Ecological risk assessment in the context of global climate change

• Published in: Environmental toxicology and chemistry Vol. 32; no. 1; pp. 79 - 92
• Main Authors: Landis, Wayne G., Durda, Judi L., Brooks, Marjorie L., Chapman, Peter M., Menzie, Charles A., Stahl Jr, Ralph G., Stauber, Jennifer L.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Hoboken, USA John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01.01.2013; Blackwell Publishing Ltd
• Subjects: Adaptive management; Cause & effect diagrams; Climate; Climate Change; Climate effects; Ecology; Ecosystem; Ecosystem service; Ecosystem services; Environmental changes; Environmental conditions; Environmental Exposure - statistics & numerical data; Environmental Monitoring - methods; Environmental Pollutants - toxicity; Global climate; Global Climate Change; Health risk assessment; Humans; Management decisions; Multiple stressors; Regional risk assessment; Risk assessment; Risk Assessment - methods; Stress, Physiological; Toxicology; Uncertainty
• ISSN: 0730-7268; 1552-8618
• DOI: 10.1002/etc.2047

Changes to sources, stressors, habitats, and geographic ranges; toxicological effects; end points; and uncertainty estimation require significant changes in the implementation of ecological risk assessment (ERA). Because of the lack of analog systems and circumstances in historically studied sites, there is a likelihood of type III error. As a first step, the authors propose a decision key to aid managers and risk assessors in determining when and to what extent climate change should be incorporated. Next, when global climate change is an important factor, the authors recommend seven critical changes to ERA. First, develop conceptual cause–effect diagrams that consider relevant management decisions as well as appropriate spatial and temporal scales to include both direct and indirect effects of climate change and the stressor of management interest. Second, develop assessment end points that are expressed as ecosystem services. Third, evaluate multiple stressors and nonlinear responses—include the chemicals and the stressors related to climate change. Fourth, estimate how climate change will affect or modify management options as the impacts become manifest. Fifth, consider the direction and rate of change relative to management objectives, recognizing that both positive and negative outcomes can occur. Sixth, determine the major drivers of uncertainty, estimating and bounding stochastic uncertainty spatially, temporally, and progressively. Seventh, plan for adaptive management to account for changing environmental conditions and consequent changes to ecosystem services. Good communication is essential for making risk‐related information understandable and useful for managers and stakeholders to implement a successful risk‐assessment and decision‐making process. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2013;32:79–92. © 2012 SETAC