Step 2: Determining and Quantifying Environmental Damage

  • Joshua Lipton
  • Kate LeJeune


The purpose of damage determination and quantification is to quantify the lost resources and/or resource services that should be offset by remediation projects. Damage determination and quantification might involve studies to determine the causes, degree, spatial and temporal extent, and nature of damages. In other cases, existing data and/or models may suffice. Damage studies should be designed to produce scientifically rigorous, high quality data and to answer questions relevant to the equivalency analysis. Studies should not be designed primarily to answer questions that are of purely scientific interest. However, analysts should not hesitate to conduct investigations of an exacting scientific nature, because without correct quantitative information about damages, equivalency analysis is unlikely to provide for the ‘right’ amount of remediation.


Environmental damage Debit Interim loss Primary remediation Metrics 


  1. Babut, M. P., Wolfgang, A., Graeme, B. E., Camusso, M., de Deckere, E., & den Besten, P. J. (2005). International overview of sediment quality guidelines and their uses. In R. J. Wenning (Ed.), Use of sediment quality guidelines and related tools for the assessment of contaminated sediments. Pensacola: SETAC.Google Scholar
  2. CCME. (1999). Canadian environmental quality guidelines. Winnipeg, MB: CCME, Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME).Google Scholar
  3. Crane, M. (2003). Proposed development of sediment quality guidelines under the European water framework directive: A critique. Toxicology Letters, 142(3), 195–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Efroymson, R. A., Will, M. E., & Suter, G. W. (1997a). Toxicological benchmarks for contaminants of potential concern for effects on soil and litter invertebrates and heterotrophic process: 1997 revision. Washington: US Department of Energy.Google Scholar
  5. Efroymson, R. A., Will, M. E., Suter, G. W., & Wooten, A. C. (1997b). Toxicological benchmarks for screening contaminants of potential concern for effects on terrestrial plants: 1997 Revision. Washington: US Department of Energy.Google Scholar
  6. GeneWatch UK. (2005). Notes for Defra in relation to GMOs and the implementation of the environmental liability directive. UK: GeneWatch.Google Scholar
  7. Hin, J. A., Osté, L. A., & Schmidt, C. A. (2010). Guidance document for sediment assessment. Methods to determine to what extent the realization of water quality objectives of a water system is impeded by contaminated sediments. Netherlands: Rijkswaterstaat Centre for Water Management.Google Scholar
  8. Lipton, J., Galbraith, H., Burger, J., & Wartenberg, D. (1993). A paradigm for ecological risk assessment. Environmental Management, 17(1), 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Long, E. R., Field, L. J., & MacDonald, D. D. (1998). Predicting toxicity in marine sediments with numerical sediment quality guidelines. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 17(4), 714–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. MacDonald, D. D., Ingersoll, C. G., & Berger, T. A. (2000). Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 39, 20–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). (1999). Sediment quality guidelines developed for the National Status and Trends Program, USA.Google Scholar
  12. Ott, W. R. (1978). Environmental indices, theory and practice. Ann Arbor Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  13. Strange, E., Galbraith, H., Bickel, S., Mills, D., Beltman, D., & Lipton, J. (2002). Environmental assessment: Determining ecological equivalence in service-to-service scaling of saltmarsh restoration. Environmental Management, 29(2), 290–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Abt AssociatesBoulderUSA
  2. 2.RabouilletFrance

Personalised recommendations