Confronting environmental pressure, environmental quality and human health impact indicators of priority air emissions

This paper evaluates the ranking of 21 priority air pollutants with three indicator schemes: environmental pressure indicator (EPI), environmental quality indicator (EQI), and human health effect indicator (HEI). The EPI and EQI compare the emissions and concentrations with the target emissions and target concentrations, respectively. The HEI comprehends the steps from cause (i.e. national emissions) to effect (i.e. human health effects), and is the total human health burden, expressed in Disability Adjusted Life Years per year of exposure (DALYs year−1). We estimated a health burden in the Netherlands of 41 × 103 DALYs year−1 caused by Dutch air emissions of PM10 and its precursors in the year 2003. The burden due to 17 carcinogenic substances emitted to air, was much lower (140 DALYs year−1). In contrast, when the same substances were evaluated regarding environmental pressure and environmental quality, carbon tetrachloride (pressure) and benzo[a]pyrene (quality) were of highest importance, whereas the importance of PM10 was substantially lower. This result is remarkable, because for the majority of substances evaluated, the target concentrations and target emissions are based on preventing human health damage. The differences in relevance are explained by the different weighting of interests in the indicators. The HEI is based on concentration–response relations, whereas the EPI and EQI also depend on other, policy-based, principles and on technical feasibility. Therefore, to effectively prioritize emission reduction measures in policy-making, substances should not only be evaluated as to whether emission targets and environmental quality targets are reached, but they should be evaluated regarding their human health impact as well. In this context, the HEI is a suitable indicator to evaluate the human health impact.