A Stakeholder’s Perspective on Contaminated Land Management - Dealing with Contaminated Sites: From Theory Towards Practical Application - page 1057

Table 24.1 (continued)

2005 Report of the NICOLE Workshop : State of the art of (Ecological) Risk
Assessment, 15-16-17 June 2005, Stockholm, Sweden see
http://www.nicole.org/publications/library.asp?listing = 1 ; Land Contamin Reclam

14(3):745-773
2005 Report of the NICOLE Workshop : Unlocking the Barriers to the Recovery of Soil and the
Rehabilitation of Contaminated Land. 15-16 November 2004, Sofia, Bulgaria see
www.nicole.org/publications/library.asp?listing = 1 ; Land Contamin Reclam 14(1):137-164

available knowledge is incorporated in the project. In addition, the co-operation
between service-provider and industry groups gives me a better understanding of
the problems, needs and wishes of (multinational) industry. NICOLE also acts
as my antennae for new developments (legislation and innovation) in the field of
contaminated land management.”
The exchange of views, knowledge and best practices with other stakeholders
(often regulators) takes place at NICOLE workshops, which are held twice a year.
Other forms of interaction and dissemination include NICOLE applied research
projects and Working groups (often related to Member States' implementation of
one of the European Directives), as well as interaction with other European networks
such as the Common Forum on Contaminated Land and supporting participation
in research programmes, such as EC Framework Programmes, and their review
panels. NICOLE's work over the past 15 years has led to a wide range of freely
downloadable publications and reports; some examples are listed in Table 24.1 .

24.2 The Road to Sustainable Risk Based Land Management

To illustrate how NICOLE's industrial problem holders view the contaminated sites
“landscape” that they operate in, as well as the progress that has been made in the
sector during the existence of NICOLE, Appendix contains two “Road maps to
Sustainable Risk Based Land Management”. The first one was originally developed
in 1998 as part of a NICOLE initiative to help those concerned with developing con-
taminated land management practice to visualise the issues they were facing. The
map depicted contaminated land as terrain that was relatively unknown, with alter-
nate routes and possible perils through the landscape to attain the desired goal of
successful restoration. It was envisioned that the most successful path was one trav-
elled together using Risk Assessment and Risk Management to negotiate the terrain
and reach the goal. The second roadmap is an update of the 1998 one, made in 2006.
A comparison of the two clearly illustrates the changes that have taken place within
this time frame, reflecting experience and new knowledge. The people who need
to use the map remain the same, with assistance still provided by the service and
academic communities. However, the obstacles have reduced in size as experience
has provided increased confidence in the technological approaches to contaminated
land management and the level of doubt about approaches and science used has been