Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our Society is the professional home for a diverse and global community of environmental scientists. The Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) meetings, workshops, and publications offer unique opportunities for us to share our discoveries and our knowledge. However, the spirit and promise of SETAC is more than a venue for the exchange of scientific information. At the core of SETAC is the idea that we can make a difference with respect to the development of principles and practices for protection, enhancement, and management of sustainable environmental quality and ecosystem integrity. Essential to this is the integration of our sciences with environmental assessment and management. Integration of thought and perspective within SETAC is a founding principle of the society. It is reflected in the emphasis we give to tripartite (government, industry, and academia) representation in our governance and scientific discourse. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management (IEAM) reflects this spirit and promise by providing a forum for exchange of ideas, approaches, and examples of both principles and practices. The integration of different sciences and their application to environmental management is reflected in the diversity of articles appearing in IEAM over the past year. Topics ranged in scale from nanotechnology to global climate change, and geographically from pesticides in Latin America to flame retardants in Canada. IEAM covered technical issues related to REACH, metals in soils, the Clean Water Act, and many other environmental regulatory programs. Emblematic of IEAM's emphasis on integration and distillation of ideas was the October 2014 article International Scientists' Priorities for Research on Pharmaceutical and Personal Care Products in the Environment by Rudd et al. (2014). The insights on future research needs with important policy implications captured in the article, which was the result of a focused Horizon Scanning Project workshop in 2011, will inspire SETAC's Global Horizon Scanning Project (GHSP) over the next 2 years. SETAC launched the GHSP in September 2013 during the SETAC Africa meeting in Lusaka, Zambia. The GHSP aims to identify geographically specific research needs that address the challenges posed by natural and human stressors on the goal of achieving sustainable environmental quality. Research priorities are identified from the diverse experiences and insights of members of our Society. SETAC is uniquely positioned to advise on science research priorities because our membership reflects expertise in a broad range of environmental sciences, as well as experience with the application of science to environmental, regulatory and policy issues. In the coming year, GHSP workshops are being planned for SETAC Europe (Barcelona), SETAC Latin America (Buenos Aires), and SETAC Africa (Langebaan) Geographic Unit (GU) meetings. A SETAC workshop in the Asia/Pacific region is planned for 2015 or 2016, and a presentation of findings from the GHSP is planned for the SETAC World Congress in 2016. IEAM is a forum for communicating advancements in life cycle analysis (LCA), which will continue to be an important and valued discipline within SETAC. Life cycle analysis integrates science and engineering and provides insights into the environmental and societal implications of consumer products and industry technologies. Life cycle analysis focuses not only on chemicals, but also on the broad range of environmental stressors that arise from new science and technology. At the 2014 SETAC Asia/Pacific meeting in Adelaide, Australia, I had the opportunity to meet with leaders in the LCA initiative and was impressed with their efforts to integrate chemicals and stressors into a consideration of the impact of new materials on environmental services. Addressing the topic of how best to communicate LCA research to our global society, I proposed that SETAC workshops, LCA-related publications, and IEAM offer 3 forums for meeting this important communication challenge. Also at the global level is the strong interest among our members to become more proficient in the many different applications of environmental risk assessment (ERA). This is reflected in the training and accreditation programs that are being developed and planned for SETAC Europe and SETAC North America. Future ERA courses and training programs are anticipated to respond to requests from SETAC members in Africa, Latin America, and Asia/Pacific. ERA could be especially useful for framing approaches to the diverse and complex environmental issues facing developing countries. Environmental risk assessment can enable scientists and policy makers in these regions to make better use of available information and to identify where research is needed. In my view, it will be especially important for our Society's mission to publish articles in IEAM that relate to the development of ERA approaches and principles that are applicable to developing countries. The SETAC community has always included environmental engineers, especially those involved in modeling and evaluating the fate of chemicals and the remediation or control of those chemicals. This expertise is reflected in the Society's workshops and publications addressing contaminated sediments and soils, industrial and municipal effluents, and atmospheric transport of global contaminants. Environmental engineers bring especially important insights into how to frame problems for environmental management. I encourage the members of our Society with engineering backgrounds and training to help broaden their involvement within SETAC. I believe there is much to be gained from wider and deeper integration of sciences and engineering. In this regard, IEAM can again offer a forum for technical research and opinion that explores the nexus between science, engineering, and environmental assessment and management. I wish you a terrific 2015. Dr. Charles Menzie Global Executive Director Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry Pensacola, FL
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".