Advancing the weight of evidence approach to enable chemical environmental risk assessment for decision-making and achieving protection goals

Abstract

The weight of evidence (WoE) approach conflates the aspects of quality, reliability, relevance, and consistency of data and information to systematically strengthen the body of evidence and enable credible communication and decision-making on chemical risk assessment. Between 2015 and 2019, the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) held several workshops in all the geographical units with scientists and managers from academia, government, and business sectors focusing on the chemical risk-assessment approach. This article summarizes the knowledge that informs the needs concerning application of WoE, especially in the context of developing countries. This effort supports the use of existing data and test strategies for assessing chemical toxicity, exposure, and risk, and highlights the critical process for risk assessors to convey and discuss information sufficiency and uncertainty mitigation strategy with risk managers. This article complements the four articles in the special series that provide a critical review of existing frameworks for chemical risk screening and management, and applications of the WoE approach for assessing exposure in the aquatic environment, prediction of fish toxicity, and bioaccumulation. Collectively, the articles exemplify the use of WoE approaches to evaluate chemicals that are data rich and/or data poor for decision-making. They integrate the WoE concepts and approaches into practical considerations and guidance, and help to scale the value of WoE in supporting sound chemical risk assessment and science-based policy implementation. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2023;19:1188-1191. © 2023 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

Keywords: Chemical management; Developing country; Risk assessment; Risk communication; Weight of evidence.