Integrate life-cycle assessment and risk analysis results, not methods

被引:0
|
作者
Linkov I. [1 ]
Trump B.D. [1 ,2 ]
Wender B.A. [3 ,4 ]
Seager T.P. [4 ]
Kennedy A.J. [1 ]
Keisler J.M. [5 ]
机构
[1] US Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Concord, 01742, MA
[2] University of Michigan, School of Public Health, 1415 Washington Heights, Ann Arbor, 48109, MI
[3] National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 500 5th Street NW, Washington, 20001, DC
[4] School of Sustainable Engineering, Arizona State University, 660 College Avenue, Tempe, 85287, AZ
[5] University of Massachusetts, 100 Morrissey Boulevard, Boston, 02125, MA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
D O I
10.1038/nnano.2017.152
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Two analytic perspectives on environmental assessment dominate environmental policy and decision-making: Risk analysis (RA) and life-cycle assessment (LCA). RA focuses on management of a toxicological hazard in a specific exposure scenario, while LCA seeks a holistic estimation of impacts of thousands of substances across multiple media, including non-toxicological and non-chemically deleterious effects. While recommendations to integrate the two approaches have remained a consistent feature of environmental scholarship for at least 15 years, the current perception is that progress is slow largely because of practical obstacles, such as a lack of data, rather than insurmountable theoretical difficulties. Nonetheless, the emergence of nanotechnology presents a serious challenge to both perspectives. Because the pace of nanomaterial innovation far outstrips acquisition of environmentally relevant data, it is now clear that a further integration of RA and LCA based on dataset completion will remain futile. In fact, the two approaches are suited for different purposes and answer different questions. A more pragmatic approach to providing better guidance to decision-makers is to apply the two methods in parallel, integrating only after obtaining separate results. © 2017 Macmillan Publishers Limite.
引用
收藏
页码:740 / 743
页数:3
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Integrate life-cycle assessment and risk analysis results, not methods
    Linkov, Igor
    Trump, Benjamin D.
    Wender, Ben A.
    Seager, Thomas P.
    Kennedy, Alan J.
    Keisler, Jeffrey M.
    [J]. NATURE NANOTECHNOLOGY, 2017, 12 (08) : 740 - 743
  • [2] The role of life-cycle analysis in risk assessment
    Sorensen, B
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENT AND POLLUTION, 1996, 6 (4-6) : 729 - 746
  • [3] LIFE-CYCLE ANALYSIS ASSESSMENT
    SULLIVAN, JL
    YOUNG, SB
    [J]. ADVANCED MATERIALS & PROCESSES, 1995, 147 (02): : 37 - 40
  • [4] Life-cycle assessment modelling and life-cycle assessment evaluation of a triboelement
    Wani, M. F.
    Anand, A.
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE INSTITUTION OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS PART J-JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING TRIBOLOGY, 2010, 224 (J11) : 1209 - 1220
  • [5] Life-cycle cost analysis using deterministic and stochastic methods: Conflicting results
    Zayed, TM
    Chang, LM
    Fricker, JD
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTED FACILITIES, 2002, 16 (02) : 63 - 74
  • [6] DEVELOPMENT OF PSYCHOMETRIC ASSESSMENT METHODS BY LIFE-CYCLE STAGES
    SPINETTA, JJ
    [J]. CANCER, 1984, 53 (10) : 2222 - 2225
  • [7] Life-cycle assessment practitioner survey - Summary of results
    Smith Cooper, Joyce
    Fava, James A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ECOLOGY, 2006, 10 (04) : 12 - 14
  • [8] LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT
    WEISSMAN, AB
    [J]. ISSUES IN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 1994, 11 (01) : 18 - 18
  • [9] Life-cycle assessment
    Harsch, M
    Schuckert, M
    Eyerer, P
    Saur, K
    [J]. ADVANCED MATERIALS & PROCESSES, 1996, 149 (06): : 43 - 46
  • [10] Life-cycle assessment
    Riebel, P
    [J]. PULP & PAPER-CANADA, 2002, 103 (04) : 57 - 57