IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v14y1994i3p225-230.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exposure Assessment: Then, Now, and Quantum Leaps in the Future

Author

Listed:
  • Russell E. Keenan
  • Brent L. Finley
  • Paul S. Price

Abstract

Health risk assessments have become so widely accepted in the United States that their conclusions are a major factor in many environmental decisions. Although the risk assessment paradigm is 10 years old, the basic risk assessment process has been used by certain regulatory agencies for nearly 40 years. Each of the four components of the paradigm has undergone significant refinements, particularly during the last 5 years. A recent step in the development of the exposure assessment component can be found in the 1992 EPA Guidelines for Exposure Assessment. Rather than assuming worst‐case or hypothetical maximum exposures, these guidelines are designed to lead to an accurate characterization, making use of a number of scientific advances. Many exposure parameters have become better defined, and more sensitive techniques now exist for measuring concentrations of contaminants in the environnment. Statistical procedures for characterizing variability, using Monte Carlo or similar approaches, eliminate the need to select point estimates for all individual exposure parameters. These probabilistic models can more accurately characterize the full range of exposures that may potentially be encountered by a given population at a particular site, reducing the need to select highly conservative values to account for this form of uncertainty in the exposure estimate. Lastly, our awareness of the uncertainties in the exposure assessment as well as our knowledge as to how best to characterize them will almost certainly provide evaluations that will be more credible and, therein, more useful to risk managers. If these refinements are incorporated into future exposure assessments, it is likely that our resources will be devoted to problems that, when resolved, will yield the largest improvement in public health.

Suggested Citation

  • Russell E. Keenan & Brent L. Finley & Paul S. Price, 1994. "Exposure Assessment: Then, Now, and Quantum Leaps in the Future," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 225-230, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:14:y:1994:i:3:p:225-230
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1994.tb00237.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1994.tb00237.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1994.tb00237.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bernard D. Goldstein, 1990. "The Problem with the Margin of Safety: Toward the Concept of Protection," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(1), pages 7-10, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. S. N. Rai & D. Krewski, 1998. "Uncertainty and Variability Analysis in Multiplicative Risk Models," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(1), pages 37-45, February.
    2. Lisa M. Funk & Richard Sedman & Jill A. J. Beals & Robert Fountain, 1998. "Quantifying the Distribution of Inhalation Exposure in Human Populations: 2. Distributions of Time Spent by Adults, Adolescents, and Children at Home, at Work, and at School," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(1), pages 47-56, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rob P. Rechard, 1999. "Historical Relationship Between Performance Assessment for Radioactive Waste Disposal and Other Types of Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(5), pages 763-807, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:14:y:1994:i:3:p:225-230. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.