@article{grieger_merck_deviney_marshall_2024, title={What are stakeholder views and needs for achieving phosphorus sustainability?}, url={https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-023-09917-y}, DOI={10.1007/s10669-023-09917-y}, abstractNote={Abstract Our society depends on the effective management of phosphorus (P). Phosphorus is a key component of agricultural fertilizers to improve crop yields, and also plays a critical role in many industrial processes and consumer products. In the past decade, there have been numerous calls for innovative approaches to manage P more sustainably, as it is a nonrenewable resource that can adversely impact aquatic ecosystems from runoff and inefficiencies in P use. To develop more sustainable solutions that will ultimately be adopted, diverse stakeholder perspectives must be recognized, including those in industry, government, academia, non-governmental organizations, and other civil groups. This study responds to this need by identifying stakeholder views, needs, concerns, and challenges regarding P sustainability. An online survey was developed and deployed to individuals identified as P sustainability experts and professionals in the U.S. and abroad. Based on responses from 96 stakeholder participants from a range of sectors, areas of expertise, and geographies, we found that the vast majority of stakeholders considered current P use to be unsustainable and were very concerned about the ability to manage P sustainably. Stakeholder participants did not distinguish between urgent and long-term challenges, and perceived financial and regulatory issues to be of greatest importance. Stakeholder participants expressed a range of needs to improve P management systems, including improved management practices, new technologies, enhanced regulations, and better approaches for engagement. Outcomes from this work can help inform future research, engagement, and policy priorities to ensure sustainable P management solutions based on stakeholder-identified perspectives and needs.}, journal={Environment Systems and Decisions}, author={Grieger, Khara and Merck, Ashton and Deviney, Alison and Marshall, Anna}, year={2024}, month={Mar} }
 @inbook{elser_baker_boyer_grieger_liu_muenich_rittmann_saha_2023, title={Creating an alternative future for Earth’s phosphorus cycle in the Anthropocene via eco-prospecting, eco-mining, and eco-refining}, booktitle={Treatise on Geochemistry}, author={Elser, J. and Baker, J. and Boyer, T. and Grieger, K. and Liu, T. and Muenich, R. and Rittmann, B. and Saha, A.}, year={2023} }
 @article{horgan_hsain_jones_grieger_2023, title={Development and application of screening-level risk analysis for emerging materials}, volume={35}, ISSN={2214-9937}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.susmat.2022.e00524}, DOI={10.1016/j.susmat.2022.e00524}, abstractNote={Analysis of a material's impact on society is increasingly recognized as a necessary step in materials development, especially in the area of lead-free piezoelectrics. Evaluations of the environmental, health, and societal impacts that occur throughout the material's life cycle are critical for determining the viability of lead-free alternatives. Risk screening approaches, such as the screening-level Emerging Materials Risk Analysis (EMRA) proposed in this work, may help researchers compare materials or material production routes to determine more sustainable solutions. As a first demonstration of its utility in the development of lead-free piezoelectrics, the approach introduced in this paper is applied to piezoelectric HfO2 (hafnia) to compare mining and processing routes and to elucidate the more sustainable route for HfO2 production. This paper aims to exemplify how the EMRA risk screening approach incorporates perspectives on environmental, health, and societal impacts into the materials research process by providing a relative risk screening evaluation of different material processing routes and/or different materials. Results from applying EMRA to hafnia show that the major known environmental impacts of hafnia mining and processing involve ecosystem destruction and heavy use of fossil fuels and electricity; health impacts related to potentially unsafe working conditions and potential exposure to radioactive elements; and societal impacts including land disputes and supply concerns. Results also demonstrate that the more sustainable production route currently available includes commercial wet mining with land rehabilitation followed by beneficiation via wet processes with consistent personal protective equipment use and water recycling. Almost all of the previously-mentioned impacts are avoided in this life cycle route. Outcomes from this analysis identify hafnia as a potentially sustainable replacement for certain applications of PZT and therefore encourage continued development of the material. Future efforts will test EMRA on a wide variety of other materials and revise the approach accordingly.}, journal={Sustainable Materials and Technologies}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={Horgan, Madison D. and Hsain, H. Alex and Jones, Jacob L. and Grieger, Khara D.}, year={2023}, month={Apr}, pages={e00524} }
 @article{grieger_kuzma_2023, title={Ensuring Sustainable Novel Plant Biotechnologies Requires Formalized Research and Assessment Programs}, volume={3}, ISSN={["2692-1952"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.1021/acsagscitech.3c00380}, DOI={10.1021/acsagscitech.3c00380}, abstractNote={ADVERTISEMENT RETURN TO ARTICLES ASAPViewpointNEXTEnsuring Sustainable Novel Plant Biotechnologies Requires Formalized Research and Assessment ProgramsKhara Grieger*Khara GriegerDepartment of Applied Ecology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27607, United StatesNorth Carolina Plant Sciences Initiative, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27606, United StatesGenetic Engineering and Society Center, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695, United States*[email protected]More by Khara Griegerhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-0821-0534 and Jennifer KuzmaJennifer KuzmaGenetic Engineering and Society Center, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695, United StatesSchool of Public and International Affairs, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695, United StatesMore by Jennifer KuzmaCite this: ACS Agric. Sci. Technol. 2023, XXXX, XXX, XXX-XXXPublication Date (Web):October 19, 2023Publication History Received14 September 2023Accepted10 October 2023Revised9 October 2023Published online19 October 2023https://doi.org/10.1021/acsagscitech.3c00380© 2023 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0. License Summary*You are free to share (copy and redistribute) this article in any medium or format within the parameters below:Creative Commons (CC): This is a Creative Commons license.Attribution (BY): Credit must be given to the creator.Non-Commercial (NC): Only non-commercial uses of the work are permitted. No Derivatives (ND): Derivative works may be created for non-commercial purposes, but sharing is prohibited. View full license*DisclaimerThis summary highlights only some of the key features and terms of the actual license. It is not a license and has no legal value. Carefully review the actual license before using these materials. This publication is Open Access under the license indicated. Learn MoreArticle Views-Altmetric-Citations-LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICSArticle Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated. Share Add toView InAdd Full Text with ReferenceAdd Description ExportRISCitationCitation and abstractCitation and referencesMore Options Share onFacebookTwitterWechatLinked InReddit PDF (1 MB) Get e-AlertscloseSUBJECTS:Biotechnology,Food,Plants,Sustainability,Testing and assessment Get e-Alerts}, number={11}, journal={ACS AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY}, author={Grieger, Khara and Kuzma, Jennifer}, year={2023}, month={Oct}, pages={970–972} }
 @book{grieger_may_2023, title={Guide to Understanding and Addressing PFAS in our Communities}, url={https://content.ces.ncsu.edu/Guide-to-Understanding-and-Addressing-PFAS-in-our-communities}, institution={NC State Extension}, author={Grieger, Khara and May, Katlyn}, year={2023} }
 @article{wei_grieger_cummings_loschin_kuzma_2023, title={Identifying sustainability assessment parameters for genetically engineered agrifoods}, volume={7}, ISSN={["2572-2611"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.1002/ppp3.10411}, DOI={10.1002/ppp3.10411}, abstractNote={Societal Impact Statement A diverse portfolio of genetically engineered food crops, as well as animal livestock and fish, are currently being developed and commercialized. To ensure their contributions to long‐term sustainability, a broad range of environmental, health, ethical, and societal parameters should be used in their evaluations. This paper proposes a set of parameters to evaluate the sustainability of genetically engineered food and agriculture products and discusses mechanisms to improve their governance and oversight. With such holistic evaluations, genetic engineering applications that are deemed beneficial to sustainable agriculture could be identified in an effort to foster sustainability. Summary To achieve international sustainable development goals, food and agricultural production need to rely on sustainable and resilient practices. Traditional breeding as well as the use of new agricultural technologies, including genetic engineering and gene editing, have the potential to help achieve sustainable agrifood production. Although numerous oversight mechanisms exist to guarantee the secure and sustainable advancement and utilization of genetically engineered agrifoods, the majority of these mechanisms heavily depend on a narrow set of parameters to assess risks and safety concerning human health and nontarget organisms. However, a more comprehensive range of parameters should be considered to promote environmental and social sustainability in a more holistic manner. This Opinion article argues that to achieve a more sustainable agrifood production that relies on genetic engineering, governance systems related to new agrifood biotechnologies should incorporate a broader array of environmental, health, ethical, and societal factors to ensure their sustainability in the long‐term. To facilitate this process, we propose a set of parameters to help evaluate the sustainability of agrifoods that rely on genetic engineering. We then discuss major challenges and opportunities for formalizing sustainability parameters in US governance policy and decision‐making systems. Overall, this work contributes to further developing a more comprehensive assessment framework that aims to minimize potential risks and maximize potential benefits of agrifood biotechnology while also fostering sustainability.}, journal={PLANTS PEOPLE PLANET}, author={Wei, Wei and Grieger, Khara and Cummings, Christopher L. and Loschin, Nick and Kuzma, Jennifer}, year={2023}, month={Jul} }
 @book{grieger_horgan_cummings_2023, title={Let’s Talk About Risk: A Guide to Identifying, Assessing, Managing, and Communicating Risk}, institution={NC State Extension Publication}, author={Grieger, Khara and Horgan, Madison and Cummings, Christopher}, year={2023} }
 @article{deviney_grieger_merck_classen_marshall_2023, title={Phosphorus sustainability through coordinated stakeholder engagement: a perspective}, volume={2}, ISSN={2194-5403 2194-5411}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10669-023-09896-0}, DOI={10.1007/s10669-023-09896-0}, abstractNote={Abstract In this Perspective we take an in-depth look at what coordinated stakeholder engagement could entail for phosphorus sustainability. The element phosphorus is critical to life on Earth and to the continued functioning of society as we know it. Yet, how society uses phosphorus is currently unsustainable, both as a resource in support of global food production where inequitable distribution creates food security challenges, but also from an environmental aspect, where mismanagement has led to negative impacts on the quality of agricultural soils, human health, and freshwater and marine ecosystems. A number of initiatives and cross-sector consortia have come together to address sustainable phosphorus management at either global or regional scales. However, these efforts could benefit from a more coordinated approach to stakeholder engagement to identify the diversity of needs and perspectives involved in this complex challenge. Herein we examine some examples of different approaches to developing such coordinated stakeholder engagement in other areas of environmental sustainability. We consider how to apply the lessons learned from those efforts toward stakeholder coordination in the realm of phosphorus sustainability. Particularly, we discuss the value of a coordinating body to manage the communications and knowledge sharing necessary to develop trust and cooperation among diverse stakeholder groups and to transition society to more sustainable phosphorus use.}, journal={Environment Systems and Decisions}, publisher={Springer Science and Business Media LLC}, author={Deviney, Alison and Grieger, Khara and Merck, Ashton and Classen, John and Marshall, Anna-Maria}, year={2023}, month={Feb} }
 @article{he_yan_qian_xiong_grieger_wang_liu_zhi_2023, title={Phytoextraction of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) by weeds: Effect of PFAS physicochemical properties and plant physiological traits}, volume={454}, ISSN={0304-3894}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.131492}, DOI={10.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.131492}, abstractNote={Phytoextraction is a promising technology that uses plants to remediate contaminated soil. However, its feasibility for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and the impact of PFAS properties and plant traits on phytoextraction efficacy remains unknown. In this study, we conducted greenhouse experiment and evaluated the potential of weeds for phytoextraction of PFAS from soil and assessed the effects of PFAS properties and plant traits on PFAS uptake via systematic correlation analyses and electron probe microanalyzer with energy dispersive spectroscopy (FE-EPMA-EDS) imaging. The results showed that 1) phytoextraction can remove 0.04%- 41.4%wt of PFAS from soil, with extracted PFAS primarily stored in plant shoots; 2) Weeds preferentially extracted short-chain PFAS over long-chain homologues from soil. 3) PFAS molecular size and hydrophilicity determined plant uptake behavior, while plant morphological traits, particularly root protein and lipid content, influenced PFAS accumulation and translocation. Although plants with thin roots and small leaf areas exhibited greater PFAS uptake and storage ability, the impact of PFAS physicochemical properties was more significant. 4) Finally, short-chain PFAS were transported quickly upwards in the plant, while uptake of long-chain PFOS was restricted.}, journal={Journal of Hazardous Materials}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={He, Qiang and Yan, Zheng and Qian, Shenhua and Xiong, Tiantian and Grieger, Khara D. and Wang, Xiaoming and Liu, Caihong and Zhi, Yue}, year={2023}, month={Jul}, pages={131492} }
 @misc{wei_loschin_grieger_2023, title={Reflections on COP15}, url={https://research.ncsu.edu/ges/2023/01/blog-reflections-on-cop15/}, journal={Genetic Engineering and Society Center}, author={Wei, W. and Loschin, N. and Grieger, K.}, year={2023} }
 @article{merck_grieger_deviney_marshall_2023, title={Using a Phosphorus Flow Diagram as a Boundary Object to Inform Stakeholder Engagement}, volume={15}, ISSN={["2071-1050"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511496}, DOI={10.3390/su151511496}, abstractNote={Phosphorus (P) is essential for life on Earth, yet its current management is unsustainable. Stakeholder engagement is urgently needed to help ensure that scientific and technical solutions to improve P sustainability meet the needs of diverse groups, yet there are comparatively few studies that provide insights into stakeholder views, perceptions, or concerns. In this opinion, we use a mass flow diagram of P as a boundary object to understand the complex challenges of sustainable P management. In particular, we map US stakeholder groups onto the mass flow diagram to incorporate human factors into mass flows at a national scale. Our approach is grounded in well-established social–scientific methodologies, such as stakeholder mapping and social network analysis, but is applied in a novel way that can be generalized to other mass flows and geographic areas. We then suggest ways that researchers can use the annotated flow diagram to identify both knowledge gaps and research gaps in stakeholder engagement, especially in interdisciplinary or convergence research contexts.}, number={15}, journal={SUSTAINABILITY}, author={Merck, Ashton W. and Grieger, Khara D. and Deviney, Alison and Marshall, Anna-Maria}, year={2023}, month={Aug} }
