ox-txTION MANAGEM.eI,Y ,IVI Ini IFocus DISCUSSION NOTE NUMBER Z FEBRUARY 1 999 Com parative In an imperfect world of finite resources, decisionmakers everywhere are faced with difficult choices about how to deal with environmental prob- Risk lems. Comparative risk assessment (CRA) can help. CRA is a tool for Assessm ent comparing and ranking risks to health and ecosystems and identifying strategies for managing these risks, on the basis of both scientific data and public values. Recent experience in the United States and in other countries worldwide shows how CRA can assist in setting environmental priorities, Ede ljjasz promoting coordination between agencies, building consensus, and giving and expression to the environmental concerns and preferences of the Laura Tlaiye community. Comparative risk assessmiient is a plan- tecllhnical specialists to identify the depleting substances) or miatters out- niing tool for evaluating environmental nirost pressing enviroiinnertal problems, side the jurisdiction of environmental problems and choices that affect hu- assess the risks, and develop priorities agencies such as food safety and pat- nan health and ecosvstems. It can be tor control and i rprventionl strategies. terns of'developmenit. applied in very specific situations to This note presents a brief descriptioni I) Health risks are evaluated using the rank risks associated with groups of pol- of the technical methodology used in standard risk assessment process: lution sources. Or it can be understood CRAs an d the public participation ac- hazard identification, dose-response in a broader sense, as a participatorv tivities recommended. assessment, exposure assessment, process that cani help incorporate pub- and risk characterization. In a CRA, lic viexv.s into decisionnmakinig and 5cope of Cp-As the set of issues examined is broad, promote better public understarnding of CRAs, in thc bhroacler sense, usually extending to cancer risks, non- environmenital issues. It is the second an alvze three categories of'risks: those cancer risks (for example, repro- use of'CRA that is discussed here, par- to humtian healthl, ecosystems, antId ductive, neurological, developmen- ticularly as it has been applied in the qualitv of life. The list of' issues ana- tal, or immunologic health effects), United States. lvzed can be as narrowv as a speciiic set and, as appropriate, other health Typically, in a CRA process repre- of toxic anid hazardous chemicals. At problems, such as vector-related sentatives from government, business, the other end ol the range. they can diseases. In some cases, all the ef1 environmental groups, and the genernl include global concerns (for example, fects are combined into a single risk public work together with scientists and climate change and emissions of ozone- rankidng; in others, the risk categories Pollution Management Discussion Notes(PMDNs) are part of the knowledge management effort of the Environment Family at the World Bank Group. They are designed to foster professional discussion, disseminate lessons leamed from Bank operations, and transfer best practices in pollution management, The views herein are those of the author{s) and are not official policy of, or attributable to, the World Bank Group. The PMDN is an open forum. Comments and suggestions for future publications should be directed to Magda Lovei (mlovei@worldbank.org, or to room MC 5-139). Authors: Ede Ijjasz, Environment and Water Resources Engineer ILCSESIECSIN), Laura Tlaiye, Senior Environmental Specialist (LCSES); Managing Editor: Magda Lovei (ENVI; Designer and Publisher: Jim Cantrell (ENV). THE WORLD BANK f It, are kept separate, and decision- mental concerns, using the best scien- Europe. Box 2 presents an application makers implicitly combine and rank tific information available (see Box 1). of the CRA methiodology in a WVorld them to prioritize problems. Among the reasons for initiating CRAs Bank project in Bolivia. 2) Ecological risks include risks to in the Llnited States is that the trains- ecosystems or to all ecological re- fer of many responsibilities from the benefits of a CIZA ceptors, frorn a single species to the federal government to states and local CRAs have effects that go beyond the functional or structural integrity of governments makes it imperative for comlpilation of data and the analysis an ecosystem. the latter to set priorities for action. and ranking of environmental risks and 3) Quality of life risks include such3 Other motivations are a desire to manlagement strategies. They have led nonhealthi issues as effects on remedy the fragmentation of environ- to new state legislation dealing with is- cornmercial activities, recreation, mliental responsibilities among various sues that the analysis identified as property values, and aestlhetic government agencies and to include posirighigl risks. ln addition, they lave values. the views of commlunity groups. provided the impetuis for internal bud- Although