TITLE:
Simplifying Risk Assessment and Management for Communication with Stakeholders: Two Case Studies from the Department of Energy
AUTHORS:
Joanna Burger, Michael Gochfeld, Kelly Ng, Kevin G. Brown, David Kosson
KEYWORDS:
Amchitka, Ecological Resources, Risk Assessment, Risk Management, US Department of Energy, Stakeholders
JOURNAL NAME:
Natural Science,
Vol.18 No.4,
April
27,
2026
ABSTRACT: Understanding and managing ecological resources to protect human health and the environment requires appropriate assessment tools and on-going monitoring and adaptive management. While formal risk assessment protocols for examining human and ecological health are a central part of environmental management, we propose that a simpler four-tiered approach may allow more communication and collaboration among diverse stakeholders. Our protocol suggests that there are four main aspects of environmental evaluations that can increase such collaboration: 1) include all stakeholders throughout the process, 2) consensus among stakeholders on the problem or issue and a path forward, 3) data acquisition and analysis to address data and knowledge gaps, and 4) consensus on a solution based on sound science and stakeholder collaboration at every stage. Environmental indicators form the basis of data acquisition, and we present two case studies to illustrate this process: 1) closing the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Amchitka Island where three underground nuclear tests were conducted (1965-1971) and 2) developing an ecosystem indicator that can be used across eco-regions to evaluate ecological resources. In the former case, the process involved extensive stakeholder involvement at all stages, while in the latter case, there was a general need for a screening tool (an indicator) for evaluating ecological resources on diverse DOE sites across the U.S. In both cases the general approach used the four main aspects of environmental evaluation to demonstrate its usefulness as a tool for collaboration among a variety of governmental and non-governmental stakeholders.