 @article{ethridge_grieger_locke_everman_jordan_leon_2023, title={Views of RNAi approaches for weed management in turfgrass systems}, volume={7}, ISSN={["1550-2759"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.1017/wsc.2023.37}, DOI={10.1017/wsc.2023.37}, abstractNote={Abstract Public concern regarding the use of herbicides in urban areas (e.g., golf courses, parks, lawns) is increasing. Thus, there is a need for alternative methods for weed control that are safe for the public, effective against weeds, and yet selective to turfgrass and other desirable species. New molecular tools such as ribonucleic acid interference (RNAi) have the potential to meet all those requirements, but before these technologies can be implemented, it is critical to understand the perceptions of key stakeholders to facilitate adoption as well as regulatory processes. With this in mind, turfgrass system managers, such as golf course superintendents and lawn care providers, were surveyed to gain insight into the perception and potential adoption of RNAi technology for weed management. Based on survey results, turfgrass managers believe that cost of weed management and time spent managing weeds are the main challenges faced in their fields. When considering new weed management tools, survey respondents were most concerned about cost, efficacy, and efficiency of a new product. Survey respondents were also optimistic toward RNAi for weed management and would either use this technology in their own fields or be willing to conduct research to develop RNAi herbicides. Although respondents believed that the general public would have some concerns about this technology, they did not believe this to be the most important factor for them when choosing new weed management tools. The need for new herbicides to balance weed control challenges and public demands is a central factor for turfgrass managers' willingness to use RNAi-based weed control in turfgrass systems. They believe their clientele will be accepting of RNAi tools, although further research is needed to investigate how a wider range of stakeholders perceive RNAi tools for turfgrass management more broadly.}, journal={WEED SCIENCE}, author={Ethridge, Sandra R. and Grieger, Khara and Locke, Anna M. and Everman, Wesley J. and Jordan, David L. and Leon, Ramon G.}, year={2023}, month={Jul} }
 @article{gao_huang_zhi_yao_wang_yang_han_lin_he_wei_et al._2022, title={Assessing the impacts of urbanization on stream ecosystem functioning through investigating litter decomposition and nutrient uptake in a forest and a hyper-eutrophic urban stream}, volume={138}, ISSN={1470-160X}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.108859}, DOI={10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.108859}, abstractNote={Rapid urbanization significantly affects freshwater systems by interfering with important ecological functions. The responses of different ecosystem functions in urban streams and their potential ecological effects remain largely unknown, impeding their management and restoration in many cases. In this study, we simultaneously assessed two important ecosystem functions, litter decomposition and nutrient uptake, and investigated the associated microbial and benthic macroinvertebrate communities in two subtropical streams (i.e., a forest headwater stream as a reference and an urban stream that was hyper-eutrophic). Litter decomposition was estimated using litter bags with two mesh sizes (i.e., 50 μm and 2 mm) and two leaf species with different qualities (i.e., Alangium chinense and Machilus leptophylla), with a total of 96 litter bags. Nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) uptake rates were measured in situ based on the spiraling model. We found that the decomposition rate of A.chinense was approximately seven times that of M. leptophylla in both streams. Moreover, in the urban stream, the litter decomposition rate (0.004 day−1) was one-third that of the forest stream (0.013 day−1), regardless of the litter species. Macroinvertebrates strongly contributed to litter decomposition in the forest stream, where decomposition rates were 1.8-fold higher in the coarse mesh compared to the fine mesh bags, while they had a negligible role in the urban stream (no significant difference between the two mesh bags). P uptake was higher (85-fold) and N uptake was lower (0.13-fold) in the urban compared to forest stream. Litter decomposition and nutrient uptake exhibit decoupled response. These findings show that litter decomposition by kcoarse/kfine metrics and the uptake of N and P are complementary and should be considered in the management and restoration of urban stream ecosystems.}, journal={Ecological Indicators}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={Gao, Jie and Huang, Yuyue and Zhi, Yue and Yao, Jingmei and Wang, Fang and Yang, Wei and Han, Le and Lin, Dunmei and He, Qiang and Wei, Bing and et al.}, year={2022}, month={May}, pages={108859} }
 @article{zhi_lu_grieger_munoz_li_wang_he_qian_2022, title={Bioaccumulation and Translocation of 6:2 Fluorotelomer Sulfonate, GenX, and Perfluoroalkyl Acids by Urban Spontaneous Plants}, volume={2}, ISSN={2690-0645 2690-0645}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acsestengg.1c00423}, DOI={10.1021/acsestengg.1c00423}, abstractNote={: There is limited information available regarding the bioaccumulation potential of poly fl uoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in urban vegetation. Using a controlled greenhouse exposure setting, we investigated the bioaccumulation and translocation of select PFAS in four common urban spontaneous plants. Target compounds included legacy PFAS (per fl uoroalkyl carboxylic and sulfonic acids, PFCA/PFSA), a fl uorotelomer sulfonate (6:2 FTS), and an emerging fl uorinated ether (i.e., hexa fl uoropropylene oxide dimer acid (HFPO-DA), or GenX). Results from this study showed that bioaccumulation factors in root and shoot (BCF root and BCF shoot ) ranged from 0.7 to 83.6 and 0.95 to 26.9, respectively. Phyllanthus urinaria harbored the highest PFAS bioaccumulation capacity among the four urban weed species. The log BCF root of PFCA homologues showed a concave shape as a function of chain length, while log BCF root of PFSA increased with chain length. The BCF root of GenX was lower than that of PFOA; likewise, 6:2 FTS bioaccumulated to a less extent than PFOS. Root uptake seemed to be the dominant accumulation mechanism for the shorter-chain compounds, whereas adsorption was the dominant mechanism for longer-chain compounds such as PFOA. BCF root and BCF shoot showed consistent trends in response to foliar and root characteristics. Leaf area and average root diameter were the most correlated traits with PFAS bioaccumulation factors, with higher BCF values for plants with smaller leaves and fi ner roots. This study also provides an important basis for the role and selection of urban weeds in future PFAS bioaccumulation and translocation studies within urban settings.}, number={7}, journal={ACS ES&T Engineering}, publisher={American Chemical Society (ACS)}, author={Zhi, Yue and Lu, Hongying and Grieger, Khara D. and Munoz, Gabriel and Li, Wei and Wang, Xiaoming and He, Qiang and Qian, Shenhua}, year={2022}, month={Apr}, pages={1169–1178} }
 @book{ruzante_shumaker_holt_mayer_kokotovich_cuchiara_binder_kuzma_grieger_2022, title={Eliciting Stakeholder Perceptions Using a Novel Online Engagement Platform: A Case Study on Nano-Agrifoods}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.3768/rtipress.2022.op.0071.2201}, DOI={10.3768/rtipress.2022.op.0071.2201}, abstractNote={Stakeholder engagement is an important component in developing policies on critical issues such as the use and development of novel methods and technologies, including biotechnologies and nanotechnologies. Understanding the perspectives, needs, and concerns of stakeholder groups can facilitate the development of transparent and trusted policy recommendations. Innovative online research platforms have been developed as alternatives to typical stakeholder engagement methods such as in-person focus groups, interviews, and online and paper surveys. These platforms facilitate the engagement of geographically and linguistically (i.e., individuals who speak different languages) diverse stakeholders using a wide range of methods, from virtual focus groups to surveys. Stakeholders can participate at their own leisure and anonymously, which can facilitate more open interactions on issues where viewpoints may differ. In this work, we used an online stakeholder engagement platform (OSEP) to engage stakeholders and capture their perceptions and views about the application of nanotechnology in food and agriculture (nano-agrifood) and the role of responsible innovation in the development of nano-agrifood products. The OSEP provided a reliable and interactive environment for stakeholders to share their views and exchange ideas. Such OSEPs should be further explored as novel tools for engaging stakeholders on a range of issues from emerging technologies to public health.}, institution={RTI Press}, author={Ruzante, Juliana M. and Shumaker, Ellen Thomas and Holt, Sidney and Mayer, Susan and Kokotovich, Adam and Cuchiara, Maude and Binder, Andrew R. and Kuzma, Jennifer and Grieger, Khara}, year={2022}, month={Jan} }
