Exploring ecosystem-based management in the North Atlantic.

The United States, the EU and Canada established a trilateral working group on the ecosystem approach to ocean health and stressors under the Atlantic Ocean Research Alliance. Recognizing the Atlantic Ocean as a shared resource and responsibility, the working group sought to advance understanding of the Atlantic Ocean and its dynamic systems to improve ocean health, enhance ocean stewardship and promote the sustainable use and management of its resources. This included consideration of multiple ocean-use sectors such as fishing, shipping, tourism and offshore energy. The working group met for 4 years and worked through eight steps that covered the development of common language as a basis for collaboration, challenges of stakeholder engagement, review of the governance mandates, exploring the links between sectors and ecosystems effects, identifying gaps in knowledge and uptake of science, identification of tools for ecosystem-based management, customary best practice for tool development and communication of key research priorities. The key findings were that ecosystem-based management enables new benefits and opportunities, and that we need to make the business case. Further findings were that adequate mandates and effective tools exist for ecosystem-based management, and that ecosystem-based management urgently requires integration of human dimensions, so we must diversify the conversation. In addition, it was found that stakeholders do not see their stake in ecosystem-based management, so greater engagement with stakeholders and targeting of ocean literacy is required and a sustainable future requires a sustained investment in ecosystem-based management, so long-term commitment is key.

Climate research priorities for policy-makers, practitioners, and scientists in Georgia, USA.

Climate change has far-reaching effects on human and ecological systems, requiring collaboration across sectors and disciplines to determine effective responses. To inform regional responses to climate change, decision-makers need credible and relevant information representing a wide swath of knowledge and perspectives. The southeastern U. S. State of Georgia is a valuable focal area for study because it contains multiple ecological zones that vary greatly in land use and economic activities, and it is vulnerable to diverse climate change impacts. We identified 40 important research questions that, if answered, could lay the groundwork for effective, science-based climate action in Georgia. Top research priorities were identified through a broad solicitation of candidate research questions (180 were received). A group of experts across sectors and disciplines gathered for a workshop to categorize, prioritize, and filter the candidate questions, identify missing topics, and rewrite questions. Participants then collectively chose the 40 most important questions. This cross-sectoral effort ensured the inclusion of a diversity of topics and questions (e.g., coastal hazards, agricultural production, ecosystem functioning, urban infrastructure, and human health) likely to be important to Georgia policy-makers, practitioners, and scientists. Several cross-cutting themes emerged, including the need for long-term data collection and consideration of at-risk Georgia citizens and communities. Workshop participants defined effective responses as those that take economic cost, environmental impacts, and social justice into consideration. Our research highlights the importance of collaborators across disciplines and sectors, and discussing challenges and opportunities that will require transdisciplinary solutions.

Ocean Research Priorities: Similarities and Differences among Scientists, Policymakers, and Fishermen in the United States.

Understanding and solving complex ocean conservation problems requires cooperation not just among scientific disciplines but also across sectors. A recently published survey that probed research priorities of marine scientists, when provided to ocean stakeholders, revealed some agreement on priorities but also illuminated key differences. Ocean acidification, cumulative impacts, bycatch effects, and restoration effectiveness were in the top 10 priorities for scientists and stakeholder groups. Significant priority differences were that scientists favored research questions about ocean acidification and marine protected areas; policymakers prioritized questions about habitat restoration, bycatch, and precaution; and fisheries sector resource users called for the inclusion of local ecological knowledge in policymaking. These results quantitatively demonstrate how different stakeholder groups approach ocean issues and highlight the need to incorporate other types of knowledge in the codesign of solutions-oriented research, which may facilitate cross-sectoral collaboration.

U.S. News Media Coverage of Pharmaceutical Pollution in the Aquatic Environment: A Content Analysis of the Problems and Solutions Presented by Actors.

Pharmaceutical pollution in the aquatic environment is an issue of concern that has attracted attention by the news media. Understanding the factors that contribute to media framing of pharmaceutical pollution may lead to a better understanding of the management and governance of this issue, including why these pollutants are generally unregulated at this time. This study conducted a content analysis of 405 newspaper articles (81 had substantive information on the topic) from 2007 to 2014, using the search terms "water" and "pharmaceuticals" in the Chicago Tribune, Denver Post, Los Angeles Times, New York Daily News, New York Times, USA Today, Wall Street Journal, and Washington Post. We sought to analyze the factors that contributed to the news media presentation of pharmaceutical pollution in the United States, including the presentation of the risks/safety and solutions by various actors. We found that the primary issues in the news media were uncertainty regarding public health and harm to the environment. The primary solutions recommended within the news media were implementing additional water treatment technologies, taking unused pharmaceuticals to predetermined sites for disposal (take-back programs), and trash disposal of unused pharmaceuticals. Water utilities and scientists presented improved water treatment technology, government actors presented take-back programs, and pharmaceutical representatives, while sparsely involved in the news media, presented trash disposal as their primary solutions. To advance the understanding of the management of pharmaceutical pollution, this article offers further insight into the debate and potential solutions within the news media presentation of this complex scientific topic.

Crossing Science-Policy-Societal Boundaries to Reduce Scientific and Institutional Uncertainty in Small-Scale Fisheries.

The governance of small-scale fisheries (SSF) is challenging due to the uncertainty, complexity, and interconnectedness of social, political, ecological, and economical processes. Conventional SSF management has focused on a centralized and top-down approach. A major criticism of conventional management is the over-reliance on 'expert science' to guide decision-making and poor consideration of fishers' contextually rich knowledge. That is thought to exacerbate the already low governance potential of SSF. Integrating scientific knowledge with fishers' knowledge is increasingly popular and is often assumed to help reduce levels of biophysical and institutional uncertainties. Many projects aimed at encouraging knowledge integration have, however, been unsuccessful. Our objective in this research was to assess factors that influence knowledge integration and the uptake of integrated knowledge into policy-making. We report results from 54 semi-structured interviews with SSF researchers and practitioners from around the globe. Our analysis is framed in terms of scientific credibility, societal legitimacy, and policy saliency, and we discuss cases that have been partially or fully successful in reducing uncertainty via push-and-pull-oriented boundary crossing initiatives. Our findings suggest that two important factors affect the science-policy-societal boundary: a lack of consensus among stakeholders about what constitutes credible knowledge and institutional uncertainty resulting from shifting policies and leadership change. A lack of training for scientific leaders and an apparent 'shelf-life' for community organizations highlight the importance of ongoing institutional support for knowledge integration projects. Institutional support may be enhanced through such investments, such as capacity building and specialized platforms for knowledge integration.

Non-use Economic Values for Little-Known Aquatic Species at Risk: Comparing Choice Experiment Results from Surveys Focused on Species, Guilds, and Ecosystems.

Accounting for non-market economic values of biological diversity is important to fully assess the benefits of environmental policies and regulations. This study used three choice experiments (species-, guild-, and ecosystem-based surveys) in parallel to quantify non-use values for little-known aquatic species at risk in southern Ontario. Mean willingness-to-pay (WTP) ranged from $9.45 to $21.41 per listing status increment under Canada's Species at Risk Act for both named and unnamed little-known species. Given the broad range of valuable ecosystem services likely to accrue to residents from substantial increases in water quality and the rehabilitation of coastal wetlands, the difference in WTP between species- and ecosystem-based surveys seemed implausibly small. It appeared that naming species-the 'iconization' of species in two of the three surveys-had an important effect on WTP. The results suggest that reasonable annual household-level WTP values for little-known aquatic species may be $10 to $25 per species or $10 to $20 per listing status increment. The results highlighted the utility of using parallel surveys to triangulate on non-use economic values for little-known species at risk.

A narrative policy approach to environmental conservation.

Due to the urgency and seriousness of the loss of biological diversity, scientists from across a range of disciplines are urged to increase the salience and use of their research by policy-makers. Increased policy nuance is needed to address the science-policy gap and overcome divergent views of separate research and policy worlds, a view still relatively common among conservation scientists. Research impact considerations should recognize that policy uptake is dependent on contextual variables operating in the policy sphere. We provide a novel adaptation of existing policy approaches to evidence impact that accounts for non-evidentiary "societal" influences on decision-making. We highlight recent analytical tools from political science that account for the use of evidence by policy-makers. Using the United Kingdom's recent embrace of the ecosystem approach to environmental management, we advocate analyzing evidence research impact through a narrative lens that accounts for the credibility, legitimacy, and relevance of science for policy.

Recreational anglers' attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors related to catch-and-release practices of Pacific salmon in British Columbia.

The fate of captured and released fish in recreational fisheries depends in large part on fisher handling and behavior. As such, there is a need for promoting adoption of responsible fishing practices. We interviewed recreational sockeye salmon anglers in the lower Fraser River, British Columbia, to assess their awareness of responsible fishing practices and identify gaps where improved education could promote conservation-oriented behaviors. Based on our interview data, we developed three latent class models of salmon angler typologies based on: 1) anglers' fishing behaviors and preferences, 2) anglers' perceived risks to salmon survival due to post-capture live release, and 3) anglers' level of support for education programs. In the first model, we identified salmon-only anglers (33% of sample), lake-species specialists (46%), and all-around anglers (21%). These classes were differentiated primarily by non-salmon fishing activities (e.g., other target species). In the second model, we found four classes of anglers who differed with regards to key factors they thought affected post-release survival: air exposure (39% of sample); water temperature (24%); hook location (22%); and revival effort (15%). In the third model, we found anglers were either supporters (73%) or non-supporters (27%) of angler education programs. Heterogeneity existed among anglers but we found no correlations in angler classes across models, nor any significant demographic or experiential predictors of class membership. Respondents generally had high awareness and application of catch-and-release best practices, with lake-species specialists rating a higher awareness and usage of recommended catch-and-release technique, and were significantly more likely to cut the line on deeply hooked fish than other groups. Our findings provide resource managers with important insight into the attitudes and behaviors of sockeye salmon anglers in the important lower Fraser River recreational fishery. Our findings also highlight, however, the need for further research on the determinants of angler beliefs and behavior in order to customize programs to build anglers' awareness and adoption of responsible fishing practices.

Radiation adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) are on the horizon: advancing radiation protection through an international Horizon-Style exercise.

PURPOSE: The Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) framework, a systematic tool that can link available mechanistic data with phenotypic outcomes of relevance to regulatory decision-making, is being explored in areas related to radiation risk assessment. To examine the challenges including the use of AOPs to support the radiation protection community, an international horizon-style exercise was initiated through the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Nuclear Energy Agency High-Level Group on Low Dose Research Radiation/Chemical AOP Joint Topical Group. The objective of the HSE was to facilitate the collection of ideas from a range of experts, to short-list a set of priority research questions that could, if answered, improve the description of the radiation dose-response relationship for low dose/dose-rate exposures, as well as reduce uncertainties in estimating the risk of developing adverse health outcomes following such exposures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The HSE was guided by an international steering committee of radiation risk experts. In the first phase, research questions were solicited on areas that can be supported by the AOP framework, or challenges on the use of AOPs in radiation risk assessment. In the second phase, questions received were refined and sorted by the SC using a best-worst scaling method. During a virtual 3-day workshop, the list of questions was further narrowed. In the third phase, an international survey of the broader radiation protection community led to an orderly ranking of the top questions. RESULTS: Of the 271 questions solicited, 254 were accepted and categorized into 9 themes. These were further refined to the top 25 prioritized questions. Among these, the higher ranked questions will be considered as 'important' to drive future initiatives in the low dose radiation protection community. These included questions on the ability of AOPs to delineate responses across different levels of biological organization, and how AOPs could be applied to address research questions on radiation quality, doses or dose-rates, exposure time patterns and deliveries, and uncertainties in low dose/dose-rate effects. A better understanding of these concepts is required to support the use of the AOP framework in radiation risk assessment. CONCLUSION: Through dissemination of these results and considerations on next steps, the JTG will address select priority questions to advance the development and use of AOPs in the radiation protection community. The major themes observed will be discussed in the context of their relevance to areas of research that support the system of radiation protection.

How research-prioritization exercises affect conservation policy.

Conservation scientists are concerned about the apparent lack of impact their research is having on policy. By better aligning research with policy needs, conservation science might become more relevant to policy and increase its real-world salience in the conservation of biological diversity. Consequently, some conservation scientists have embarked on a variety of exercises to identify research questions that, if answered, would provide the evidence base with which to develop and implement effective conservation policies. I synthesized two existing approaches to conceptualizing research impacts. One widely used approach classifies the impacts of research as conceptual, instrumental, and symbolic. Conceptual impacts occur when policy makers are sensitized to new issues and change their beliefs or thinking. Instrumental impacts arise when scientific research has a direct effect on policy decisions. The use of scientific research results to support established policy positions are symbolic impacts. The second approach classifies research issues according to whether scientific knowledge is developed fully and whether the policy issue has been articulated clearly. I believe exercises to identify important research questions have objectives of increasing the clarity of policy issues while strengthening science-policy interactions. This may facilitate the transmission of scientific knowledge to policy makers and, potentially, accelerate the development and implementation of effective conservation policy. Other, similar types of exercises might also be useful. For example, identification of visionary science questions independent of current policy needs, prioritization of best practices for transferring scientific knowledge to policy makers, and identification of questions about human values and their role in political processes could all help advance real-world conservation science. It is crucial for conservation scientists to understand the wide variety of ways in which their research can affect policy and be improved systematically.

Scientists' opinions on the global status and management of biological diversity.

The large investments needed if loss of biological diversity is to be stemmed will likely lead to increased public and political scrutiny of conservation strategies and the science underlying them. It is therefore crucial to understand the degree of consensus or divergence among scientists on core scientific perceptions and strategies most likely to achieve given objectives. I developed an internet survey designed to elucidate the opinions of conservation scientists. Conservation scientists (n =583) were unanimous (99.5%) in their view that a serious loss of biological diversity is likely, very likely, or virtually certain. Scientists' agreement that serious loss is very likely or virtually certain ranged from 72.8% for Western Europe to 90.9% for Southeast Asia. Tropical coral ecosystems were perceived as the most seriously affected by loss of biological diversity; 88.0% of respondents familiar with that ecosystem type agreed that a serious loss is very likely or virtually certain. With regard to conservation strategies, scientists most often viewed understanding how people and nature interact in certain contexts and the role of biological diversity in maintaining ecosystem function as their priorities. Protection of biological diversity for its cultural and spiritual values and because of its usefulness to humans were low priorities, which suggests that many scientists do not fully support the utilitarian concept of ecosystem services. Many scientists expressed a willingness to consider conservation triage, engage in active conservation interventions, and consider reframing conservation goals and measures of success for conservation of biological diversity in an era of climate change. Although some heterogeneity of opinion is evident, results of the survey show a clear consensus within the scientific community on core issues of the extent and geographic scope of loss of biological diversity and on elements that may contribute to successful conservation strategies in the future.

Resumen: Las grandes inversiones requeridas para frenar la pérdida de diversidad biológica probablemente llevarán a un mayor escrutinio público y político de las estrategias de conservación y de la ciencia que las sustenta. Por lo tanto, es crucial entender el grado de consenso o divergencia entre científicos sobre las percepciones y estrategias científicas planteadas para alcanzar ciertos objetivos. Desarrollé un muestreo por internet para aclarar las opiniones de científicos de la conservación. Científicos de la conservación (n =583) fueron unánimes (99.5%) en opinar que una pérdida severa de diversidad biológica es posible, muy posible o virtualmente cierta. El acuerdo de los científicos respecto a que una pérdida severa es muy probable o virtualmente cierta varió de 72.8% en Europa Occidental a 90.9 en el sureste de Asia. Los ecosistemas de corales tropicales fueron percibidos como los más afectados por la pérdida de diversidad biológica; 88.0% de los encuestados familiarizados con ese tipo de ecosistema estuvo de acuerdo en que una pérdida severa es muy probable o virtualmente cierta. En relación con las estrategias de conservación, los científicos a menudo visualizaron como prioritario el entendimiento la interacción entre la gente y la naturaleza en ciertos contextos y el papel de la diversidad biológica en el mantenimiento de las funciones del ecosistema. La protección de la diversidad biológica por sus valores culturales y espirituales y por su utilidad para los humanos fueron prioridades bajas, lo que sugiere que muchos científicos no apoyan el concepto utilitario de los servicios ecosistémicos. Muchos científicos expresaron disponibilidad para considerar el triaje de conservación, involucrarse activamente en intervenciones de conservación y considerar el replanteamiento de metas de conservación y medidas de éxito para la conservación de la diversidad biológica en una era de cambio climático. Mientras que la heterogeneidad de opiniones es evidente, los resultados del muestreo muestran un consenso claro entre la comunidad científica respecto a temas centrales de la extensión y alcance geográfico de la pérdida de diversidad biológica y sobre elementos que pueden contribuir a estrategias de conservación exitosas en el futuro.

Generation of priority research questions to inform conservation policy and management at a national level.

Integrating knowledge from across the natural and social sciences is necessary to effectively address societal tradeoffs between human use of biological diversity and its preservation. Collaborative processes can change the ways decision makers think about scientific evidence, enhance levels of mutual trust and credibility, and advance the conservation policy discourse. Canada has responsibility for a large fraction of some major ecosystems, such as boreal forests, Arctic tundra, wetlands, and temperate and Arctic oceans. Stressors to biological diversity within these ecosystems arise from activities of the country's resource-based economy, as well as external drivers of environmental change. Effective management is complicated by incongruence between ecological and political boundaries and conflicting perspectives on social and economic goals. Many knowledge gaps about stressors and their management might be reduced through targeted, timely research. We identify 40 questions that, if addressed or answered, would advance research that has a high probability of supporting development of effective policies and management strategies for species, ecosystems, and ecological processes in Canada. A total of 396 candidate questions drawn from natural and social science disciplines were contributed by individuals with diverse organizational affiliations. These were collaboratively winnowed to 40 by our team of collaborators. The questions emphasize understanding ecosystems, the effects and mitigation of climate change, coordinating governance and management efforts across multiple jurisdictions, and examining relations between conservation policy and the social and economic well-being of Aboriginal peoples. The questions we identified provide potential links between evidence from the conservation sciences and formulation of policies for conservation and resource management. Our collaborative process of communication and engagement between scientists and decision makers for generating and prioritizing research questions at a national level could be a model for similar efforts beyond Canada.

Toward Sustainable Environmental Quality: Priority Research Questions for Asia.

Environmental and human health challenges are pronounced in Asia, an exceptionally diverse and complex region where influences of global megatrends are extensive and numerous stresses to environmental quality exist. Identifying priorities necessary to engage grand challenges can be facilitated through horizon scanning exercises, and to this end we identified and examined 23 priority research questions needed to advance toward more sustainable environmental quality in Asia, as part of the Global Horizon Scanning Project. Advances in environmental toxicology, environmental chemistry, biological monitoring, and risk-assessment methodologies are necessary to address the adverse impacts of environmental stressors on ecosystem services and biodiversity, with Asia being home to numerous biodiversity hotspots. Intersections of the food-energy-water nexus are profound in Asia; innovative and aggressive technologies are necessary to provide clean water, ensure food safety, and stimulate energy efficiency, while improving ecological integrity and addressing legacy and emerging threats to public health and the environment, particularly with increased aquaculture production. Asia is the largest chemical-producing continent globally. Accordingly, sustainable and green chemistry and engineering present decided opportunities to stimulate innovation and realize a number of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Engaging the priority research questions identified herein will require transdisciplinary coordination through existing and nontraditional partnerships within and among countries and sectors. Answering these questions will not be easy but is necessary to achieve more sustainable environmental quality in Asia. Environ Toxicol Chem 2020;39:1485-1505. © 2020 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.

Toward Sustainable Environmental Quality: Priority Research Questions for North America.

Anticipating, identifying, and prioritizing strategic needs represent essential activities by research organizations. Decided benefits emerge when these pursuits engage globally important environment and health goals, including the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. To this end, horizon scanning efforts can facilitate identification of specific research needs to address grand challenges. We report and discuss 40 priority research questions following engagement of scientists and engineers in North America. These timely questions identify the importance of stimulating innovation and developing new methods, tools, and concepts in environmental chemistry and toxicology to improve assessment and management of chemical contaminants and other diverse environmental stressors. Grand challenges to achieving sustainable management of the environment are becoming increasingly complex and structured by global megatrends, which collectively challenge existing sustainable environmental quality efforts. Transdisciplinary, systems-based approaches will be required to define and avoid adverse biological effects across temporal and spatial gradients. Similarly, coordinated research activities among organizations within and among countries are necessary to address the priority research needs reported here. Acquiring answers to these 40 research questions will not be trivial, but doing so promises to advance sustainable environmental quality in the 21st century. Environ Toxicol Chem 2019;38:1606-1624. © 2019 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of SETAC.

Towards Sustainable Environmental Quality: Priority Research Questions for the Australasian Region of Oceania.

Environmental challenges persist across the world, including the Australasian region of Oceania, where biodiversity hotspots and unique ecosystems such as the Great Barrier Reef are common. These systems are routinely affected by multiple stressors from anthropogenic activities, and increasingly influenced by global megatrends (e.g., the food-energy-water nexus, demographic transitions to cities) and climate change. Here we report priority research questions from the Global Horizon Scanning Project, which aimed to identify, prioritize, and advance environmental quality research needs from an Australasian perspective, within a global context. We employed a transparent and inclusive process of soliciting key questions from Australasian members of the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. Following submission of 78 questions, 20 priority research questions were identified during an expert workshop in Nelson, New Zealand. These research questions covered a range of issues of global relevance, including research needed to more closely integrate ecotoxicology and ecology for the protection of ecosystems, increase flexibility for prioritizing chemical substances currently in commerce, understand the impacts of complex mixtures and multiple stressors, and define environmental quality and ecosystem integrity of temporary waters. Some questions have specific relevance to Australasia, particularly the uncertainties associated with using toxicity data from exotic species to protect unique indigenous species. Several related priority questions deal with the theme of how widely international ecotoxicological data and databases can be applied to regional ecosystems. Other timely questions, which focus on improving predictive chemistry and toxicology tools and techniques, will be important to answer several of the priority questions identified here. Another important question raised was how to protect local cultural and social values and maintain indigenous engagement during problem formulation and identification of ecosystem protection goals. Addressing these questions will be challenging, but doing so promises to advance environmental sustainability in Oceania and globally.

Toward sustainable environmental quality: Identifying priority research questions for Latin America.

The Global Horizon Scanning Project (GHSP) is an innovative initiative that aims to identify important global environmental quality research needs. Here we report 20 key research questions from Latin America (LA). Members of the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) LA and other scientists from LA were asked to submit research questions that would represent priority needs to address in the region. One hundred questions were received, then partitioned among categories, examined, and some rearranged during a workshop in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Twenty priority research questions were subsequently identified. These research questions included developing, improving, and harmonizing across LA countries methods for 1) identifying contaminants and degradation products in complex matrices (including biota); 2) advancing prediction of contaminant risks and effects in ecosystems, addressing lab-to-field extrapolation challenges, and understanding complexities of multiple stressors (including chemicals and climate change); and 3) improving management and regulatory tools toward achieving sustainable development. Whereas environmental contaminants frequently identified in these key questions were pesticides, pharmaceuticals, endocrine disruptors or modulators, plastics, and nanomaterials, commonly identified environmental challenges were related to agriculture, urban effluents, solid wastes, pulp and paper mills, and natural extraction activities. Several interesting research topics included assessing and preventing pollution impacts on conservation protected areas, integrating environment and health assessments, and developing strategies for identification, substitution, and design of less hazardous chemicals (e.g., green chemistry). Finally, a recurrent research need included developing an understanding of differential sensitivity of regional species and ecosystems to environmental contaminants and other stressors. Addressing these critical questions will support development of long-term strategic research efforts to advance more sustainable environmental quality and protect public health and the environment in LA. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2018;14:344-357. © 2018 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

Toward sustainable environmental quality: Priority research questions for Europe.

The United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals have been established to end poverty, protect the planet, and ensure prosperity for all. Delivery of the Sustainable Development Goals will require a healthy and productive environment. An understanding of the impacts of chemicals which can negatively impact environmental health is therefore essential to the delivery of the Sustainable Development Goals. However, current research on and regulation of chemicals in the environment tend to take a simplistic view and do not account for the complexity of the real world, which inhibits the way we manage chemicals. There is therefore an urgent need for a step change in the way we study and communicate the impacts and control of chemicals in the natural environment. To do this requires the major research questions to be identified so that resources are focused on questions that really matter. We present the findings of a horizon-scanning exercise to identify research priorities of the European environmental science community around chemicals in the environment. Using the key questions approach, we identified 22 questions of priority. These questions covered overarching questions about which chemicals we should be most concerned about and where, impacts of global megatrends, protection goals, and sustainability of chemicals; the development and parameterization of assessment and management frameworks; and mechanisms to maximize the impact of the research. The research questions identified provide a first-step in the path forward for the research, regulatory, and business communities to better assess and manage chemicals in the natural environment. Environ Toxicol Chem 2018;37:2281-2295. © 2018 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of SETAC.

Advancing the adverse outcome pathway framework-An international horizon scanning approach.

Our ability to conduct whole-organism toxicity tests to understand chemical safety has been outpaced by the synthesis of new chemicals for a wide variety of commercial applications. As a result, scientists and risk assessors are turning to mechanistically based studies to increase efficiencies in chemical risk assessment and making greater use of in vitro and in silico methods to evaluate potential environmental and human health hazards. In this context, the adverse outcome pathway (AOP) framework has gained traction in regulatory science because it offers an efficient and effective means for capturing available knowledge describing the linkage between mechanistic data and the apical toxicity end points required for regulatory assessments. A number of international activities have focused on AOP development and various applications to regulatory decision-making. These initiatives have prompted dialogue between research scientists and regulatory communities to consider how best to use the AOP framework. Although expert-facilitated discussions and AOP development have been critical in moving the science of AOPs forward, it was recognized that a survey of the broader scientific and regulatory communities would aid in identifying current limitations while guiding future initiatives for the AOP framework. To that end, a global horizon scanning exercise was conducted to solicit questions concerning the challenges or limitations that must be addressed to realize the full potential of the AOP framework in research and regulatory decision-making. The questions received fell into several broad topical areas: AOP networks, quantitative AOPs, collaboration on and communication of AOP knowledge, AOP discovery and development, chemical and cross-species extrapolation, exposure/toxicokinetics considerations, and AOP applications. Expert ranking was then used to prioritize questions for each category, where 4 broad themes emerged that could help inform and guide future AOP research and regulatory initiatives. In addition, frequently asked questions were identified and addressed by experts in the field. Answers to frequently asked questions will aid in addressing common misperceptions and will allow for clarification of AOP topics. The need for this type of clarification was highlighted with surprising frequency by our question submitters, indicating that improvements are needed in communicating the AOP framework among the scientific and regulatory communities. Overall, horizon scanning engaged the global scientific community to help identify key questions surrounding the AOP framework and guide the direction of future initiatives. Environ Toxicol Chem 2017;36:1411-1421. © 2017 SETAC.

Behavior, preferences, and willingness to pay for measures aimed at preventing pollution by pharmaceuticals and personal care products in China.

The release of pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) into the environment has been held up as a potential threat to ecosystem and human health. Using a custom-designed survey of residents living in Xiamen, China, this paper examines individuals' disposal practices, awareness of the environmental impact of PPCPs, and willingness to pay for measures aimed at reducing the likelihood of PPCPs being released into the environment. The vast majority of respondents report that they dispose of PPCPs through the thrash. The results of a contingent valuation experiment suggest a substantial willingness to pay (WTP) for policy measures aimed at reducing PPCP pollution. Income as well as subjective perceptions relating to overall financial health, expenditure on PPCPs, and overall concern with environmental issues emerged as significant predictors of respondents' WTP. Our results should be of interest to policymakers looking for ways to mitigate the introduction of PPCPs in the environment. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2016;12:793-800. © 2015 SETAC.

Pathways from marine protected area design and management to ecological success.

Using an international dataset compiled from 121 sites in 87 marine protected areas (MPAs) globally (Edgar et al., 2014), I assessed how various configurations of design and management conditions affected MPA ecological performance, measured in terms of fish species richness and biomass. The set-theoretic approach used Boolean algebra to identify pathways that combined up to five 'NEOLI' ( No-take, Enforced, Old, Large, Isolated) conditions and that were sufficient for achieving positive, and negative, ecological outcomes. Ecological isolation was overwhelming the most important condition affecting ecological outcomes but Old and Large were also conditions important for achieving high levels of biomass among large fishes (jacks, groupers, sharks). Solution coverage was uniformly low (<0.35) for all models of positive ecological performance suggesting the presence of numerous other conditions and pathways to ecological success that did not involve the NEOLI conditions. Solution coverage was higher (>0.50) for negative results (i.e., the absence of high biomass) among the large commercially-exploited fishes, implying asymmetries in how MPAs may rebuild populations on the one hand and, on the other, protect against further decline. The results revealed complex interactions involving MPA design, implementation, and management conditions that affect MPA ecological performance. In general terms, the presence of no-take regulations and effective enforcement were insufficient to ensure MPA effectiveness on their own. Given the central role of ecological isolation in securing ecological benefits from MPAs, site selection in the design phase appears critical for success.