ecological and quality- CRA is being used in other set- getary reallocations in governmenit of-life analyses attempt to incorporate tings worldwvide, although with limnited agencies, for strategic use of federal all the quantitative information avail- public participationi in maniy cases. Irn grants, and for the creation of public able, they have been less uniform and Bangkok and Cairo, for example, CRAs enxviroiirnerntal education programs more qualitative than the more estab- were used to identify specific antipol- aimed at reducing the gap between per- lished methodologies for assessing lution measures, such as reduciig lead ceived and actual risks faced by health risks. in gasoline and maniaging traffic to de- corninurities. crease particulate emissions. Other The CRA process usually brings L.xperience to Date places wlhere CRAs lhave been applied about better undcerstanding among Risk assessmient has been used during include Zlatna (Romania), Zilina stakelholders in governmilenit programs the past decade in a number of induis- (Slovakia), Radomn, Starogard Gdanski and initiatives and encourages im- trial countries, developing coutrities, and Chelin (Poland), Lima, Quito, and proved coordination amonig agencies and transition economies. In the various sites in Central Anielnica. CRA with overlapping jurisdictions. In gen- United States, risk assessment has was also used in the preparation of eral. CRAs at the local level lave beeni been used to set national enivironmenl- the 1993 Environmnental Action miiore effective thian those at the na- tal priorities, to guide legislation. and Programme for Central and Eastern tional level in dev eloping focused to choose anmong regulatory ap- proaclhes. Almost every environmental Box 1. Experience with CRA at the State and program vwithin the U.S. Environimen-- City Level in the United States tal Protectioni Agency (USEPA) now More than 30 states, 32 cities, and Native American tribes in the United States uses risk assessImlent in deciding have used the CRA methodology to establish environmental priorities in their juris- regtilatory priorities, performing cost- dictions, with varying degrees of success. Here are a few highlights: be nefit analysis, or targeti l g California. Clearly differentiated environmental topic lists were developed to avoid enforcement activities. Risk assess- overlap between categories of risk. The CRA included (in addition to the usual tech- nical groups on human health, ecological, and quality-of-life risks) working groups on education, environmental justice, economic perspectives, and interagency coop- decide which air pollutants to control, eration. Simple quantitative criteria were used to rank risks. whichi pesticides to allow anid whichi to New York. The state CRA, currently under way, limited its focus to the evaluation ban, and to what degree hazardous of risks associated with 14 categories of toxic and hazardous chemicals. wNaste sites should be cleaned up. In: Maine. The technical groups were organized by environmental media (outdoor air, WVestern Europe, both the European land and agricultural resources, surface water and sediments, and groundwater). Union and individual countries are The risk-ranking analysis included trend analyses and evaluations of the quality of working to adapt risk assessment tech- information. niques to their owII contexts. Ohio. The CRA included extensive public participation and outreach activities-for The US EPA hias promnoted the use example, interviews with environmental professionals, focus groups, telephone polls, of CRA and related environmental participation in fairs, and distribution of fact sheets and newsletters. planning tools by states, regions, cities, Hawaii. The CRA resulted in the establishment of an indoor air program, a pro- and Native American tribes to help gram to test blood lead levels in children, new legislation to implement the recom- comrunities address their environ- mendations, and a cabinet-level committee to oversee progress. Box 2. Setting Priorities for Remediation of verse (cancer, gastrointestinal prob- Environmental Contamination: Bolivia's Mining Sector lems, and so on); they affect different The World Bank Environment, Industry, and Mining project in Bolivia included a age groups; and they may be fatal, per- CRA to identify how best to use financial resources specifically targeted for rem- manent, or short-term. Next, society's edying environmental contamination associated with mining. The study first com- values and choices have to be pared mine sites according to the risk that they posed to people, to the economic integrated into the ranking. These pref- infrastructure, and to ecosystems through heavy metals contamination, acid gen- eration, and physical hazards. The goal was to make informed decisions on which erences and values are transmitted sites to clean up first, how much to clean them up, and how to do the job. In the through the public advisory