 @inbook{baun_grieger_2022, place={Singapore}, title={Environmental Risk Assessment of Emerging Contaminants—The Case of Nanomaterials}, ISBN={9789811691157 9789811691164}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-9116-4_15}, DOI={10.1007/978-981-16-9116-4_15}, booktitle={Advances in Toxicology and Risk Assessment of Nanomaterials and Emerging Contaminants}, publisher={Springer}, author={Baun, Anders and Grieger, Khara}, editor={Guo, L.H. and Mortimer, M.Editors}, year={2022}, pages={349–371} }
 @article{grieger_merck_kuzma_2022, title={Formulating best practices for responsible innovation of nano-agrifoods through stakeholder insights and reflection}, volume={10}, ISSN={2666-6596}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrt.2022.100030}, DOI={10.1016/j.jrt.2022.100030}, abstractNote={Nanotechnology in food and agriculture (nano-agrifoods) may provide numerous benefits to society. At the same time, previous experiences have demonstrated the importance of innovating responsibly. This study reports on stakeholder-identified actions to address concerns about nano-agrifoods and actions to ensure their responsible innovation (RI). We find stakeholders largely supported actions to address risk and safety, followed by governance actions, the examination of ‘need,’ and identification of clear benefits. Participants also indicated no actions would address their concerns in several cases, largely for nano-in food products without a clear ‘need’ and risk/benefit comparisons. We conclude by highlighting four best practices to foster RI of nano-agrifoods, with relevancy for other novel agrifood technologies, including the institutionalization of RI, education and training next generation of researchers and innovators, use of tiered approaches to implement RI principles at different levels and degrees, and incorporation of monitoring and learning systems to improve RI practices.}, journal={Journal of Responsible Technology}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={Grieger, Khara and Merck, Ashton and Kuzma, Jennifer}, year={2022}, month={Jul}, pages={100030} }
 @article{grieger_zarate_barnhill-dilling_hunt_jones_kuzma_2022, title={Fostering Responsible Innovation through Stakeholder Engagement: Case Study of North Carolina Sweetpotato Stakeholders}, volume={14}, ISSN={2071-1050}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su14042274}, DOI={10.3390/su14042274}, abstractNote={Stakeholder and community engagement are critical for the successful development of new technologies that aim to be integrated into sustainable agriculture systems. This study reports on an approach used to engage stakeholders within the sweetpotato community in North Carolina to understand their preferences, needs, and concerns as they relate to a new sensing and diagnostic platform. This work also demonstrates an example of real-time technology assessment that also fosters responsible innovation through inclusivity and responsiveness. Through the conduction of 29 interviews with sweetpotato stakeholders in North Carolina, we found that participants found the most value in detecting external sweetpotato characteristics, as well as the ability to use or connect to a smartphone that can be used in field. They also found value in including environmental parameters and having a Spanish language module. Most participants indicated that they were comfortable with sharing data as long as it benefited the greater North Carolina sweetpotato industry, and were concerned with sharing these data with “outside” competitors. We also observed differences and variations between stakeholder groups. Overall, this work demonstrates a relatively simple, low-cost approach to eliciting stakeholder needs within a local agricultural context to improve sustainability, an approach that could be leveraged and transferred to other local agrifood systems.}, number={4}, journal={Sustainability}, publisher={MDPI AG}, author={Grieger, Khara and Zarate, Sebastian and Barnhill-Dilling, Sarah Kathleen and Hunt, Shelly and Jones, Daniela and Kuzma, Jennifer}, year={2022}, month={Feb}, pages={2274} }
 @book{ahmad_batlzegar_brown_delborne_dhole_elsensohn_grieger_hardwick_kuzma_loschin_et al._2022, title={Gene Drives in Agriculture: Workshop on Risk Assessment and Research Prioritization}, journal={Gene Drives in Agriculture: Workshop on Risk Assessment and Research Prioritization. Workshop Report}, author={Ahmad, J. and Batlzegar, J. and Brown, Z. and Delborne, J.A. and Dhole, S. and Elsensohn, J. and Grieger, K. and Hardwick, A. and Kuzma, J. and Loschin, N. and et al.}, year={2022} }
 @article{merck_grieger_kuzma_2022, title={How can we promote the responsible innovation of nano-agrifood research?}, volume={137}, ISSN={["1873-6416"]}, DOI={10.1016/j.envsci.2022.08.027}, abstractNote={The use of nanotechnology and engineered nanomaterials in food and agriculture (nano-agrifoods) may provide numerous benefits to society. At the same time, there is also a chance that nano-agrifood innovations may pose new or unknown risks to human or environmental health and safety. To understand these issues and be more responsive to public concerns, researchers are beginning to discuss and adopt an emerging best practice in science and technology communities known as “responsible innovation” (RI). Originally developed by researchers over ten years ago, RI is now a well-established framework that is already a part of science policymaking in the European Union (as “responsible research and innovation”). In the United States, however, there are numerous structural and institutional barriers for scientists to align their research with RI principles and goals. This perspective briefly reviews RI, why it is needed for nano-agrifoods, and how it could be institutionalized more effectively in the U.S. to ensure that future nano-agrifood research is better aligned with societal needs, expectations, and concerns. This work also identifies several pathways to institutionalize RI in nano-agrifoods, ranging from a public legal mandate to privately enforced organizational norms. Further, a set of strategies and/or best practices for implementing RI in the U.S. context is presented that are applicable to both public and private organizations. While key findings from this work are focused on the need for RI of nano-agrifoods in the U.S., implementation of these best practices could have positive benefits for other emerging technologies and in other national contexts as well. • More attention to responsible innovation (RI) is needed for nano-agrifood research. • Pathways to institutionalize RI in U.S. nano-agrifood research are outlined. • Best practices to achieve RI include priority-setting, incentives, and monitoring. • Public-private cooperation can help promote RI in the U.S. context.}, journal={ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY}, author={Merck, Ashton W. and Grieger, Khara D. and Kuzma, Jennifer}, year={2022}, month={Nov}, pages={185–190} }
 @article{grieger_cummings_2022, title={Informing environmental health and risk priorities through local outreach and extension}, volume={42}, ISSN={2194-5403 2194-5411}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10669-022-09864-0}, DOI={10.1007/s10669-022-09864-0}, abstractNote={Abstract Our society is currently facing an unprecedented number of environmental and societal challenges. Stakeholder and community engagement can help identify priority issues and needs at local levels. One approach to engage stakeholders and communities in the contexts of environmental, health, and societal challenges is to leverage outreach and extension programs. Within this context, and to help identify priority issues to focus subsequent research and extension programs in North Carolina (NC), a survey was conducted with extension agents to identify priority issues as they relate to environmental health and risks and related needs. Based on responses from 66 study participants that represented half of the 100 NC counties, we found that Water pollution , Flooding , Natural resources management , and Engaging stakeholders were top priority issues across all environmental health and risk topics. Participants also identified that practices of Engaging stakeholders as well as Assessing , Managing , and Communicating risks were increasingly important. Participants indicated they needed a moderate-to-significant amount of guidance across a range of areas related to assessing, managing, communicating, and making decisions regarding environmental health and risk topics, as well as engaging with local communities. Outcomes from this work can not only help inform subsequent research and outreach efforts at local scales, but this work demonstrates a simple, low-cost approach to elicit perspectives and priorities can be leveraged in other states and regions with established stakeholder and community outreach programs more broadly.}, number={3}, journal={Environment Systems and Decisions}, publisher={Springer Science and Business Media LLC}, author={Grieger, Khara and Cummings, Christopher L.}, year={2022}, month={Jun}, pages={388–401} }
 @book{grieger_horgan_merck_2022, title={Let’s Work Together in Addressing Environmental and Societal Issues - Guide to Engaging Stakeholders and Communities}, url={https://content.ces.ncsu.edu/lets-work-together-in-addressing-environmental-and-societal-issues-guide-to-engaging-stakeholders}, institution={NC State Extension}, author={Grieger, K. and Horgan, M. and Merck, A.}, year={2022} }
 @article{grieger_2022, title={STEPS to Tackle Our Phosphorus Paradox}, url={https://doi.org/10.52750/331886}, DOI={10.52750/331886}, abstractNote={Phosphorus is an essential nutrient for animals, plants and microbes.The current system to manage phosphorus is extremely inefficient.One major reason relates to the loss of phosphorus from the food chain, where it can bind to soils and transfer to animal wastes and run-off, which can lead to water pollution, algal blooms, eutrophication and even fish kills.Khara Grieger, Ph.D., argues that overall, our society needs more sustainable solutions to solve our global phosphorus paradox.The Science and Technologies for Phosphorus Sustainability (STEPS) Center, led by researchers at NC State and in partnership with several other institutions, aims to facilitate these solutions through combining science, technology and innovation together with social sciences, communication and stakeholder engagement.Grieger is an assistant professor and extension specialist in environmental health & risk assessment at NC State.Her research focuses on developing best practices for risk assessment, risk analysis and governance of emerging risks and new technologies.Grieger's work also focuses on extending and translating complex knowledge to diverse stakeholders to inform decisions.For example and among other roles, she currently serves as project director for a USDA/NIFA-funded grant that investigates societal implications of new nanoand bio-technologies used in food and agriculture.She also serves as a co-director of Knowledge Transfer of the Science and Technologies for Phosphorus Sustainability (STEPS) Center, where she connects researchers and stakeholders to co-create knowledge related to phosphorus sustainability.}, author={Grieger, Khara}, year={2022}, month={Aug} }
 @book{grieger_riza_horgan_merck_2022, title={Society for Risk Analysis Strategic Initiative Funding: Final Report}, institution={Society for Risk Analysis}, author={Grieger, K. and Riza, M. and Horgan, M. and Merck, A.}, year={2022} }
 @book{barnhill-dilling_horgan_grieger_2022, title={Stakeholder Engagement in Risk Sciences}, institution={Society for Risk Analysis}, author={Barnhill-Dilling, K. and Horgan, M. and Grieger, K.}, year={2022} }
 @article{saia_nelson_huseth_grieger_reich_2022, title={Transitioning Machine Learning from Theory to Practice in Natural Resources Management}, volume={1}, url={https://doi.org/10.31223/X5D01H}, DOI={10.31223/X5D01H}, abstractNote={Advances in sensing and computation have accelerated at unprecedented rates and scales, in turn creating new opportunities for natural resources managers to improve adaptive and predictive management practices by coupling large environmental datasets with machine learning (ML). Yet, to date, ML models often remain inaccessible to managers working outside of academic research. To identify challenges preventing natural resources managers from putting ML into practice more broadly, we convened a group of 23 stakeholders (i.e., applied researchers and practitioners) who model and analyze data collected from environmental and agricultural systems. Workshop participants shared many barriers regarding their perceptions of, and experiences with, ML modeling. These barriers emphasized three main areas of concern: ML model transparency, availability of educational resources, and the role of process-based understanding in ML model development. Informed by workshop participant input, we offer recommendations on how the ecological modelling community can overcome key barriers preventing ML model use in natural resources management and advance the profession towards data-driven decision-making.}, publisher={California Digital Library (CDL)}, author={Saia, Sheila and Nelson, Natalie and Huseth, Anders and Grieger, Khara and Reich, Brian}, year={2022}, month={Jan} }
 @article{merck_grieger_cuchiara_kuzma_2022, title={What Role Does Regulation Play in Responsible Innovation of Nanotechnology in Food and Agriculture? Insights and Framings from U.S. Stakeholders}, volume={42}, ISSN={0270-4676 1552-4183}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/02704676221102066}, DOI={10.1177/02704676221102066}, abstractNote={Historically, market regulation has played an important role in shaping the trajectory of scientific and technological innovation in food and agriculture. However, regulators’ traditional focus on safety and efficacy may be insufficient to address more complex ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of novel products, such as the use of nanotechnology and nanomaterials in food and agriculture (nano-agrifoods). One solution might be to implement the principles of responsible innovation (RI) to challenge innovators and policymakers to better anticipate risks further upstream and be responsive to societal desires and concerns, although substantial barriers to implementation persist. This paper presents stakeholder views on the relationship between regulation and RI in nano-agrifoods based on a broader U.S. stakeholder engagement study conducted in the fall of 2020. We found that participants raised key issues that incorporated all 4 pillars of RI (anticipation, inclusion, reflexivity, responsiveness). We also found that participants’ attitudes about the relationship between regulation and innovation informed their recommendations about the relationship between regulation and RI. These attitudes are represented in a spectrum of views, ranging from “regulation as barrier” to “regulation as driver” of innovation. We further identified implications for how each attitude might be used to operationalize RI in regulatory systems. Overall, these results suggest that just as regulation drove key innovations in the twentieth century, regulation may still have a role to play in helping to promote RI of nano-agrifoods in the twenty-first.}, number={3}, journal={Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society}, publisher={SAGE Publications}, author={Merck, Ashton W. and Grieger, Khara D. and Cuchiara, Maude and Kuzma, Jennifer}, year={2022}, month={Jun}, pages={85–103} }
 @article{kuiken_barrangou_grieger_2021, title={(Broken) Promises of Sustainable Food and Agriculture through New Biotechnologies: The CRISPR Case}, volume={4}, ISSN={["2573-1602"]}, DOI={10.1089/crispr.2020.0098}, abstractNote={In recent years, the development of diverse CRISPR-based technologies has revolutionized genome manipulation and enabled a broad scientific community in industry, academia, and beyond to redefine research and development for biotechnology products encompassing food, agriculture, and medicine. CRISPR-based genome editing affords tremendous opportunities in agriculture for the breeding of crops and livestock across the food supply chain that could benefit larger portions of the population compared to CRISPR applications in medicine, for example by helping to feed a growing global population, reach sustainability goals, and possibly mitigate the effects of climate change. These promises come alongside concerns of risks and adverse impacts associated with CRISPR-based genome editing and concerns that governance systems that are ill equipped or not well suited to evaluate these risks. The international community will continue to gather, in multiple venues, in the coming years to discuss these concerns. At the same time, responsible research and innovation paradigms also promise to evaluate the risks and benefits better while incorporating broad stakeholder engagement across the research and development process. The CRISPR community therefore must actively engage with these international deliberations, society, and national governance systems that have promised to build better agricultural systems and provide better food products to achieve equitable outcomes while protecting the environment. Without this active engagement, the promises discussed in this paper are sure to be broken.}, number={1}, journal={CRISPR JOURNAL}, author={Kuiken, Todd and Barrangou, Rodolphe and Grieger, Khara}, year={2021}, month={Feb}, pages={25–31} }
 @inbook{grieger_isigonis_franken_wigger_bossa_janer_rycroft_kennedy_hansen_2021, title={5 Risk screening tools for engineered nanomaterials}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110719932-005}, DOI={10.1515/9783110719932-005}, abstractNote={It has now been more than 15 years since scientists, researchers, risk analyzers, policymakers, and other decision-makers initiated comprehensive investigations into the potential environmental, health, and safety risks of engineered nanomaterials. During this time, various tools have been proposed and/or developed to screen potential environmental, health, and safety risks of engineered nanomaterials. Risk screening tools provide a first-tiered, screening-level evaluation to better understand risks without significant time and resource investments. Stakeholders interested in obtaining an initial screen of potential environmental, health, and safety risks of a nanomaterial or product may find risk screening tools particularly useful to formulate decisions, and/or communicate potential risks to stakeholders. This chapter overviews five leading risk screening tools developed specifically for nanomaterials: NanoRiskCat, Swiss Precautionary Matrix, LICARA nanoSCAN, NanoGRID, and GUIDEnano. The selected tools differ in scope, aims, underlying methodologies, and generated output. These tools were selected for further exploration due to the maturity of their development, application in multiple case studies, projects, and initiatives. After highlighting the main features of each of the risk screening tools, we provide brief guidance on their use and formulate broad recommendations for the field of nanomaterial risk screening tool development.}, booktitle={Ethics in Nanotechnology}, publisher={De Gruyter}, author={Grieger, Khara and Isigonis, Panagiotis and Franken, Remy and Wigger, Henning and Bossa, Nathan and Janer, Gemma and Rycroft, Taylor and Kennedy, Alan J. and Hansen, Steffen Foss}, year={2021}, month={Aug}, pages={89–108} }
 @article{cummings_kuzma_kokotovich_glas_grieger_2021, title={Barriers to responsible innovation of nanotechnology applications in food and agriculture: A study of US experts and developers}, volume={23}, ISSN={["2452-0748"]}, DOI={10.1016/j.impact.2021.100326}, abstractNote={The use of nanotechnology and engineered nanomaterials in food and agriculture (nano-agrifood) sectors is intended to provide several potential benefits to consumers and society, such as the provision of more nutritious processed foods, edible food coatings to extend shelf lives of fresh cut produce, and more sustainable alternatives to traditional agrochemicals. The responsible innovation of nano-agrifoods may be particularly important to pursue given previous case studies involving other agrifood technologies that experienced significant public consternation. Here, we define responsible innovation following Stilgoej et al. (2013) that establishes processes to iteratively review and reflect upon one's innovation, engage stakeholders in dialogue, and to be open and transparent throughout innovation stages - processes that go beyond primary focuses of understanding environmental, health, and safety impacts of nano-enabled products and implementing safe-by-design principles. Despite calls for responsible nano-innovation across diverse sectors, it has not yet been clear what types of barriers are faced by nano-agrifood researchers and innovators in particular. This study therefore identifies and builds the first typology of barriers to responsible innovation as perceived by researchers and product developers working in nano-agrifood sectors in the United States. Our findings report 5 key barriers to responsible innovation of nano-agrifoods: Lack of Data (reported by 70% of all interview participants, and represented 34.6% of all barrier-related excerpts), Lack of Product Oversight (reported by 60% of participants, and represented 28.7% of excerpts), Need for Ensuring Marketability & Use (reported by 70% of participants, and represented 21.3% of all barrier-related excerpts), Need for Increased Collaboration (reported by 40% of participants, and represented 10.3% of excerpts), and finally Lack of Adequate Training & Workforce (reported by 30% of participants, and represented by 5.1% of excerpts). We also relate these key barriers across three main nano-innovation phases, including 1) Scientific and Technical R&D, 2) Product Oversight, and 3) Post-commercialization Marketability & Use, and discuss how these barriers may impact stakeholders as well as present opportunities to align with principles of responsible innovation. Overall, these findings may help illuminate challenges that researchers and innovators face in the pursuit of responsible innovation relevant for the field of nanotechnology with relevancy for other emerging food and agricultural technologies more broadly.}, journal={NANOIMPACT}, author={Cummings, Christopher L. and Kuzma, Jennifer and Kokotovich, Adam and Glas, David and Grieger, Khara}, year={2021}, month={Jul} }
 @article{huang_li_gao_wang_yang_han_lin_min_zhi_grieger_et al._2021, title={Effect of microplastics on ecosystem functioning: Microbial nitrogen removal mediated by benthic invertebrates}, volume={754}, ISSN={["1879-1026"]}, url={http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-85090347843&partnerID=MN8TOARS}, DOI={10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142133}, abstractNote={While ecotoxicological impacts of microplastics on aquatic organisms have started to be investigated recently, impacts on ecosystem functions mediated by benthic biota remain largely unknown. We investigated the effect of microplastics on nitrogen removal in freshwater sediments where microorganisms and benthic invertebrates (i.e., chironomid larvae) co-existed. Using microcosm experiments, sediments with and without invertebrate chironomid larvae were exposed to microplastics (polyethylene) at concentrations of 0, 0.1, and 1 wt%. After 28 days of exposure, the addition of microplastics or chironomid larvae promoted the growth of denitrifying and anammox bacteria, leading to increased total nitrogen removal, in both cases. However, in microcosms with chironomid larvae and microplastics co-existing, nitrogen removal was less than the sum of their individual effects, especially at microplastics concentration of 1 wt%, indicating an adverse effect on microbial nitrogen removal mediated by macroinvertebrates. This study reveals that the increasing concentration of microplastics entangled the nitrogen cycling mediated by benthic invertebrates in freshwater ecosystems. These findings highlight the pursuit of a comprehensive understanding of the impacts of microplastics on the functioning in freshwater ecosystems.}, journal={SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT}, author={Huang, Yuyue and Li, Wei and Gao, Jie and Wang, Fang and Yang, Wei and Han, Le and Lin, Dunmei and Min, Bolin and Zhi, Yue and Grieger, Khara and et al.}, year={2021}, month={Feb} }
