development of policy instruments: environmental health indicators veerle arren human ecology...

Development of Policy Instruments:

Environmental Health Indicators

Veerle Arren

Human Ecology Department

Vrije Universiteit Brussel

International SymposiumDecember 15th, 2006

Environmental Health Indicators 15/12/2006 2

Contents

1. What are Environmental Health Indicators ?

2. The DPSEEA-framework

3. Inventory of international and national EHI

4. Filling-in of selected EHI for Flanders:

a) Outdoor air pollution

b) Water quality

c) Food safety

5. Conclusions


1. What are Environmental Health Indicators (EHI) ? (1/2)

• EHI: “ Measurable units suggesting a relevant and simple

relationship between health and environment.

Health effects arise from human exposure to environmental pollution.”

Cause-consequence relation

• Changes environment changes health & well-being of people

• Need to develop EHI to support policy


1. What are Environmental Health Indicators (EHI) ? (2/2)

• Selection criteria for a good EHI:1. Policy relevance

2. Availability and follow-up of data

3. Simplicity & clarity

4. Sensitivity

5. Validity

6. Reliability & objectivity

7. Specificity


2. The DPSEEA-framework

• Developed by WHO

• Driving forces

• Pressure

• State

• Exposure

• Effects

• Actions


3. Inventory of international and national EHI (1/3)

• State of the art: worldwide overview based on: – International studies on indicators for SD

• WHO• UN• OECD• EU

– National studies:• MIRA (‘Environmental report for Flanders’)• VRIND (‘Regional indicators for Flanders’)

• Highlighting themes within E & H, relevant for Flanders



• Testing proposed indicators to criteria for good indicators:

• Policy relevance, data availability, simplicity, sensitivity, validity, reliability, specificity

To obtain a set indicators to integrate in Flemish EHIS

• Resulted in core set with 42 relevant indicators for Flanders

• Classified within the DPSEEA-framework



• Considered themes:– Outdoor air pollution (17 selected indicators)– Indoor air quality & housing (5)– Noise (4)– Soil pollution (1)– Waste pollution (2)– Water quality (9)– Food safety (1)– Environmental radiation (2)– Smell nuisance (1)


4. Filling-in of selected EHI for Flanders (1/2)

• Filling-in EHI for 3 priority themes with important health impacts:– Outdoor air pollution– Water quality– Food safety


4. Filling-in of selected EHI for Flanders (2/2)Implementation: Fact-sheets

1. Results & analysis:• Environment & health context: state of the art• Policy relevance & context• Analysis of the current state

2. Methodology for implementation3. Data4. Metadata:

• Geographical range, time range, frequency datacollection

5. Quality, bottlenecks & weaknesses6. Alternative indicator(s)7. Comparison with indicator in other countries


4. Filling-in of selected EHI for Flandersa) Outdoor air pollution (1/6)

Driving forces Pressure State Exposure Effect Action

Energy use by road traffic

Yearly emissions of SO2, NOx and NMVOC

Mean year-conc. of SO2

Population-weighed exceedances of reference concentrations for NO2

Yearly child mortality due to respiratory diseases

Yearly emissions of 8 heavy metals

Mean year-conc. of NO2

Population-weighed exceedances of reference concentrations for PM10

Yearly mortality due to respiratory diseases

Emissions of 17 dioxins

Mean year-conc. of PM10

Population-weighed exceedances of reference concentrations for O3

Lung cancer incidence

Days with exceedance of threshold value for highest mean 8-hours O3-conc.

Population-weighed exposure to NO2 DALYs because of PM10

Mean year-conc. of benzene & 1,3-dichloroethane

Population-weighed exposure to PM10

Mean year-conc. of BaP & PAK’s

Population-weighed exposure to ozone

Deposition of dioxins

Heavy metal concentrations


4. a) Outdoor air pollution (2/6) Air_D1: Energy use by road traffic

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Year

En

erg

y u

se (

MJ/

inh

ab

itan

t)

petroldieselLPG


4. a) Outdoor air pollution (3/6)Air_P1: Yearly emissions of SO2, NOx & NM VOC

0

50.000

100.000

150.000

200.000

250.000

300.000

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

*

Year

Em

issio

ns (

ton)

SO2 emissions NOx emissions NM VOC emissions


4. a) Outdoor air pollution (4/6)Air_S2: Mean yearly concentrations of PM10

25

35

45

55

65

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Year

Mean

year-

con

c. (

µg/m

3)

industrial suburban urban rural Flanders


4. a) Outdoor air pollution (5/6)Air_Exp5: Population-weighed exposure to ozone

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2000 2001 2002 2003

Concentrations exposed to

mon

itor

ed p

opul

atio

n

< 20 µg/m3 20- 29 µg/m3 30- 39 µg/m3 >=40 µg/m3


4. a) Outdoor air pollution (6/6)Air_Eff2: Yearly mortality due to respiratory diseases


