A probabilistic analysis reveals fundamental limitations with the environmental impact quotient and similar systems for rating pesticide risks

被引:27
作者
Peterson, Robert K. D. [1 ]
Schleier, Jerome J., III [1 ]
机构
[1] Montana State Univ, Dept Land Resources & Environm Sci, Bozeman, MT 59717 USA
关键词
Risk ranking; Integrated pest management; Comparative risk assessment; Exposure assessment; Risk analysis; Pesticide; EXPOSITORY NOTE; RANKING; INDICATORS; MATRICES; HAZARD;
D O I
10.7717/peerj.364
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Comparing risks among pesticides has substantial utility for decision makers. However, if rating schemes to compare risks are to be used, they must be conceptually and mathematically sound. We address limitations with pesticide risk rating schemes by examining in particular the Environmental Impact Quotient (EIQ) using, for the first time, a probabilistic analytic technique. To demonstrate the consequences of mapping discrete risk ratings to probabilities, adjusted EIQs were calculated for a group of 20 insecticides in four chemical classes. Using Monte Carlo simulation, adjusted EIQs were determined under different hypothetical scenarios by incorporating probability ranges. The analysis revealed that pesticides that have different EIQs, and therefore different putative environmental effects, actually may be no different when incorporating uncertainty. The EIQ equation cannot take into account uncertainty the way that it is structured and provide reliable quotients of pesticide impact. The EIQ also is inconsistent with the accepted notion of risk as a joint probability of toxicity and exposure. Therefore, our results suggest that the EIQ and other similar schemes be discontinued in favor of conceptually sound schemes to estimate risk that rely on proper integration of toxicity and exposure information.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 37 条
[1]   Risk analysis of analytical validations by probabilistic modification of FMEA [J].
Barends, D. M. ;
Oldenhof, M. T. ;
Vredenbregt, M. J. ;
Nauta, M. J. .
JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL AND BIOMEDICAL ANALYSIS, 2012, 64-65 :82-86
[2]   Some limitations of qualitative risk rating systems [J].
Cox, LA ;
Babayev, D ;
Huber, W .
RISK ANALYSIS, 2005, 25 (03) :651-662
[3]   What's wrong with risk matrices? [J].
Cox, Louis Anthony , Jr. .
RISK ANALYSIS, 2008, 28 (02) :497-512
[4]   What's Wrong with Hazard-Ranking Systems? An Expository Note [J].
Cox, Louis Anthony , Jr. .
RISK ANALYSIS, 2009, 29 (07) :940-948
[5]   Some Limitations of "Risk = Threat x Vulnerability x Consequence" for Risk Analysis of Terrorist Attacks [J].
Cox, Louis Anthony , Jr. .
RISK ANALYSIS, 2008, 28 (06) :1749-1761
[6]   Some Limitations of Frequency as a Component of Risk: An Expository Note [J].
Cox, Louis Anthony , Jr. .
RISK ANALYSIS, 2009, 29 (02) :171-175
[7]   Variation in pesticide hazard from arable crop production in Great Britain from 1992 to 2008: An extended time-series analysis [J].
Cross, Paul ;
Edwards-Jones, Gareth .
CROP PROTECTION, 2011, 30 (12) :1579-1585
[8]  
Dushoff J., 1994, AM ENTOMOL, V40, P180
[9]   Rating systems for pesticide risk classification on different ecosystems [J].
Finizio, A ;
Calliera, M ;
Vighi, M .
ECOTOXICOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY, 2001, 49 (03) :262-274
[10]  
[FOCUS] FOrum for the Coordination of pesticide fate models and their USe, 2001, SANCO48022001REV2 FO