Analysis of the evidence to support the definition of specific protection goals for terrestrial organisms—Part 1: Proposed strategy

TL;DR

This paper proposes a strategy for defining specific protection goals for terrestrial organisms, considering both direct and indirect effects.

Contribution

The paper introduces a methodology for building multiple lines of evidence to define acceptable effect magnitudes and timescales for protection goals.

Findings

The Working Group analyzed previous Scientific Opinions to elaborate on SPG options.

Key aspects for further consideration include acceptable effect magnitudes and related timescales.

A methodology for integrating multiple lines of evidence was developed.

Abstract

The review of the Terrestrial Ecotoxicology Guidance concerns three groups of non‐target organisms (NTOs): non‐target arthropods other than bees, in‐soil organisms and non‐target terrestrial plants. Thus, specific protection goals (SPGs) would need to be defined for all these groups. In view of the link between direct and indirect effects, the need to include considerations of indirect effects via trophic interactions when setting SPGs was recognised. This document serves to illustrate the strategy proposed by the Working Group for supporting Risk Managers in the definition of the SPGs. The methodology uses as a starting point previous Scientific Opinions of the PPR Panel where SPG options were comprehensively explored. Following an analysis and synthesis of such Opinions, the Working Group has elaborated further the various options and has identified key aspects requiring further consideration, mainly pertaining to the definition of the magnitude of acceptable effects and the related timescale. To address those aspects a methodology for building multiple lines of evidence is presented.

Figures