ArticleJournal of risk research2024
Sliding scales for assessing and communicating human and ecological risks and complexities for restoration, remediation crises, and decisions.
Article in Journal of risk research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.