Risk Assessment, Risk Management & Risk Communication

Principles and Applications
  • C. M. Teaf
  • J. M. Kuperberg
Conference paper
Part of the NATO Science Series book series (NAIV, volume 34)


The evaluation and resolution of environmental contamination problems, including affected water resources, is most effective if it involves appropriate application of three complementary elements: risk assessment, risk management and risk communication. These three components of the evaluation and resolution process address the following:
  • an understanding of the extent and magnitude of the hazards (e.g., chemical contamination);

  • the development of practical and technically effective qualitative or quantitative goals and decisions regarding safe exposure levels, coupled with methods to minimize or control potential exposures (e.g., remediation, engineered structures, restrictions on resource use); and,

  • the dissemination and discussion of information among scientists, regulators, politicians, and the public, regarding potential risks and available management strategies.


Risk Assessment Risk Management Risk Communication Risk Assessment Approach Risk Management Approach 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    NRC. 1983. Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process. National Research Council Commission on Life Sciences, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    WHO. 2002. World Health Organization IPCS Risk Assessment website September, 2002.
  3. 3.
    U.S. EPA. 1991. Risk Assessment Guidelines for Superfund (RAGS). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    U.S. EPA. 2002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Superfund Risk Assessment website September, 2002.
  5. 5.
    EC. 2002. European Commission Chemical Risks website September, 2002.
  6. 6.
    NRC. 1994. Science & Judgment in Risk Assessment. National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    ATSDR. 2002. A Primer on Health Risk Communication Principles and Practices. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. See ATSDR website
  8. 8.
    NAS. 1996. Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. National Academy of Sciences, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gutteling, J.M. and O. Wiegman. 1996. Exploring Risk Communication. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Covello, V. and P. Sandman. 2001. Risk communication: evolutin and revolution. In: Wolborst, E. (ed.), Solutions to an Environment in Peril. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    NCI. 2003. Risk communication bibliography. National Cancer Institute website

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. M. Teaf
    • 1
  • J. M. Kuperberg
    • 1
  1. 1.Florida State University TallahasseeFloridaUSA

Personalised recommendations