Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
to do the new analyses with stored samples, and thereby create a long-term re-
cord of exposure or change, the resulting insights can be invaluable for under-
standing the implications of new observations (see Rothamsted 2012 for an ex-
ample of the information that this type of long-term data potentially could
provide).
USING NEW SCIENCE TO DRIVE SAFER
TECHNOLOGIES AND PRODUCTS
In addition to using new tools and technologies to address the major chal-
lenges identified in Chapter 2, it will be important for EPA to continue to look
for new ways of preventing environmental problems before they arise. The tools
and technologies for measuring and managing scientific data outlined in this
chapter have generally been thought of in the context of refined risk-assessment
processes. The use of scientific information for the purposes of risk assessment
is focused in large part on detailed and nuanced problem identification—that is,
a holistic understanding of causes and mechanisms. Such work is important and
valuable in understanding how toxicants and other stressors affect environ-
mental health and ecosystems, and at times is required by statute. However, the
focus on problem identification often occurs at the expense of efforts to use sci-
entific tools to develop safer technologies and solutions. Consideration of
whether functional, cost-effective, and safer alternative manufacturing processes
or materials exist that could reduce or eliminate risks while still stimulating in-
novation is not often part of the risk-assessment processes undertaken by EPA.
Given the changing nature of chemical exposures in the United States, from
large point sources to disperse, non-point exposures, the traditional tools of ex-
posure assessment and control will likely be insufficient to prevent exposure to
chemicals and it may be more effective to place a greater focus on preventing
exposure through design changes. NRC (2009) outlined a framework for risk
assessment in which the assessment process is tied to evaluating risk-
management options rather than the safety of single hazards.
Defining problems without a comparable effort to find solutions greatly
diminishes the value of the agency's applied research efforts and may impede its
mission to protect human health and the environment. Furthermore, if EPA's
actions lead to a change in technology, chemical, or practice, there is a responsi-
bility to understand alternatives and to support a path forward that is environ-
mentally sound, technically feasible, and economically viable (Tickner 2011).
Sarewitz et al. (2010) have proposed the Sustainable Solutions Agenda as an
alternative approach to think about sustainability problems in the context of
complex systems. As noted in other parts of this report, uncertainty is an inevi-
table part of decision-making processes surrounding complex risks. The Sus-
tainable Solutions Agenda asks a different set of questions about such problems,
from asking whether “x causes y” or leads to an “unacceptable” risk to “given
current knowledge of the possibility that x causes y, is there a way to move to-
Search WWH ::
Custom Search