Sliding scales for assessing and communicating human and ecological risks and complexities for restoration, remediation crises, and decisions

Abstract

Many lands were degraded or destroyed by human activities, including contamination from industry and military facilities. The United States and other industrialized counties have legacy wastes remaining from the Second World War, the Cold War, and industrialization. There is increasing need to return degraded land to suitable future land uses, including ecological parks and preserves. This paper proposes a conceptual model of the different levels of information needed to understand the risk to human health, the environment, and ecological resources. I propose a four-part approach: (1) general model for assessing ecological resources, (2) model for assessment needed for remediation or restoration projects, (3) a sliding scale, conceptual model for causes, events, and sources that lead to exposure and risk, and (4) an additional step that includes environmental justice (equity, diversity, and inclusion) as a necessary consideration of traditional exposure assessment. While the factors involved in ecological risk assessment are well established, the combination of human health, ecological health, and environmental justice determining risk for remediation or restoration projects is not. Major factors useful for human health, environmental, and ecological evaluation include causes, events (earthquakes, accidents, chemical releases), sources, exposure, and informational challenges, as well as barriers to exposure. I propose that exposure through an environmental justice (diversity, equity, and inclusion) lens should be a key component of risk assessment. Each of these factors involves a sliding scale or continuum that must be considered in evaluating risk and communicating with the regulators, resource trustees, land managers and the public. The conceptual model also serves as a template for obtaining information about the environment that will be useful for communicating the importance of different risk factors. The model was developed for consideration of remediation on Department of Energy lands, it can be applied more broadly to other projects.

Keywords:

• Assessment components
• environmental justice
• restoration
• remediation
• sliding risk factors

Acknowledgments

Thanks are extended to the many colleagues who have discussed human health risk assessment, ecological and ecocultural evaluations, and restoration, including David Kosson, Kevin Brown, Steven Handel, Michael Greenberg, Dick and Jane Stewart, and Hank Mayer. I also thank other people from CRESP, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, DOE headquarters in Washington D.C., managers and scientists from EPA and state agencies, and others.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest is reported by the authors. The opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. DOE, Rutgers University, Vanderbilt University, and other participating universities.

Additional information

Funding

This study was supported by the Department of Energy (DE-FC01-06EW07053) through the Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP), Rutgers University NIEHS Center of Excellence (NIH-NIEHS P30ES005022), Rutgers University, and Vanderbilt University.