 @article{zhi_call_grieger_duckworth_jones_knappe_2021, title={Influence of natural organic matter and pH on phosphate removal by and filterable lanthanum release from lanthanum-modified bentonite}, volume={202}, ISSN={0043-1354}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2021.117399}, DOI={10.1016/j.watres.2021.117399}, abstractNote={Lanthanum modified bentonite (LMB) has been applied to eutrophic lakes to reduce phosphorus (P) concentrations in the water column and mitigate P release from sediments. Previous experiments suggest that natural organic matter (NOM) can interfere with phosphate (PO4)-binding to LMB and exacerbate lanthanum (La)-release from bentonite. This evidence served as motivation for this study to systematically determine the effects of NOM, solution pH, and bentonite as a La carrier on P removal. We conducted both geochemical modeling and controlled-laboratory batch kinetic experiments to understand the pH-dependent impacts of humic and fulvic acids on PO4-binding to LMB and La release from LMB. The role of bentonite was studied by comparing PO4 removal obtained by LMB and La3+ (added as LaCl3 salt to represent the La-containing component of LMB). Our results from both geochemical modeling and batch experiments indicate that the PO4-binding ability of LMB is decreased in the presence of NOM, and the decrease is more pronounced at pH 8.5 than at 6. At the highest evaluated NOM concentration (28 mg C L−1), PO4-removal by La3+ was substantially lower than that by LMB, implying that bentonite clay in LMB shielded La from interactions with NOM, while still allowing PO4 capture by La. Finally, the presence of NOM promoted La-release from LMB, and the amount of La released depended on solution pH and both the type (i.e., fulvic/humic acid ratio) and concentration of NOM. Overall, these results provide an important basis for management of P in lakes and eutrophication control that relies on LMB applications.}, journal={Water Research}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={Zhi, Yue and Call, Douglas F. and Grieger, Khara D. and Duckworth, Owen W. and Jones, Jacob L. and Knappe, Detlef R.U.}, year={2021}, month={Sep}, pages={117399} }
 @article{kokotovich_kuzma_cummings_grieger_2021, title={Responsible Innovation Definitions, Practices, and Motivations from Nanotechnology Researchers in Food and Agriculture}, volume={15}, ISSN={1871-4757 1871-4765}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11569-021-00404-9}, DOI={10.1007/s11569-021-00404-9}, abstractNote={Abstract The growth of responsible innovation (RI) scholarship has been mirrored by a proliferation of RI definitions and practices, as well as a recognition of the importance of context for RI. This study investigates how researchers in the field of nanotechnology for food and agriculture (nano-agrifoods) define and practice RI, as well as what motivations they see for pursuing RI. We conducted 20 semi-structured interviews with nano-agrifood researchers from industry and academia in the USA, where we asked them to describe their RI definitions, practices, and motivations. We analyzed the emergent themes from these interviews, including how the themes aligned with four prominent RI principles (anticipation, inclusion, reflexivity, responsiveness). We found that nano-agrifood researchers largely focused their descriptions of RI definitions, practices, and motivations around a narrow envisioning of the RI principle of anticipation — emphasizing product safety, efficacy, and efficiency. We also found noteworthy tensions surrounding the less frequently mentioned RI principles. For example, some researchers envisioned inclusion as a way to align products with industry interests while others saw it as a way to align products with the public good. Concerning motivations for RI, some researchers viewed RI as a way to protect one’s reputation and avoid lawsuits while others viewed it as a way to improve human well-being and solve societal problems. Given these findings, future efforts to foster RI within nano-agrifoods should promote discussions among researchers concerning what it means to responsibly innovate and what practices this could entail, particularly beyond ensuring product safety, efficacy, and efficiency.}, number={3}, journal={NanoEthics}, publisher={Springer Science and Business Media LLC}, author={Kokotovich, Adam E. and Kuzma, Jennifer and Cummings, Christopher L. and Grieger, Khara}, year={2021}, month={Dec}, pages={229–243} }
 @article{grieger_merck_cuchiara_binder_kokotovich_cummings_kuzma_2021, title={Responsible innovation of nano-agrifoods: Insights and views from U.S. stakeholders}, volume={24}, ISSN={2452-0748}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.impact.2021.100365}, DOI={10.1016/j.impact.2021.100365}, abstractNote={To date, there has been little published work that has elicited diverse stakeholder views of nano-agrifoods and of how nano-agrifoods align with the goals of responsible innovation. This paper aims to fill this research gap by investigating views of nano-agrifoods, how well their development adheres to principles of responsible innovation, and potential challenges for achieving responsible nano-agrifood innovation. Using an online engagement platform, we find that U.S. stakeholder views of responsible innovation were dominated by environmental, health, and safety (EHS) contexts, considerations of societal impacts, opportunities for stakeholder engagement, and responding to societal needs. These views overlap with scholarly definitions of responsible innovation, albeit stakeholders were more focused on impacts of products, while the field of responsible innovation strives for more "upstream" considerations of the process of innovation. We also find that views of nano-agrifoods differed across applications with dietary supplements and improved whitening of infant formula viewed least favorably, and environmental health or food safety applications viewed most favorably. These findings align with the larger body of literature, whereby stakeholders are expected to be more supportive of nanotechnology used in agricultural applications compared to directly within food and food supplements. Overall, participants indicated they held relatively neutral views on research and innovation for nano-agrifoods being conducted responsibly, and they identified key challenges to ensuring their responsible innovation that were related to uncertainties in EHS studies, the need for public understanding and acceptance, and adequate regulation. In light of these results, we recommend future research efforts on EHS impacts and risk-benefit frameworks for nano-agrifoods, better understanding stakeholder views on what constitutes effective regulation, and addressing challenges with effective regulation and responsible innovation practices.}, journal={NanoImpact}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={Grieger, Khara D. and Merck, Ashton W. and Cuchiara, Maude and Binder, Andrew R. and Kokotovich, Adam and Cummings, Christopher L. and Kuzma, Jennifer}, year={2021}, month={Oct}, pages={100365} }
 @article{doydora_gatiboni_grieger_hesterberg_jones_mclamore_peters_sozzani_van den broeck_duckworth_2020, title={Accessing Legacy Phosphorus in Soils}, volume={4}, ISSN={2571-8789}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/soilsystems4040074}, DOI={10.3390/soilsystems4040074}, abstractNote={Repeated applications of phosphorus (P) fertilizers result in the buildup of P in soil (commonly known as legacy P), a large fraction of which is not immediately available for plant use. Long-term applications and accumulations of soil P is an inefficient use of dwindling P supplies and can result in nutrient runoff, often leading to eutrophication of water bodies. Although soil legacy P is problematic in some regards, it conversely may serve as a source of P for crop use and could potentially decrease dependence on external P fertilizer inputs. This paper reviews the (1) current knowledge on the occurrence and bioaccessibility of different chemical forms of P in soil, (2) legacy P transformations with mineral and organic fertilizer applications in relation to their potential bioaccessibility, and (3) approaches and associated challenges for accessing native soil P that could be used to harness soil legacy P for crop production. We highlight how the occurrence and potential bioaccessibility of different forms of soil inorganic and organic P vary depending on soil properties, such as soil pH and organic matter content. We also found that accumulation of inorganic legacy P forms changes more than organic P species with fertilizer applications and cessations. We also discuss progress and challenges with current approaches for accessing native soil P that could be used for accessing legacy P, including natural and genetically modified plant-based strategies, the use of P-solubilizing microorganisms, and immobilized organic P-hydrolyzing enzymes. It is foreseeable that accessing legacy P will require multidisciplinary approaches to address these limitations.}, number={4}, journal={Soil Systems}, publisher={MDPI AG}, author={Doydora, Sarah and Gatiboni, Luciano and Grieger, Khara and Hesterberg, Dean and Jones, Jacob L. and McLamore, Eric S. and Peters, Rachel and Sozzani, Rosangela and Van den Broeck, Lisa and Duckworth, Owen W.}, year={2020}, month={Dec}, pages={74} }
