Brodin, Tomas
- Department of Wildlife, Fish and Environmental Studies, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
Abstract
The One Health concept strongly brings into focus the important connections for human and ecosystem health. However, the incorporation of behavior method guidelines in risk assessment and regulation/policy is not equal between human and ecological disciplines. A survey was conducted on the perceptions and role of behavioral (eco)toxicology in the protection of human and ecosystem health. Those surveyed include scientists working in the field of environmental toxicology and behavioral ecology, representing industry, government, nongovernment organizations, and academia/research centers. The respondents (N = 166) agreed that contaminants "can impact" and "are impacting" wildlife (97% and 77%) and humans (84% and 62%, respectively). Overall respondents believed behavioral experiments to be repeatable (60%), reliable (61%), and relevant (84%), although those not studying behavior (43%) were more cautious in their answers. Respondents were more likely to be neutral when asked whether behavioral endpoints are more sensitive (43%), but they agreed (80%) that behavioral endpoints provide important alternative information to standard endpoints. The largest group disagreed (42%) with the statement that behavioral endpoints are currently used in risk assessment but agreed that they were essential (55%). The majority of respondents disagreed (63%) that we understood the risks of contaminants to human and ecosystem health, but they agreed (68%) that regulatory authorities should consider behavioral endpoints. When answers were compared among sectors (academia, government, or industry), industry scientists were more likely to be negative or neutral in their responses to the application of behavioral toxicology. We discuss how these data could be used to support our understanding of and confidence in the effects of contaminants on human and ecosystem health.Key points The respondents agreed that chemical contaminants "can impact" and "are impacting" wildlife and humans.Overall respondents predominantly agreed that behavioral experiments are repeatable, reliable, and relevant, although those not studying behavior were more cautious in their answers.Those surveyed were more likely to be neutral when asked whether behavioral endpoints are more sensitive, but they agreed that behavioral endpoints provide important alternative information to standard endpoints.Industry scientists were more likely to be negative or neutral in their responses to the application of behavioral toxicology.
Keywords
behavioral toxicology; regulation; risk assessment; industry; conflicts of interest
Published in
Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management
2025
Publisher: OXFORD UNIV PRESS
SLU Authors
UKÄ Subject classification
Environmental Sciences
Publication identifier
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/inteam/vjaf123
Permanent link to this page (URI)
https://res.slu.se/id/publ/144038