2
Halmstad University3
Aarhus University4
Norwegian Institute for Water Research5
University of Aveiro6
Department of Civil Engineering, Technical University of Denmark7
Section for Structural Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, Technical University of Denmark8
United States Environmental Protection Agency9
Norwegian Geotechnical Institute10
Polish Academy of Sciences11
Roskilde University12
Chapema Environmental Strategies Ltd.13
Stockholm University14
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor15
DHI Water - Environment - Health16
Simon Fraser University17
National Institute of Aquatic Resources, Technical University of Denmark18
Section for Marine Ecology and Oceanography, National Institute of Aquatic Resources, Technical University of Denmark19
Delft University of Technology20
...and 10 moreRoskilde University (Denmark) hosted a November 2015 workshop, Environmental Risk—Assessing and Managing Multiple Risks in a Changing World. This Focus article presents the consensus recommendations of 30 attendees from 9 countries regarding implementation of a common currency (ecosystem services) for holistic environmental risk assessment and management; improvements to risk assessment and management in a complex, human‐modified, and changing world; appropriate development of protection goals in a 2‐stage process; dealing with societal issues; risk‐management information needs; conducting risk assessment of risk management; and development of adaptive and flexible regulatory systems.
The authors encourage both cross‐disciplinary and interdisciplinary approaches to address their 10 recommendations: 1) adopt ecosystem services as a common currency for risk assessment and management; 2) consider cumulative stressors (chemical and nonchemical) and determine which dominate to best manage and restore ecosystem services; 3) fully integrate risk managers and communities of interest into the risk‐assessment process; 4) fully integrate risk assessors and communities of interest into the risk‐management process; 5) consider socioeconomics and increased transparency in both risk assessment and risk management; 6) recognize the ethical rights of humans and ecosystems to an adequate level of protection; 7) determine relevant reference conditions and the proper ecological context for assessments in human‐modified systems; 8) assess risks and benefits to humans and the ecosystem and consider unintended consequences of management actions; 9) avoid excessive conservatism or possible underprotection resulting from sole reliance on binary, numerical benchmarks; and 10) develop adaptive risk‐management and regulatory goals based on ranges of uncertainty.
Language: | English |
---|---|
Year: | 2017 |
Pages: | 7-16 |
ISSN: | 15528618 and 07307268 |
Types: | Journal article |
DOI: | 10.1002/etc.3513 |
ORCIDs: | Dinh, Khuong Van , Miraglia, Simona and 0000-0002-6437-9473 |
Climate change Ecosystem services Multiple environmental stressors Risk assessment Risk management SDG 13 - Climate Action Wicked problems
CHALLENGES CONTAMINANTS CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ASSESSMENT Climate Change Congresses as Topic Conservation of Natural Resources DECISION-MAKING Denmark ECOSYSTEM-SERVICES Ecology Ecosystem GLOBAL CLIMATE-CHANGE Humans International Cooperation MITIGATION Risk Assessment Risk Management SEA SEDIMENTS climate change ecosystem services multiple environmental stressors risk assessment risk management wicked problems