risk assessment is policy wim passchier health risk analysis and toxicology, maastricht university

Risk assessment is policy

Wim PasschierHealth Risk Analysis and Toxicology, Maastricht University

Risk - case

Trans Alaska Pipeline System: Risk is not just the possibility of oil loss

6 November 2006 Public Policy - Risk & Uncertainty 3

Trans Alaska Pipeline System

11-09-2001 .. .. .. 12-09-2001

WTC, Pentagon Heightened security Loading operations stopped Korean airliner diverted Loading operations resumed



04-10-2001 .. 05-10-2001 .. ..

06-10-2001 07-10-2001

Helicopter discovers oil leak Pipeline shut down Cause: bullet hole Shooter taken in custody Shooter was drunk 6600 barrels spill 6800 barrels spill Pipeline operating again


Cause-effect sequence

human action, natural

processes

changes in

material and

energy fluxes

stressors exposure harm

cause-effect sequence

contextcontext

driver

s

driver

s

feedbackfeedback


Risk assessment of pipeline transport (but incomplete!)

Disturbed operation

Human needs

Human wants

Choice of technology

or production

process

Loss of control

Emissions of

materials or energy

Diffusion in the

environ-ment

-‘exposure’

Effects

Damage to health of man and

the environ-

ment

Normal operation

Disturbed operation

MobilityProductsHeating

Oil production

Extraction Arctic

region and pipeline transport

Pumping failure or

loss of integrity

Normal:Limited

Disturbed:Oil spill

Oil spill:Diffusion in

soil

Oil spill:Ecosystem

effects

Oil spill:Local loss

of diversity and

ecosystem functions


Incompleteness of extendedcause-effect sequence

Disturbed operation

Human needs

Human wants


or production

process

Loss of control

Emissions of

materials or energy

Diffusion in the

environ-ment

-‘exposure’

Effects


the environ-

ment

Normal operation

OptionsOptionsUncertaintiesUncertainties

Test measures?Test measures?

Indire

ct e

ffects

Indire

ct e

ffects



1000 m3 oil spill Response plan did not work Income loss for State of Alaska M$ 8 Cleanup costs M$ 18 (Feb 2001) 60% recovered (Mar 2002) Cleanup efforts continue No evidence for ecological damage Hydrocarbon concentrations stable

as off Feb 2006


Trans Alaska Pipeline SystemLessons

Risk: When is uncertain Where is uncertain What is uncertain

Characteristics Possibility of harm Varying nature of harm Unexpected Unforeseen

Risk - case

Motorized transport:Accidents, noise and air pollution


Risk assessment of exposure to emissions from motorized vehicles

Disturbed operation

Human needs

Human wants


or production

process

Loss of control

Emissions of

materials or energy

Diffusion in the

environ-ment

-‘exposure’

Effects


the environ-

ment

Normal operation

Disturbed operation

MobilityProductsHeating

Individual transport

Cars with combus-

tion engines

Road accidents

Emission of combu-

tion products

Noise generation

Spread of polluted

air, inhalation by people

Noise exposure

Lung disease, cardio-

vascular disease,Mortality

Annoyance

Loss of quality of

life Disease Health

care costsLoss of life

Normal operation


PM10 risk assessment

0 5000 10000 15000 20000

Eur A 10

Eur B 10

Eur C 10

Eur A 20

Eur B 20

Eur C 20

Estimated deaths per year

UpperCentralLower

Characterizing risk

Measures are value laden


Measures for characterizing harmful health effects Selecting measure to characterize risk is value

laden Example: Deaths -

Per million people in the population Per million people within x km of exposure source Per unit of concentration Per facility Per ton of air toxic released Per ton of air toxic absorbed by people Per ton of chemical produced Per million dollars of product produced In terms of loss of life expectancy


Measures for characterizing harmful health effects (cont’d)

Selecting measure to characterize risk is value laden

Requires interaction between decision maker and analyst

An example taken from Wilson and Crouch demonstrates how the choice of one measure or another can make a technology

look either more or less risky. For example, between 1950 and 1970, coal mines became much less risky in terms of deaths from accidents per ton of coal, but they became marginally riskier in terms of deaths from accidents per

employee. Which measure one thinks more appropriate for decision making depends on one's point of view. From a

national point of view, given that a certain amount of coal has to be obtained to provide fuel, deaths per million tons of coal is the more appropriate measure of risk, whereas from a

labor leader's point of view, deaths per thousand persons employed may be more relevant.