4. Filling-in of selected EHI for Flandersb) Water quality (1/5)

Driving forces Pressure State Exposure Effect Action

Waste water treatment coverage

Exceedance of limit values for microbiological values in surface water (recreational)

Outbreaks of waterborne diseases

(Waste water treatment coverage)

% of surface water measure points with a basic quality for BOD

Concentration of pesticides in surface water above the basic guideline value

Concentration of pesticides in ground water above the basic guideline value

Concentration of pesticides in eel

Exceedance of WHO guideline values for drinking water for microbiological parameters

Exceedance of WHO guideline values for drinking water for chemical parameters


4. b) Water quality (2/5)Water_P1: Waste water treatment coverage

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2007

year

was

te w

ater

trea

tmen

t cov

erag

e (%

)

treatment coverage objective 2007


4. b) Water quality (3/5)Water_S5: Concentration of pesticides in eel

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

lindane diëldrin HCB sum DDT

pesticide

% o

f ee

l

strongly deviant fromreference valuedeviant from RV

lightly deviant fromRVnot deviant from RV


4. b) Water quality (4/5)Water_S6: Exceedance of WHO guideline values for drinking water for microbiological parameters

80%

82%

84%

86%

88%

90%

92%

94%

96%

98%

100%

2003 2004 2003 2004

E.coli Enterococci

% conform % not conform

98,0%

98,5%

99,0%

99,5%

100,0%

2003 2004 2003 2004

E.coli Enterococci

% conform % not conform

Tap water (100 – 98 %) Well water (100 – 80 %)


4. b) Water quality (5/5)Water_Eff1: Outbreaks of water borne diseases

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

num

ber

of r

epor

tings

leptospirosis shigellosis

central nervous system protozoal infections collective non-foodborne gastro-intestinal infection


4. Filling-in of selected EHI for Flandersc) Food safety (1/4)

Driving forces

Pressure State Exposure Effect Action

Dioxins & PCB’s in cow’s milk

Residues of pesticides in food stuffs (fruit & vegetables)

Food borne infections

Estimated daily intake (pesticides)

Monitoring of chemicals in food stuffs

Dioxins & PCB’s in breast milk

Lead (Pb) in children’s blood

Cadmium (Cd) in children’s blood (urine)

POP’s in blood

Only one indicator was retained after selection, therefore also the alternative indicators are included in this overview (in italic print)


4. c) Food safety (2/4)Food_Exp1: Residues of pesticides in food stuffs (fruit & vegetables)

4,1

5,4

4,34,8

7,9

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

sam

ples

with

con

cent

ratio

ns >

MR

L (%

)

> MRL (%)


4. c) Food safety (3/4)Food_S1: Dioxins and PCB’s in cow’s milk

0

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

1991 1994 1995 1996 1997 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

diox

in c

onc.

(pg

TE

Q/g

fat

)

spring summer spring


4. c) Food safety (4/4)Food_Eff1: Food borne infections

meat; 42%

poultry; 5,5%

pastry; 8,5%

sea products; 9,5%

raw eggs; 3%

not identif ied; 31,5%

meatnot identifiedsea productspastrypoultryraw eggs2005

botulism(0,00%)

brucellosis(0,34%)

listeriosis(9,62%)

trichinosis(0,00%)

FTI(7,22%)

collective gastro-intestinal infection

(24,05%)

shigellosis58,76%

botulismbrucellosislisteriosisshigellosistrichinosiscollective gastro-intestinal infectionFood Toxi Infections (FTI)2005

Distribution potential food borne infections

Distribution sources collective food borne infections


5. Conclusions

• Follow-up specific environment & health situations– Identify potential health risks / vulnerable populations– Visualise past & current state– Forecast distance-to-target– Facilitate decision-making– Evaluate policy and measures– International comparison & benchmarking

policy supporting & evaluating instruments


Thank you for your attention!

Contact Information:

[email protected]

Human Ecology Department

Vrije Universiteit Brussel

Laarbeeklaan 103

B – 1090 Brussels

Belgium

Phone: +32/2/477.42.81

Fax: +32/2/477.49.64

E-mail: [email protected]

Homepage: http://www.vub.ac.be/MEKO

development of policy instruments: environmental health indicators veerle arren human ecology...

Documents