WHY ARE THERE SO MANY DIFFERENT TYPES OF RANKINGS PER PROJECT?
Most projects have multiple priority lists, based on rankings that address human health risks, ecological risks or other risk attributes. Whenever a project succeeded in developing a final ranking that integrates across several types of rankings, this list is presented first in that project’s report (Vermont, for example). However, most projects never developed an integrated summary ranking (California, for example). Multiple priority lists are to be expected given the complexity of any effort to set environmental priorities. To develop an integrated ranking, project participants need to reach consensus on a controversial series of value judgments: should human health risks be given the same weight as ecological risks? should rankings be based solely on risk magnitude or be balanced by considerations of cost and technical feasibility? should rankings reflect only technocratic assessments of risks or incorporate public risk perceptions? There are no easy answers to these questions, and
