WCA Environment Limited, Brunel House, Volunteer Way, Faringdon, Oxfordshire, SN7 7YR, UK,
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2014 Jan;21(1):6-16. doi: 10.1007/s11356-013-1732-8. Epub 2013 Apr 26.
Many jurisdictions around the globe have well-developed regulatory frameworks for the derivation and implementation of water quality guidelines (WQGs) or their equivalent (e.g. environmental quality standards, criteria, objectives or limits). However, a great many more still do not have such frameworks and are looking to introduce practical methods to manage chemical exposures in aquatic ecosystems. There is a potential opportunity for learning and sharing of data and information between experts from different jurisdictions in order to deliver efficient and effective methods to manage potential aquatic risks, including the considerable reduction in the need for aquatic toxicity testing and the rapid identification of common challenges. This paper reports the outputs of an international workshop with representatives from 14 countries held in Hong Kong in December 2011. The aim of the workshop and this paper was to identify 'good practice' in the development of WQGs to deliver to a range of environmental management goals. However, it is important to broaden this consideration to cover often overlooked facets of implementable WQGs, such as demonstrable field validation (i.e. does the WQG protect what it is supposed to?), fit for purpose of monitoring frameworks (often an on-going cost) and finally how are these monitoring data used to support management decisions in a manner that is transparent and understandable to stakeholders. It is clear that regulators and the regulated community have numerous pressures and constraints on their resources. Therefore, the final section of this paper addresses potential areas of collaboration and harmonisation. Such approaches could deliver a consistent foundation from which to assess potential chemical aquatic risks, including, for example, the adoption of bioavailability-based approaches for metals, whilst reducing administrative and technical burdens in jurisdictions.
全球许多司法管辖区都有完善的监管框架,用于制定和实施水质指南(WQGs)或其等效物(例如环境质量标准、标准、目标或限值)。然而,还有许多司法管辖区没有这样的框架,正在寻求引入实用方法来管理水生生态系统中的化学物质暴露。不同司法管辖区的专家之间有机会进行学习和数据信息共享,以便提供高效和有效的方法来管理潜在的水生风险,包括大大减少水生毒性测试的需求和快速识别共同挑战。本文报告了 2011 年 12 月在香港举行的一次国际研讨会的成果,该研讨会有来自 14 个国家的代表参加。研讨会和本文的目的是确定制定 WQGs 的“良好实践”,以实现一系列环境管理目标。然而,重要的是要将这种考虑扩大到涵盖可实施 WQGs 经常被忽视的方面,例如可证明的现场验证(即 WQG 是否保护其应保护的目标?)、适合监测框架的用途(通常是持续的成本),以及最后这些监测数据如何以透明和可理解的方式用于支持管理决策。很明显,监管机构和受监管社区在资源方面面临着众多压力和限制。因此,本文的最后一节讨论了潜在的合作和协调领域。这种方法可以为评估潜在的化学水生风险提供一致的基础,例如,采用基于生物有效性的方法来处理金属,同时减轻司法管辖区的行政和技术负担。