SETAC NA 2013 ERA AG Sponsored Sessions
Ecological Risk Assessment Advisory Group (ERA
AG) Sponsored Sessions
SETAC NA 2013: Nashville, TN, USA
consider submitting abstracts and attending these ERA AG sponsored sessions.
- Implementing Ecological Risk Assessment Weight-of Evidence Approaches that Contribute to Decision-Making
- Session Chairs: Chris McCarthy, Ruth Hull, and Glenn Suter
- What Works and Why?
- Session Chairs: John Toll, Marc Greenberg, and Steve Brown
See details of each session below:
Ecological Risk Assessment Weight-of Evidence Approaches that Contribute to
Chairs: Chris McCarthy, Ruth Hull and Glenn Suter
(WOE) approaches have been used within ecological risk assessments (ERAs) for
the last two decades. The sediment quality triad WOE approach to assess risks
to the benthic invertebrate community has been implemented broadly and has achieved
widespread regulatory acceptance. However, WOE analyses for other receptor
groups, particularly in the terrestrial environment, are used less often, and
the types of data collected and their contribution to the overall
characterization of risk are less clear. There is little guidance on how to
develop a workplan that will lead to a comprehensive dataset that can be used
for WOE analysis, nor is there guidance on how to interpret the various lines
of evidence in relation to each other, particularly when there are differing
levels of uncertainty in the data, and results that do not clearly support each
other. This often leads to cursory analyses that do not provide confidence in
the conclusions, hence do not contribute to decision-making. This session will seek
examples of well-planned and thorough WOE analyses that can evaluate impacts,
and also provide insight into potential future risks, a requirement of some
contaminated sites programs. It is the goal of this session to highlight
advances in WOE approaches, including the study design, analysis of data,
weighing of lines of evidence, addressing uncertainties, and integrating
diverse data sets, so that the resulting characterization and conclusions can
be used with confidence in decision-making.
If you would like to participate, please contact one of the
session co-chairs: Chris McCarthy
, Ruth Hull (
) and Glenn Suter. (
What Works and Why?
John Toll, Marc Greenberg, and
session follows in the footsteps of the 2011 session "Evaluating Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessments and Remediation
Decisions: Is the Cure Worse than the Disease?” and the 2012 session "21st Century Environmental Risk Assessment.”
As with its predecessors, the motivation for
the proposed session is the widely held view that environmental risk management
decisions – particularly site-specific environmental risk management decisions
for large "mega” sites – tend to take too long and cost too much.
Moreover, the people responsible for
implementing environmental risk management decisions often lament lost opportunities
to achieve real and lasting environmental benefits, from ecosystem restoration
to urban revitalization.
squandered goes hand-in-hand with opportunities lost.
of the proposed session "What Works and
Why” is not to dwell on these problems, but to accelerate progress toward a
new status quo where environmental risk management projects are routinely
expected to create real and lasting value that outweighs direct and indirect project
We hope to help is by convening
professionals working on the front lines of environmental risk management
projects to discuss projects that are the exception to the rule, and learn from
We are seeking abstracts
to fill this bill.
If you have
worked on a project that created real and lasting value that outweighed project
transaction costs, please consider submitting an abstract to this session.
Abstracts should provide:
project's value proposition (i.e., what it sought to achieve)
that had to be overcome
key(s) to the project's success (e.g., strong leadership, savvy technical
experts, regulators' willingness to consider unconventional solutions, responsible
party interest in expeditiously addressing the environmental problem, effective
stakeholder engagement, etc.)
outcomes regarding risk reduction, environmental enhancement, and
least one piece of practical advice that other practitioners – many of whom
have not yet experienced a successful environmental risk management project –
can use to more broadly propagate your success.
you would like to participate, please contact: John Toll
at your earliest
convenience to discuss what you would like to present.