committee, second part of the study, the set of actions analyzed was expanded beyond those which should have a diverse and rep- directly related to the remediation of mine waste. The study identified the most cost-effective measures for dealing with problems resulting from contamination- resentative makeup, or through public for example, repairing water supply pipes affected by acid drainage, sealing play- participation in forums or polls. grounds built on mine waste, and paving dust roads. Source: Ayres, Anderson, and Hanrahan (I1997). PubLic \/iew5 Public participation structured to environmental action plans because Once the issue list is defined, the generate results is one of the most im- the information tends to be of higher technical work groups collect and ana- portant and valuable features of the quality, the management strategies are lyze the best data available and describe CRA process. CRA projects deal with within the jurisdiction and capabilities the level of risk for each issue. Next, the public on three levels: as partici- of those involved in the CRA process, the technical groups, the public advi- pants in the process, as a source and and the results are more tangible. sory committee, or both together recipient of information, and as a body compare and rank the risks on the ba- whose support for the initiatives and The CIZA. Proces.5 sis of criteria specific to each risk proposals resulting from the project is A CRA project generally has two stages: category (health, ecosystems, or qual- needed. Participation is not limited to risk comparison and ranking, and stra- ity of life). Finally, the public advisory representation of stakeholders in the tegic analysis and priority setting. The committee integrates all the issues into public advisory committee. Outreach project tasks are commonly divided a single ranked list. and participation activities under the among three committees: (a) techni- The first stage-analysis and CRA engage all stakeholders in a broad cal work groups or consultants in ranking of health risks-commonly has discussion about risks, public values, clharge of research and analysis of risks; two steps. First, the stressors or sources and potential risk management strate- (b) a broadly representative public ad- of risks are grouped to facilitate the gies; allow them to reach consensus on visory committee that serves as a liaison analysis, and estimates are made of the an action plan; educate the public between the government and the population exposed to each stressor about risks in their communities; general public and has varied respon- and the concentration of the particu- gather information on the public's sibilities, ranging from definition of risk lar stressor. Second, the risks to typical views; and give legitimacy to the CRA issues to be analyzed up to the final exposed individuals are estimated, us- process and the proposed risk manage- ranking of risks and strategies; and (c) ransteeing ommritteead sthatoerees; tc ing either cancer potency factors for ment plan. carcinogens and a reference dose for Risk-ranking exercises in state process and the delivery of products. noncarcinogens, or relative risk ratios and local CRAs have been criticized for The scope of the CRA depends on and other dose-response coefficients a lack of rigor (due to, among other fac- the purpose of the analysis and may be ase narrowe asthe acoarysisoand ofy rs from epidemiological studies. By mul- tors, deficiencies in the supporting across industries or coteriroup of p- tiplying the individual risks by the data). However, the final ranking of acrutsiondsources or ashr broa psa ioal- number of people assumed to be risks and strategies is not the sole re- lution sources or as broad as a national ranking of environmental problems. similarly exposed, a population risk es- sult or objective of the ranking process. Among the first steps in the CRA pro- timate can be obtained. In some CRAs, Another goal is to promote a cess is the selection of an issues list. the technical groups have made a spe- structured, fair, and open exchange of The USEPAs guidebook on CRA con- cial effort to identify subpopulations of ideas among scientists, citizens, and tains a comprehensive list of health and special concern, such as children. government officials on a broad range ecological risks that has been used by The comparison of population of environmental risks, using the best various states and cities after public risk estimates is not the final step in available data. In many cases, the pub- consultation. ranking health risks. The risks are di- lic participation activities have revealed differences in how the technical work magnitude of the problems associated Other useful documents include R. groups and tie public perceive risks. with pollution sources, provide a Minard and K. Jones, State Compara- Some CRA projects have used the out- means of incorporating public views tive Risk Projects: A Forcefor Change reach activities