Vulnerability and Environmental Risk Assessment

Over the past half century, environmental risk assessment (ERA) has become increasingly important in political decisions. It forms an important basis within the World Trade Organization’s Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement (SPS) and is an important touch point within the Convention on Biological Diversity. The scope of ERA is expanding rapidly both in the issues that it covers and in its role in policy formation. Classic environmental risk issues—starting in the 60s—include air and water pollution and pesticide usage. However, new ecological challenges include hormones in the environment, invasive species and the GM issue. Also, new technologies are becoming the focus of ERA. Importantly, the way that ERA is used in policymaking is changing as well. Historically, ERA was used primarily as a decision-support tool. In other words, risk-assessors provided information that decision-makers took into account to guide policy. However, in the last few decades, ERA has been increasingly used to legitimize environmental policy; when the public knows that a risk assessment was done, it is likely to legitimize the eventual decision. Thus, the process now is important in terms of acceptability of the decision, which can create tension if the risk-assessment data are lacking in some regard. In addition, risk assessment has been expanded in ways to set environmental policy. In the developing area of comparative risk assessment, certain policy options are favored, rather than certain policy decisions, which has raised additional challenges for risk assessment. The expansion of the scope of these issues has increased vulnerability because, as we address new problems, we have to keep revising our modus operandi merely to keep up. Vulnerability and Environmental Risk Assessment