Harmonization of Risk Assessment Methodologies for Soil Threats in Europe

1
Harmonization of Risk Assessment Methodologies
for Soil Threats in Europe
Christy van Beek, Oene Oenema et al.
2
The RAMSOIL consortium
3
Objectives of RAMSOIL
Objectives to identify options for harmonization
of risk assessment methodologies for soil threats
among EU member states
Threats in EU soil strategy Compaction, soil
organic matter decline, landslides, erosion and
salinization
4
Methodological approach
Monitoring site, data set
Simulation model
Comparison with threshold value
Sense of urgency
Indicator based RAMs
Policy questionnaire
Full harmonization
Thematic questionnaires
Partial harmonization
5
RAMs in practice
We identified 26 main RAMs, but the distinction
is often vague.
There are more, but differences are in details.
Unclear when is a RAM a RAM?
Data processing
Data interpretation
Data collection
Risk perception
6
RAMs in practice example 1 Soil organic matter
decline
Data processing
Data interpretation
Data collection
Risk perception
What is a reasonable threshold?
No ideas about risk perceptions.
Jones, R.J.A., Hiederer, R., Rusco, E., Loveland,
P.J. and Montanarella, L. (2004). The map of
organic carbon in topsoils in Europe, Version
1.2, September 2003 Explanation of Special
Publication Ispra 2004 No.72 (S.P.I.04.72).
European Soil Bureau Research Report No.17, EUR
21209 EN, 26pp. and 1 map in ISO B1 format.
Office for Official Publications of the European
Communities, Luxembourg.
7
RAMs in practice example 2 Compaction
Data processing
Data interpretation
Data collection
Risk perception
Some countries use a minimum saturated hydraulic
conductivity (ranging from 10 to 24 cm d-1),
whereas others used a maximum penetrometer value
(ranging from 2 to 6 Mpa).
Scientific basis, or historical/personal grounds?
8
RAMs in practice example 2 Salinization
Data processing
Data interpretation
Data collection
Risk perception
9
Example 4 Erosion
Data processing
Data collection
PESERA
10
Example 5 land slides
Data processing
Data interpretation
Data collection
Risk perception
11
Why do (parts of) RAMs differ?
Historical/personal differences
Differences in terminology (compaction,
salinization, erosion, land-slides)
Different environmental conditions
Different driving forces (e.g. different
machinery for compaction SOM decline in peat
soils due to drainage)
Different objectives (e.g. risks related to
agricultural production and/or soil stability)
12
Options for (partial) harmonization
13
Harmonization why should we?
- Transboundary character of externality
- Economic reasons (race to the bottom, level
playing field)
- Minimum level of protection
- Exchange of information
De Smedt K. 2004. Is harmonization of
environmental liability rules needed in an
enlarged European Union? Reciel 13 164-174.
14
Conclusions
RAMs can be harmonized, but first they need to be
completed.
The best time to harmonize RAMs is when they are
being developed and that is now!
Involve policy makers, stakeholders and
communication experts for threshold values and
risk perception.
15
Outlook

• RAMSOIL runs till January 2009
• Further elaboration of options for harmonization
• Evaluation of case studies
• Final workshop open science meeting

16
Thank you!

• For more information visit www.ramsoil.eu