Conceptual framework proposes an environmental radiological quality standard for simultaneous human and ecological protection, suggesting a harmonized regulatory approach modeled on chemical safety.
Strengthening the environmental radiological protection system requires integrated risk management approaches that can only benefit from developments already implemented for other stressors such as chemical substances. The proposed concept of an environmental radiological quality standard (ERQS) builds on the rapprochement that was initiated in the past, for a better use of radiotoxicity data and the derivation of environmental protection criteria. A pragmatic regulatory-oriented approach is presented for the simple, simultaneous management of the radiological risk for people and the environment, consistently with the management of chemical pollution. It produces a synthetic indicator potentially that can be used in various radiological exposure situations. Its transparent derivation methodology allows for iterative updates. The existing technical bridges between domains of concern are reviewed before to analyse additional elements from the field of protection of the environment from chemicals. This analysis inspired an operational proposal for a better integration of radiation protection of humans and wildlife, obtained ”simply by adding a R” to the well-known EQS existing for chemicals. The corresponding ERQS concept is close to previous proposals in the field of radiation protection. It however enlarges their purpose, and it is developed here in a regulatory perspective, and above all in a strict parallel with that of EQS. This ERQS approach will give rise to improvements and further developments. One of its major perspectives is its possible connection with the larger environmental subject of ecosystem services, which potential use in combination with radiation protection of all living organisms is currently under scrutiny.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
BEAUGELIN-SEILLER et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: