Skip to main content

Attributes of a Public Health Risk Assessment

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Public Health Risk Assessment for Human Exposure to Chemicals

Part of the book series: Environmental Pollution ((EPOL,volume 27))

  • 1247 Accesses

Abstract

It has long been recognized that, nothing is wholly safe or dangerous per se, but that the object involved, and the manner and conditions of use determine the degree of hazard or safety. Consequently, it may rightly be concluded that there is no escape from all risk, no matter how remote, but that there only are choices among risks (Daniels 1978). In that spirit, risk assessment is usually designed to offer an opportunity to help understand a system better—usually by adding an orderliness and completeness to a problem evaluation. It must be acknowledged, however, that risk assessment has usefulness only if it is properly applied. Also, the risk analyst must be cognizant of the fact that hazard perception and risk thresholds—all of which can have significant impact on the ultimate risk decision—tend to be quite distinct in different regions or locations. Indeed, a good understanding of several important attributes of the risk assessment mechanisms would generally help both the risk assessor and the risk manager in practice. This chapter discusses key attributes that will facilitate the application and interpretation of risk assessment information—and thus make it more useful in public health risk management decisions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Suggested Reading

  • Bate, R. (Ed.). (1997). What risk? (Science, politics & public health). Oxford, England: Butterworth-Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bates, D. V. (1994). Environmental health risks and public policy. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bromley, D. W., & Segerson, K. (Eds.). (1992). The social response to environmental risk: Policy formulation in an age of uncertainty. Kluwer Academic: Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamed, M. M. (1999). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis of public health risk assessment from contaminated soil. Journal of Soil Contamination, 8(3), 285–306.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hamed, M. M. (2000). Impact of random variables probability distribution on public health risk assessment from contaminated soil. Journal of Soil Contamination, 9(2), 99–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammitt, J. K. (1995). Can more information increase uncertainty? Chance, 8(3), 15–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammitt, J. K., & Shlyakhter, A. I. (1999). The expected value of information and the probability of surprise. Risk Analysis, 19(1), 135–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansson, S.-O. (1989). Dimensions of risk. Risk Analysis, 9(1), 107–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansson, S.-O. (1996a). Decision making under great uncertainty. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 26(3), 369–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansson, S.-O. (1996b). What is philosophy of risk? Theoria, 62, 169–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joffe, M., & Mindell, J. (2002). A framework for the evidence base to support health impact assessment. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 56(2), 132–132.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kimmel, C. A., & Gaylor, D. W. (1988). Issues in qualitative and quantitative risk analysis for developmental toxicology. Risk Analysis, 8, 15–20.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pollard, S. J., Yearsley, R., et al. (2002). Current directions in the practice of environmental risk assessment in the United Kingdom. Environmental Science & Technology, 36(4), 530–538.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Richards, D., & Rowe, W. D. (1999). Decision-making with heterogeneous sources of information. Risk Analysis, 19(1), 69–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Ryzin, J. (1980). Quantitative risk assessment. Journal of Occupational Medicine, 22, 321–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Bibliography

  • ACS and RFF. (1998). Understanding Risk Analysis (A Short Guide for Health, Safety and Environmental Policy Making), A Publication of the American Chemical Society (ACS) and Resources for the Future (RFF)—written by M. Boroush, ACS, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Asante-Duah, D. K. (1998). Risk assessment in environmental management: A guide for managing chemical contamination problems. Chichester, England: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • ASTM. (1995). Standard guide for risk-based corrective action applied at petroleum-release sites. Philadelphia, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials, ASTM (E1739-95).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cairney, T. (1995). The re-use of contaminated land: A handbook of risk assessment. Chichester, UK: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, B., & Rees, J. F. (1995). Contaminated land remediation in the UK with reference to risk assessment: Two case studies. Journal of the Institute of Water and Environmental Management, 9(1), 27–36.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • HSE (Health and Safety Executive). (1989a). Risk criteria for land-use planning in the vicinity of major industrial hazards. London, UK: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • HSE (Health and Safety Executive). (1989b). Quantified risk assessment—Its input to decision making. London, UK: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • McTernan, W. F., & Kaplan, E. (Eds.). (1990). Risk assessment for groundwater pollution control, ASCE Monograph. New York: American Society of Civil Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millner, G. C., James, R. C., & Nye, A. C. (1992). Human health-based soil cleanup guidelines for diesel fuel No.2, J. Soil Contamination, 1(2), 103–157.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Moeller, D. W. (1997). Environmental Health (Revisedth ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • NRC. (1989a). Ground Water Models: Scientific and Regulatory Applications, National Research Council (NRC). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • NRC. (1989b). Improving Risk Communication, National Research Council, Committee on Risk Perception and Communication. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • NRC. (1993a). Ground Water Vulnerability Assessment: Predicting Relative Contamination Potential Under Conditions of Uncertainty. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • NRC. (1993b). Issues in Risk Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • NRC. (1993c). Pesticides in the Diets of Infants and Children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saleh, M. A., Blancato, J. N., & Nauman, C. H. (Eds.). (1994). Biomarkers of human exposure to resticides (ACS Symposium Series). Washington, DC: American Chemical Society (ACS).

    Google Scholar 

  • Shere, M. E. (1995). The myth of meaningful environmental risk assessment. Harvard Environmental Law Review, 19(2), 409–492.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sittig, M. (1994). World-wide limits for toxic and hazardous chemicals in air, water and soil. Park Ridge, NJ: Noyes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, T. T., Jr. (1996). Regulatory reform in the USA and Europe. Journal of Environmental Law, 8(2), 257–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. H., Sciortino, S., Goeden, H., & Wright, C. C. (1996). Consideration of background exposures in the management of hazardous waste sites: A new approach to risk assessment. Risk Analysis, 16(5), 619–625.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tsuji, J. S., & Serl, K. M. (1996). Current uses of the EPA lead model to assess health risk and action levels for soil. Environmental Geochemistry and Health, 18, 25–33.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • WHO. (2010a). WHO human health risk assessment toolkit: chemical hazards, IPCS Harmonization Project Document No. 8, The International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS), WHO Press, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland

    Google Scholar 

  • WHO. (2010b). Characterization and application of physiologically based pharmacokinetic models in risk assessment. IPCS Harmonization Project Document No. 9, The International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS), WHO Press, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whyte, A. V., & Burton, I. (Eds.). (1980). Environmental risk assessment, SCOPE Report 15. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniels, S. L. (1978). Environmental evaluation and regulatory assessment of industrial chemicals. In 51st Ann. Conf. Water Poll. Cont. Fed., Anaheim, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suter, G. W. (1993). Ecological risk assessment. Boca Raton, FL: Lewis Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • NRC. (1995). Improving the environment: An evaluation of DOE’s environmental management program. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Asante-Duah, K. (2017). Attributes of a Public Health Risk Assessment. In: Public Health Risk Assessment for Human Exposure to Chemicals. Environmental Pollution, vol 27. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1039-6_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics