Criteria for the quality of water and other media are often said to be risk based. However, the relationship between the process of criterion setting and risk assessment has not been clear. This article shows that the conventional framework for risk assessment may be easily modified to represent criterion development. The critical difference is that conventional risk assessments solve an exposure–response model for an expected exposure to estimate an effect, but criterion assessments solve the same model for a benchmark effect to estimate an upper limit to acceptable exposures. Hence, the critical step in criterion setting is the determination of an effect metric that can be modeled and that represents the environmental goal. The same process applies to equivalent assessments, such as deriving screening benchmarks and remedial goals.
You have requested a machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Neither BioOne nor the owners and publishers of the content make, and they explicitly disclaim, any express or implied representations or warranties of any kind, including, without limitation, representations and warranties as to the functionality of the translation feature or the accuracy or completeness of the translations.
Translations are not retained in our system. Your use of this feature and the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in the Terms and Conditions of Use of the BioOne website.
Vol. 4 • No. 4