Comprehensive Environmental Assessment: A Meta-Assessment Approach

With growing calls for changes in the field of risk assessment, improved systematic approaches for addressing environmental issues with greater transparency and stakeholder engagement are needed to ensure sustainable trade-offs. Here we describe the comprehensive environmental assessment (CEA) approach as a holistic way to manage complex information and to structure input from diverse stakeholder perspectives to support environmental decision-making for the near- and long-term. We further note how CEA builds upon and incorporates other available tools and approaches, describe its current application at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and point out how it could be extended in evaluating a major issue such as the sustainability of biofuels.

[1]  Paul T Anastas,et al.  Fundamental changes to EPA's research enterprise: the path forward. , 2012, Environmental science & technology.

[2]  Jonathan I Levy,et al.  Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment , 2010, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[3]  Michael E. Gorman,et al.  Identification of Risks in the Life Cycle of Nanotechnology‐Based Products , 2008 .

[4]  M. Jacobson.  Effects of ethanol (E85) versus gasoline vehicles on cancer and mortality in the United States. , 2007, Environmental science & technology.

[5]  S. Al-Athel,et al.  Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: "Our Common Future" , 1987 .

[6]  Cynthia Stahl,et al.  Toward sustainability: a case study demonstrating transdisciplinary learning through the selection and use of indicators in a decision-making process. , 2011, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[7]  David Pimentel,et al.  Ethanol production: energy, economic, and environmental losses. , 2007, Reviews of environmental contamination and toxicology.

[8]  David B. Lindenmayer,et al.  Adaptive risk management for certifiably sustainable forestry , 2008 .

[9]  E Ferguson,et al.  From comparative risk assessment to multi-criteria decision analysis and adaptive management: recent developments and applications. , 2006, Environment international.

[10]  D. Scott Sink,et al.  Using the nominal group technique effectively , 1983 .

[11]  Jane C. Bare,et al.  Risk Assessment and Life-Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) for Human Health Cancerous and Noncancerous Emissions: Integrated and Complementary with Consistency within the USEPA , 2006 .

[12]  T. Seager,et al.  Coupling multi-criteria decision analysis, life-cycle assessment, and risk assessment for emerging threats. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[13]  David D. Hsu,et al.  Life cycle environmental impacts of selected U.S. ethanol production and use pathways in 2022. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[14]  James A. Duffield,et al.  THE ENERGY BALANCE OF CORN ETHANOL REVISITED , 2003 .

[15]  Jo Anne Shatkin,et al.  Nanotechnology: Health and Environmental Risks , 2008 .

[16]  Alexis Laurent,et al.  Analysis of current research addressing complementary use of life-cycle assessment and risk assessment for engineered nanomaterials: have lessons been learned from previous experience with chemicals? , 2012, Journal of Nanoparticle Research.

[17]  Jane C. Bare,et al.  Environmental impact assessment taxonomy providing comprehensive coverage of midpoints, endpoints, damages, and areas of protection , 2008 .

[18]  Igor Linkov,et al.  Environmental risk analysis for nanomaterials: Review and evaluation of frameworks , 2012, Nanotoxicology.

[19]  André L. Delbecq,et al.  A Group Process Model for Problem Identification and Program Planning , 1971 .

[20]  D. Watts,et al.  Designing Resilient , Sustainable Systems , 2022 .

[21]  G. Sayler,et al.  EPA at 40: bringing environmental protection into the 21st century. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[22]  Ord,et al.  Nanotechnology White Paper , 2014 .

[23]  S. Page.  Prologue to The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies , 2007 .

[24]  H Otway,et al.  Expert judgment in risk analysis and management: process, context, and pitfalls. , 1992, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[25]  David Rejeski,et al.  Synthetic biology: Four steps to avoid a synthetic-biology disaster , 2012, Nature.

[26]  David Rejeski,et al.  Four steps to avoid a synthetic-biology disaster: Synthetic biology , 2012 .

[27]  S. Polasky,et al.  Environmental, economic, and energetic costs and benefits of biodiesel and ethanol biofuels. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[28]  Andrew D. Jones,et al.  Supporting Online Material for: Ethanol Can Contribute To Energy and Environmental Goals , 2006 .

[29]  Valerie M Thomas,et al.  Systematic Approach to Evaluating Trade‐Offs among Fuel Options , 2006, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[30]  J. Donaldson,et al.  Integrating diverse scientific and practitioner knowledge in ecological risk analysis: a case study of biodiversity risk assessment in South Africa. , 2012, Journal of environmental management.

[31]  Theodor J. Stewart,et al.  Multiple criteria decision analysis - an integrated approach , 2001 .

[32]  G. Heath,et al.  Environmental and sustainability factors associated with next-generation biofuels in the U.S.: what do we really know? , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[33]  Division on Earth.  Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process , 1983 .

[34]  J. Ditomaso,et al.  Nonnative Species and Bioenergy: Are We Cultivating the Next Invader? , 2008 .