Environmental quality standards: Endpoints or triggers for a tiered ecological effect assessment approach?

Authors

  • Dick Sijm,

    Corresponding author
    1. Centre for Substances and Risk assessment (CSR), National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), PO Box 1, NL-3720 BA Bilthoven, The Netherlands
    • Centre for Substances and Risk assessment (CSR), National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), PO Box 1, NL-3720 BA Bilthoven, The Netherlands
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Jack de Bruijn,

    1. Centre for Substances and Risk assessment (CSR), National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), PO Box 1, NL-3720 BA Bilthoven, The Netherlands
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Trudie Crommentuijn,

    1. Centre for Substances and Risk assessment (CSR), National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), PO Box 1, NL-3720 BA Bilthoven, The Netherlands
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Kees van Leeuwen

    1. Centre for Substances and Risk assessment (CSR), National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), PO Box 1, NL-3720 BA Bilthoven, The Netherlands
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

The recently derived Dutch Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) for water, soil, and sediment for approximately 170 substances have been evaluated. Three methods have been used to derive the Dutch EQS. Independent of how the EQS were derived, they are given equal weight in Dutch environmental policy. Scientifically, the three methods may deserve different weights. For example, for soil and sediment, the least reliable method had to be applied to derive most of the EQS. Ecological effects in these compartments may be either overestimated or underestimated. A multitiered approach is proposed, which is relevant for all parties involved, including other countries, and which may help improve ecological effect assessment.

Ancillary