Introduction to Ecological Risk Assessment - Dealing with Contaminated Sites: From Theory Towards Practical Application - page 603

decision-makers is highly challenging. In many countries, intensive communication
between decision-makers and scientists has taken place, often resulting in the imple-
mentation of national regulations. But since the extent of the benefits of Ecosystem
Services and, even more so, the way these services are to be maintained, are so
complex, this communication has not always been effective. In many cases this has
resulted in non-transparent ecological protection levels. In addition, the remediation
costs of contaminated sites in order to regain an ecologically acceptable level, that
is, reconstitution of a healthy subsoil, could be one reason that decision-makers are
reluctant about focussing on ecological protection. Moreover, lack of knowledge in
terms of ecological protection levels has sometimes resulted in over-conservatism
in setting ecological protection levels. It is claimed that ecotoxicologists masquer-
ade value-based assumptions as science (Lancaster 2000 ). Moreover, scientists are
accused of incorporating beliefs, morals, values and ethics as properties of ecolog-
ical systems (Kapustka and Landis 1998 ). Indeed, the difficulty of communication
may well enhance the subjective opinions of scientists. Many experts, in turn, are
unhappy about the fact that, in spite of many years of collaboration, their decision-
makers have not been able to comprehend the blessings of soil ecology to a full
extent and, hence, have been unable to respond with appropriate political measures.
In conclusion, communication between decision-makers and scientists is essen-
tial for appreciating the protection and recovery of the soil ecosystem and setting
appropriate protection levels. Choosing the soil ecosystem as a protection tar-
get and the determination of an appropriate ecological protection level strongly
impact Risk Assessment procedures such as the value of ecologically-based Soil and
Groundwater Quality Standards. What is often overlooked is that Risk Assessment
procedures are much more sensitive to these policy choices than to many sci-
entific issues. Therefore, communication between scientists with a talent for
communicating about practical implementation and decision-makers with scientific
understanding is extremely important for the appropriate positioning of ecologi-
cal protection and recovery on the political agenda and for the determination of
appropriate ecological protection levels.
In Europe (Carlon and Swartjes 2007 ; Römbke et al. 2005 ) and in the United
States, Canada and Australia (Barron and Wharton 2005 ), there is a trend that shows
an increase in political interest in ecological protection with regard to the manage-
ment of contaminated sites. In the Netherlands, the protection of the ecosystem was
explicitly included in the definitions of soil ('

... ...

including and organisms') and

soil protection (' ... that imply a reduction of the threat to the functional properties

that the soil has for , plant and animals'). Soil Quality Standards derived from

SSDs were proposed by Van Straalen and Denneman ( 1989 ). In 1994, the Dutch
Soil Protection Act was extended with the addition of a procedure to determine the
urgency of remediation, among other things, on the basis of site-specific risks for
the soil ecosystem (Swartjes 1999 ). This procedure was significantly improved by
the use of the TRIAD approach (see Chapter 15 by Rutgers and Jensen, this topic).
In the German Federal Soil Protection Act of 1998, reference is made to 'harmful
soil changes'. In the UK, a tiered approach for assessing the risks to the soil ecosys-
tem has been proposed, in which conclusions have been drawn on the basis of the

...