Abstract
This paper explains how comparative risk analysis can help decision makers set environmental management priorities. We believe that “screening level” techniques, based on readily available data and methods, can characterize the relative magnitude of the health risks and economic damages posed by environmental problems. This hypothesis was recently tested as part of the EPA’s Environmental Strategies Project in Denver, Colorado. The problems analyzed for metro-Denver included indoor and outdoor air pollutants, drinking water quality, releases from hazardous waste management sites, surface water pollution, and exposures to lead in the environment. We used risk as a common denominator to evaluate problems with dissimilar characteristics. The results helped local decision makers identify problems deserving priority attention. Given the current levels of public and private dollars that are spent on environmental protection, we believe that conducting comparative risk analysis to set priorities may be a wise use of public funds.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