DALY-concept

0

1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

population

child canceracute respiratory infection

progressive degenerative disease

serious annoyance

age

disabilityweight

potential healthy life years

'health' loss


DALY’s from motorized transport

Risk

Attribute of human activities


Risk

Socialsubsystem

Economic subsystem

Ecological subsystem

Economic subsystem


Social

subsystem

Risk:(serious) harm

might occur

Socialsubsystem

Economic subsystem



Definitions of risk Probability of harm Seriousness of (maximum) harm Multi-attribute weighted sum of components of harm Probability x seriousness of harm ('expected loss') Probability-weighted sum of all components of harm

('average expected loss') Graph of points relating probability to extent of harm Variance of harm about mean expected consequence …

Risk:a situation or event in which something of

human value (including humans themselves) has been put at stake and

where the outcome is uncertain.

Governance of risk

Including stakeholders


Policy cycle

Status quoDefine policy

Policy implementation

Appraisal

Agenda setting

Evaluation

Autonomous developments

Results of policy


Good governance

Participatory

Follows therule of law

Consensus oriented

Effective and Efficient

Responsive

Transparent

Equitable and inclusive

Accountable

Good governance


Management Sphere:Decision on & Implementation of Actions

Assessment Sphere:Generation of Knowledge

Risk assessment framework

Communication

Pre-assessment

•Problem Framing•Early Warning•Screening•Determination of Scientific Conventions

Risk management

Implementation•Option Realisation•Monitoring & Control•Feedback from Risk Mgmt. PracticeDecision Making•Option Identification & Generation•Option Assessment•Option Evaluation & Selection

Risk appraisal

Risk Assessment•Hazard Identification & Estimation•Exposure & Vulnerability Assessment•Risk EstimationConcern Assessment•Risk Perceptions•Social Concerns•Socio-Economic Impacts

Tolerability and acceptability judgement

Risk Evaluation•Judging the Tolerability & Acceptability

•Need for Risk Reduction Measures

Risk Characterisation•Risk Profile•Judgement of theSeriousness of Risk•Conclusions & Risk Reduction Options


Framing motorized transport issues Climate change issue

Fuel efficiency, Reduction of mobility Mobility issue

Train, Plane, Car Individual local transport issue

Public transport, Cycling, Car Issue of car technology

Fuel efficiency, Exhaust cleaning Physical planning issue

Offices near stations, Shops in towns, Bicyclepaths


Perceptions of transport risks:own car

0 2 4 6

Probability

Consequences

Worry

Demandmitigation

ExpertsPoliticiansLay people


Attitudes and values

fatalist

nature capricious

hierarchist

nature limited

individualist

nature stable

egalitarian

nature instableBetter cars. Technology

solves problems.

Nothing helps.

Exposure limits for PM10 and

noise.

Bicycles and free public transport


Vulnerable groups Risk are unequally distributed

People living near express ways are more exposed to PM10 and noise from traffic than people living rural areas

People are not equally sensitive Older people may suffer more from PM10 and noise

that young adults These differences are also influenced by socio-economic

differences Higher income groups can afford better food and housing Education may help to effectively influence risk mitigation

measures

Environmental health

The top of the iceberg


Environment and health

Dynamic demographic, social, cultural, economical and technological environment

Processing by the

organism

Genetic and acquired

characteristics

Determinants:Physical

environmentSocial

environmentLife style

Effects on health and

quality of life

Health care and prevention


Environment and HealthMortalit

yMorbidity

Adverse health effects (impairments)

Functional or structural changes

Body burdenExposure

(Aggravation of) disease,medical consumption absenteeism

Retarded development of organ systems (e.g. brain), (progressive) loss of organ function (e.g.

lung, kidney, cardiovascular system, liver), chronic disturbance of sleep, concentration and performance, prolonged inflammation, allergy,

immuno-suppression

Reversible loss of organ function, chronic stress, alteration of macromolecules (protein, DNA), enzyme induction,

inflammation, immune suppression, physical, biochemical, psychological

changes (e.g. in diastolic/systolic blood pressure, in serum lipoproteins, anxiety)

Persistent organic chemicals, cadmium, lead,

infection, DNA-adducts, stress-hormones

Chemical, physical, biological,

psychological factors

Manifest phenomena

Phenomena observable in specific surveys or investigations


Summary Risk is an attribute of societal processes Risk assessment is part of policy processes Risk governance is integral and inclusive The framing of risk issues determines the nature and

degree of risk mitigation

But many still like driving a car!


Contact data Severij 1, NL 3155 BR MAASLAND tel +31 10 599 0247, mobile +31 6 1297 4165 e-mail [email protected]

Universiteit Maastricht Dept. of Health Risk Analysis and Toxicology PO Box 616, NL 6200 MD MAASTRICHT tel +31 43 388 1097 (secretariat) e-mail [email protected]

risk assessment is policy wim passchier health risk analysis and toxicology, maastricht university

Documents