Character of Environmental Harms: Overcoming Implementation Challenges with Policy Makers and Regulators

Abstract

Policy makers and regulators are charged with the daunting task of comparing incommensurate environmental risks to inform strategic decisions on interventions. Here we present a policy-level framework intended to support strategic decision processes concerning environmental risks within the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). The framework provides the structure by which risk-based evidence may be collated and by assessing the value of harm expressed by different environmental policy areas against a consistent objective (e.g., sustainable development), we begin to form a basis for relative comparison. This research integrates the prior art, examples of best practice, and intimate end-user input to build a qualitative assessment informed by expert judgment. Supported by contextual narratives, the framework has proven successful in securing organizational support and stimulating debate about proportionate mitigation activity, resource allocation, and shifts in current risk thinking.

Engaging with Comparative Risk Appraisals: Public Views on Policy Priorities for Environmental Risk Governance

“…This was noted for ENMs, as highlighted by the level of uncertainty within this field. This relationship should be investigated further, given the complex character of environmental harms . Environment, social, and economic impacts within an overall assessment of 12 risks were considered.…”

“…The academic research team in this study has a long‐standing interest in the capability of governments and their agencies to manage environmental policy risk portfolios . The methodological challenges associated with comparing risks that are disparate in character, such as exposures to engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) alongside the dangers of coastal erosion, for example, where the types and scales of impact vary significantly, are understood and reported widely elsewhere .…”

“…Most environmental policy risks are now susceptible to augmentation, in terms of their magnitude and future uncertainty, by the effects of climate change and so their baseline assessment and future dynamic trajectories are of increasing concern as climate effects exacerbate, or mitigate, their probabilities and impacts forward in time. We have previously commented on the utility of a strategic appraisal method to help risk managers compare national environmental risks at the policy level . A central research question remains: Do these comparative analyses have traction with citizens?…”

Selecting Policy Instruments for Better Environmental Regulation: a Critique and Future Research Agenda

“…Prpich et al . () describe a policy‐level framework applied at Defra to characterize environmental risks, and demonstrate its successful application in stimulating debate within the organization about proportionate mitigation actions and allocation of resources. Pollard et al .…”

“…However, for comparing environmental risks and designing policy and regulatory responses that apply to multiple cases, an approach that can assess classes of harm rather than specific projects is required. Prpich et al (2011) describe a policy-level framework applied at Defra to characterize environmental risks, and demonstrate its successful application in stimulating debate within the organization about proportionate mitigation actions and allocation of resources. Pollard et al (2004) describe strategic risk assessment approaches that have been developed at the Environment Agency for England and Wales, which includes risk characterization across multiple environmental, economic and social dimensions, risk communication, screening and prioritization, and options appraisal and risk management.…”