The pesticide risk analysis process is well regulated in the EU, especially in relation to placing on the market authorisation procedures, but in order to avoid risks for human health and environment in the use phase, information on how these substances are employed and on socio-behavioural factors that can influence the exposure have to be taken into account. To better explore reasons about the gap between risk assessment and risk management, within the EU FP7 Health and Environmental Risks: Organisation, Integration and Cross-fertilisation of Scientific Knowledge (HEROIC) project, a stepwise stakeholder’s consultation process was developed using a mixed approach in two different phases (survey and roundtable).We elicited stakeholder views regarding factors that could limit the pesticide risk assessment phase linked on how the knowledge is produced and the way the data are used in risk management and in risk communication, also taking into account qualitative factors such as responsibility, trust and behaviours, which could have impact on risk assessment policies. Activities deployed indicate that some changes and interaction are needed to better define the problems at the formulation stage, and the type of information risk assessor has to provide, to better inform risk manager in addressing different societal needs, to strengthen the credibility of the process of risk assessment and improve the effectiveness of policies.

Calliera, M., Marchis, A. V., Sacchettini, G., Capri, E., Stakeholder consultations and opportunities for integrating socio-behavioural factors into the pesticide risk analysis process, <<ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL>>, 2016; (23): 2937-2947. [doi:10.1007/s11356-015-5553-9] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/91114]

Stakeholder consultations and opportunities for integrating socio-behavioural factors into the pesticide risk analysis process

Calliera, Maura
Primo
;
Marchis, Alexandru Vasile
Secondo
;
Sacchettini, Gabriele
Penultimo
;
Capri, Ettore
Ultimo
2016

Abstract

The pesticide risk analysis process is well regulated in the EU, especially in relation to placing on the market authorisation procedures, but in order to avoid risks for human health and environment in the use phase, information on how these substances are employed and on socio-behavioural factors that can influence the exposure have to be taken into account. To better explore reasons about the gap between risk assessment and risk management, within the EU FP7 Health and Environmental Risks: Organisation, Integration and Cross-fertilisation of Scientific Knowledge (HEROIC) project, a stepwise stakeholder’s consultation process was developed using a mixed approach in two different phases (survey and roundtable).We elicited stakeholder views regarding factors that could limit the pesticide risk assessment phase linked on how the knowledge is produced and the way the data are used in risk management and in risk communication, also taking into account qualitative factors such as responsibility, trust and behaviours, which could have impact on risk assessment policies. Activities deployed indicate that some changes and interaction are needed to better define the problems at the formulation stage, and the type of information risk assessor has to provide, to better inform risk manager in addressing different societal needs, to strengthen the credibility of the process of risk assessment and improve the effectiveness of policies.
Inglese
Calliera, M., Marchis, A. V., Sacchettini, G., Capri, E., Stakeholder consultations and opportunities for integrating socio-behavioural factors into the pesticide risk analysis process, <<ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL>>, 2016; (23): 2937-2947. [doi:10.1007/s11356-015-5553-9] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/91114]
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10807/91114
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 8
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 8
social impact