6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Open Science in regulatory environmental risk assessment

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          A possible way to alleviate the public skepticism toward regulatory science is to increase transparency by making all data and value judgments used in regulatory decision making accessible for public interpretation, ideally early on in the process, and following the concepts of Open Science. This paper discusses the opportunities and challenges in strengthening Open Science initiatives in regulatory environmental risk assessment (ERA). In this discussion paper, we argue that the benefits associated with Open Science in regulatory ERA far outweigh its perceived risks. All stakeholders involved in regulatory ERA (e.g., governmental regulatory authorities, private sector, academia, and nongovernmental organizations), as well as professional organizations like the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, can play a key role in supporting the Open Science initiative, by promoting the use of recommended reporting criteria for reliability and relevance of data and tools used in ERA, and by developing a communication strategy for both professionals and nonprofessionals to transparently explain the socioeconomic value judgments and scientific principles underlying regulatory ERA. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2021;17:1229–1242. © 2021 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC)

          KEY POINTS

          • Open Science is important to increase transparency and trust in regulatory Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA).

          • Open Science requires that data, tools, and value judgments used in decision making are made accessible for public interpretation.

          • Benefits associated with Open Science outweigh its perceived risks.

          • Open Science in regulatory ERA is supported by promoting the use of reporting criteria for reliability and relevance of data and tools.

          Related collections

          Most cited references86

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship

          There is an urgent need to improve the infrastructure supporting the reuse of scholarly data. A diverse set of stakeholders—representing academia, industry, funding agencies, and scholarly publishers—have come together to design and jointly endorse a concise and measureable set of principles that we refer to as the FAIR Data Principles. The intent is that these may act as a guideline for those wishing to enhance the reusability of their data holdings. Distinct from peer initiatives that focus on the human scholar, the FAIR Principles put specific emphasis on enhancing the ability of machines to automatically find and use the data, in addition to supporting its reuse by individuals. This Comment is the first formal publication of the FAIR Principles, and includes the rationale behind them, and some exemplar implementations in the community.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            A manifesto for reproducible science

            Improving the reliability and efficiency of scientific research will increase the credibility of the published scientific literature and accelerate discovery. Here we argue for the adoption of measures to optimize key elements of the scientific process: methods, reporting and dissemination, reproducibility, evaluation and incentives. There is some evidence from both simulations and empirical studies supporting the likely effectiveness of these measures, but their broad adoption by researchers, institutions, funders and journals will require iterative evaluation and improvement. We discuss the goals of these measures, and how they can be implemented, in the hope that this will facilitate action toward improving the transparency, reproducibility and efficiency of scientific research.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              SCIENTIFIC STANDARDS. Promoting an open research culture.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                theo.brock@wur.nl
                Journal
                Integr Environ Assess Manag
                Integr Environ Assess Manag
                10.1002/(ISSN)1551-3793
                IEAM
                Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                1551-3777
                1551-3793
                18 May 2021
                November 2021
                : 17
                : 6 ( doiID: 10.1002/ieam.v17.6 )
                : 1229-1242
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Wageningen Environmental Research Wageningen The Netherlands
                [ 2 ] Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Lyman Briggs College Department of Philosophy Michigan State University East Lansing Michigan USA
                [ 3 ] Department of Philosophy Lyman Briggs College Michigan State University East Lansing Michigan USA
                [ 4 ] Bayer Germany
                [ 5 ] National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) Utrecht The Netherlands
                [ 6 ] Research Division Agroecology and Environment Agroscope Zurich Switzerland
                [ 7 ] Hygiene‐Institut des Ruhrgebiets Gelsenkirchen Germany
                [ 8 ] Institute for Environmental Research RWTH Aachen University Aachen Germany
                [ 9 ] University of Guelph Guelph Ontario Canada
                [ 10 ] BASF Germany
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence Theo C. M. Brock, Wageningen Environmental Research, The Netherlands.

                Email: theo.brock@ 123456wur.nl

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1842-1597
                Article
                IEAM4433
                10.1002/ieam.4433
                8596791
                33913617
                cb6016ae-93a5-4634-af14-5b1804d6ec14
                © 2021 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC)

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

                History
                : 22 February 2021
                : 02 December 2020
                : 16 April 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 2, Pages: 14, Words: 11663
                Categories
                Health & Ecological Risk Assessment
                Health & Ecological Risk Assessment
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                November 2021
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:6.0.9 mode:remove_FC converted:17.11.2021

                General environmental science
                building trust,data quality,problem formulation,prospective environmental risk assessment,transparency

                Comments

                Comment on this article