Abstract

Problem statement: The risk level predictions in risk assessment often suffer from uncertainties and may, thus, overlook some adverse effects. This problem can be reduced by using risk reduction strategies that continuously guide activities toward lowest possible risk. Approach: This study suggested a method to guide and assess such risk reduction strategies using multi-indicator risk characterization. It was a challenge for the method to secure robustness against unavoidable high uncertainty and to secure flexibility that embraced multiple indicators for different aspects governing the risk level. This methodology was to protect real existing targets, denoted Protection Units (PU), against adverse effects and applied knowledge about all PUs, or a representative fraction of those. A set of risk indicators described different aspects of the risk level for each PU. A scenario in this context contained the set of PUs, each having their risk level described by the set of different risk indicator values. Results: The result was a multi-criterion solution that was analyzed using partial order ranking, where ambiguities between single criteria prediction of risk level as either higher or lower were analyzed and mapped. Conclusion/Recommendations: Risk level hotspots, in which several criteria simultaneously predicted higher risk level for specific PUs, was used as key-elements to provide guidance and assessment of the need for risk reduction and the method was, therefore, called Hotspot ruled ranking (HotsRank).

Highlights

  • This study suggests an aggregation method for risk indicators that can guide and assess risk reduction

  • A scenario in this context contained the set of Protection Units (PU), each having their risk level described by the set of different risk indicator values

  • If the target is humans, the number of PUs could be the number of humans to protect, or, if the target is lakes, the number of PUs could be the number of lakes in the geographical area that is covered by the risk assessment activity (e.g., EU)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

This study suggests an aggregation method for risk indicators that can guide and assess risk reduction. The use of chemicals including pesticides and biocides, in the following unified denoted “chemicals”, may result in adverse effects, even though the risk assessment predicts them to be harmless. This is not a consequence of insufficient work of the risk assessors, but an unavoidable problem arising from the highly complicated task of risk level prediction. The risk indicators need to include as many factors as possible to gain validity and each indicator involves some degree of numeric uncertainty This problem is enforced by the fact that risk reduction is most important to apply when the risk assessment includes a critical degree of uncertainty. It is a widely accepted statement that relative analyses, in general, are more certain in the

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

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 call

Disclaimer: 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.