Environmental Laboratory, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS, USA.
Risk Anal. 2011 Aug;31(8):1211-25. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01585.x. Epub 2011 Mar 3.
Weight of evidence (WOE) methods are key components of ecological and human health risk assessments. Most WOE applications rely on the qualitative integration of diverse lines of evidence (LOE) representing impact on ecological receptors and humans. Recent calls for transparency in assessments and justifiability of management decisions are pushing the community to consider quantitative methods for integrated risk assessment and management. This article compares and contrasts the type of information required for application of individual WOE techniques and the outcomes that they provide in ecological risk assessment and proposes a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework for integrating individual LOE in support of management decisions. The use of quantitative WOE techniques is illustrated for a hypothetical but realistic case study of selecting remedial alternatives at a contaminated aquatic site. Use of formal MCDA does not necessarily eliminate biases and judgment calls necessary for selecting remedial alternatives, but allows for transparent evaluation and fusion of individual LOE. It also provides justifiable methods for selecting remedial alternatives consistent with stakeholder and decision-maker values.
证据权重 (WOE) 方法是生态和人类健康风险评估的关键组成部分。大多数 WOE 应用依赖于定性整合代表对生态受体和人类影响的多种证据 (LOE)。最近对评估透明度和管理决策合理性的呼吁，促使该领域考虑用于综合风险评估和管理的定量方法。本文比较和对比了应用个别 WOE 技术所需的信息类型以及它们在生态风险评估中提供的结果，并提出了一个多准则决策分析 (MCDA) 框架，用于整合个别 LOE，以支持管理决策。使用定量 WOE 技术说明了一个假设但现实的案例研究，即在受污染的水地点选择补救替代方案。使用正式的 MCDA 不一定能消除选择补救替代方案所需的偏见和判断，但允许透明评估和融合个别 LOE。它还为选择与利益相关者和决策者价值观一致的补救替代方案提供了合理的方法。