to educate the general into the decisionmaking process, and (1993), http://www.epa.gov/docs/ public about environmental risks and illustrate the importance of'pollution futures/risk/crexamnples/reviews/ how to reduce or avoid them. problems. Even a fairly rough CRA, change.txt.html; California Compara- Vwithout extensive public participation tive Risk Project Report (1994), at Ze5ource5 and activities, can be useful as a first step http://v 'wepa.gov/docs/futures/riski IZequirements in heightening awareness of'environ- crexamples/examples/california. Risk assessment does not necessarily mental issues arid indicatiuig priorities txthtrnl; the Ohio EPA, Recommen- require extensive collection of new for action. dations to Reduce EnVironMental Risk in Ohio (1997). The Maine En- data. Reasonable, practical results can be derived from the information avail- 5ource5 of Information cironmental Priorities Project, at http://wwxw. state. me .us!dep/mepc/ able in developing counltries, although For a more detailed version of this pa- indtexv. h ti; and Thte Ci tey considerable effort may have to be put per, including highlights of' CRAs - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~of Seattle s Enzvironmental Action into collecting and organizing infor- conducted in the United States, see Agenda (1992, 199G). mation from different agencies. In the the WVorld Bank Pollution Manage- United States, the time frame for ment Web site (http://www-esd. Note state-level CRAs has ranged between worldbank.org/pollution). For addi- This PMDN is based on the Coinpara- 18 and 36 months. Most CRAs have tional technical information on CRAs, tive Risk Assessment chapter in the taken two years to complete-one see the chapter on Comparative Risk World Bank's Pollution Prevention year for the risk-ranking phase, and Assessment in the Pollution Preven- and Abaterent Handbook and on a one year for the management strate- tion and Abatement Handbook (http:/ review of U.S. experience with com- gies phase. The budget for CRA /www-esd.vworldbank.org/pph/pait2/ parative risk assessrrments. projects (not counting in-kind and SettingI.htmIL). Thle USEPA Guide- voluntary contributions) has ranged book to Comparing Risks and Setting .5etected R3ibLiography from $70,000 for a city project to Enzironmental Priorities (httL/ American Chemcal Society and Re 5700,000 for state projects with v,vwepa.gov/oppe_drisk.htm) is an sources for the Future. 1998. substantial public participation coin- excellernt souice of information. TXvo .' nderstanding Risk Analysis: A Short Guide fbr Health, Safet!/, ponents. The USEPA has provided centers set Up with USEPA support and En-vironmental Policy Mak- federal seed funds--usually S10(.00()( to assist states and cities with CRAs ing. `ashington, D.C. Contains for two-year projects but up to have prepared numiierous publicationis usef'ul refeerences. Ayres. Wndsci S., KaIthleen Anderson, S300,000. State agencies have pro- aiid case studies, available at http!L arid David Hanahan. 1997 S1t- vided staff timie and support, arid imost vv w.gried.org/ and httn://wwv. ting Prioritie.sfir Enzironmental of the work of scientists, technical wced.or. The\Vorld Bank's Decisioni Managemenrt: An Application to -_ --__gZ. The NVo i the Mining Sector in Bolizia. specialists, and citizens in the tech- Support System atid Industrial Pollu- Vsorld Bank Techlnical Paper 398. nical work groups and public advisory tion Projection Sste (It://wv. Pollution Management Series. committees has been voluntar-y woridbank. orgipiLpoIlmod .htm) are Washington, D.C. an tL ~~~~~~Davies, J. Clarence, edl. 1996. Coomz- For developing countries, the useful for supplereniltinig pollution paring Environmental Risks: United States Agency for Interna- and risk data. A key source of infor- Tools for Setting Government Pri- tional Development (USAID) has mation for the evaluation of health oritiesg ResouCes fOI the Future, suggested a typical schedule of be- risks is provided by the USEPA Inte- Lackey, Robert T 1996. "Ecological tween four to six months. Some CRAs grated Risk Information System Risk Analysis." In Vlasta Molak, have taken up to one year to prepare, (IRIS), whicI contains a large collec- ed.. Fundame-ntals of Risk Anally- d e p e n d i n g o n'tl l e d if fi c l t y o f a t a ti n o f fi e s o r, t h e i e l t h e e c t s o s i s a n d R is k M a n a g e m e n t. B o c a depending on the difficulty of' data tion of files on the health ef'fects of Ratont, Fla.: LLewis Publishers/ gathering and the extent of public in- individual chemicals (http: / wvNwivepa CRC Press. volveinent. Rapid evaluations of a oviis') Information on ecological W,orld Batik. 1999. Pollution Prer en- Rapid '] Iiiforiiiatiofi on ecological tion and Abatement Handbook: broad set of risks yield less certain risk assessment can be found ir http:/ Toward Cleaner Production. results, but they do give an idea of the ./ww_epa.govZn cea/ecologic. htm. NWashington, D.C. M