 @article{kuzma_grieger_2020, title={Community-led governance for gene-edited crops A post-market certification process could promote transparency and trust}, volume={370}, ISSN={["1095-9203"]}, DOI={10.1126/science.abd1512}, abstractNote={A post–market certification process could promote transparency and trust In August 2020, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) began implementing new regulations for genetically engineered (GE) organisms, the SECURE (sustainable, ecological, consistent, uniform, responsible, efficient) rule (1). SECURE marks the first comprehensive reform of U.S. genetically modified (GM) crop oversight since the agency's initial approach in 1987 (and after several unsuccessful attempts to update its regulations over the past two decades) [see (1) for definitions of GE and GM crops]. The USDA estimates that under this substantial departure from its prior approach, 99% of GM plants will be exempt from premarket field testing and data-based risk assessment requirements (2). This rule has potential implications for international trade as the European Union (EU) is taking a more stringent approach to regulating gene-edited crops and will track them in the marketplace (3). We are also concerned that developers of gene-edited and GM (i.e., biotech) crops, who largely support the SECURE approach (4), are reconstituting the same conditions that led to public rejection and mistrust of the first generation of GM foods (3). To earn greater public trust and transparency, as well as enhance the ability to track gene-edited plants entering the marketplace, we therefore propose a “community-led and responsible governance” (CLEAR-GOV) coalition and certification process for biotech crop developers based on transparent information sharing about current and anticipated market uses of biotech crop varieties.}, number={6519}, journal={SCIENCE}, author={Kuzma, Jennifer and Grieger, Khara}, year={2020}, month={Nov}, pages={916–918} }
 @book{jensen_porcari_pizzol_kelly_bakker_spurgeon_grieger_chakravarty_2020, title={Complete list of requirements for a nano-specific risk governance framework}, institution={caLIBRAte European project, Horizon 2020 research and innovation program}, author={Jensen, K.A. and Porcari, A. and Pizzol, L. and Kelly, S. and Bakker, M. and Spurgeon, D. and Grieger, K. and Chakravarty, S.}, year={2020} }
 @misc{zhi_zhang_hjorth_baun_duckworth_call_knappe_jones_grieger_2020, title={Emerging lanthanum (III)-containing materials for phosphate removal from water: A review towards future developments}, volume={145}, ISSN={["1873-6750"]}, url={http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-85090951095&partnerID=MN8TOARS}, DOI={10.1016/j.envint.2020.106115}, abstractNote={The last two decades have seen a rise in the development of lanthanum (III)-containing materials (LM) for controlling phosphate in the aquatic environment. >70 papers have been published on this topic in the peer-reviewed literature, but mechanisms of phosphate removal by LM as well as potential environmental impacts of LM remain unclear. In this review, we summarize peer-reviewed scientific articles on the development and use of 80 different types of LM in terms of prospective benefits, potential ecological impacts, and research needs. We find that the main benefits of LM for phosphate removal are their ability to strongly bind phosphate under diverse environmental conditions (e.g., over a wide pH range, in the presence of diverse aqueous constituents). The maximum phosphate uptake capacity of LM correlates primarily with the La content of LM, whereas reaction kinetics are influenced by LM formulation and ambient environmental conditions (e.g., pH, presence of co-existing ions, ligands, organic matter). Increased La solubilization can occur under some environmental conditions, including at moderately acidic pH values (i.e., < 4.5–5.6), highly saline conditions, and in the presence of organic matter. At the same time, dissolved La will likely undergo hydrolysis, bind to organic matter, and combine with phosphate to precipitate rhabdophane (LaPO4·H2O), all of which reduce the bioavailability of La in aquatic environments. Overall, LM use presents a low risk of adverse effects in water with pH > 7 and moderate-to-high bicarbonate alkalinity, although caution should be applied when considering LM use in aquatic systems with acidic pH values and low bicarbonate alkalinity. Moving forward, we recommend additional research dedicated to understanding La release from LM under diverse environmental conditions as well as long-term exposures on ecological organisms, particularly primary producers and benthic organisms. Further, site-specific monitoring could be useful for evaluating potential impacts of LM on both biotic and abiotic systems post-application.}, journal={ENVIRONMENT INTERNATIONAL}, author={Zhi, Yue and Zhang, Chuhui and Hjorth, Rune and Baun, Anders and Duckworth, Owen W. and Call, Douglas F. and Knappe, Detlef R. U. and Jones, Jacob L. and Grieger, Khara}, year={2020}, month={Dec} }
 @inbook{hansen_grieger_baun_2020, place={Boca Raton}, edition={2nd}, title={Nanomaterials: Regulation and Risk Assessment}, booktitle={Managing Human and Social Systems}, publisher={CRC Press}, author={Hansen, S.F. and Grieger, K. and Baun, A.}, year={2020} }
 @article{cummings_kuzma_grieger_brown_2020, title={Pandemics Call for Systems Approaches to Research and Funding}, url={https://issues.org/pandemics-call-for-systems-approaches/}, journal={Issues in Science and Technology}, author={Cummings, C.L. and Kuzma, J. and Grieger, K. and Brown, Z.S.}, year={2020}, month={Apr} }
 @article{saia_nelson_huseth_grieger_reich_2020, title={Transitioning Machine Learning from Theory to Practice in Natural Resources Management}, volume={435}, ISSN={0304-3800}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2020.109257}, DOI={10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2020.109257}, journal={Ecological Modelling}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={Saia, S.M. and Nelson, N. and Huseth, A.S. and Grieger, K and Reich, B.J.}, year={2020}, month={Nov}, pages={109257} }
 @article{grieger_jones_hansen_hendren_jensen_kuzma_baun_2019, title={Best practices from nano-risk analysis relevant for other emerging technologies}, volume={14}, ISSN={1748-3387 1748-3395}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41565-019-0572-1}, DOI={10.1038/s41565-019-0572-1}, abstractNote={The experiences gained from the past 15 years of nanomaterial risk analysis may be useful for the risk analysis efforts of other emerging technologies.}, number={11}, journal={Nature Nanotechnology}, publisher={Springer Science and Business Media LLC}, author={Grieger, Khara and Jones, Jacob L. and Hansen, Steffen Foss and Hendren, Christine Ogilvie and Jensen, Keld Alstrup and Kuzma, Jennifer and Baun, Anders}, year={2019}, month={Nov}, pages={998–1001} }
 @article{mortensen_johnson_grieger_ambroso_fennell_2019, title={Biological interactions between nanomaterials and placental development and function following oral exposure}, volume={90}, ISSN={["0890-6238"]}, DOI={10.1016/j.reprotox.2019.08.016}, abstractNote={We summarize the literature involving the deposition of nanomaterials within the placenta following oral exposure and the biological interactions between nanomaterials and placental development and function. The review focuses on the oral exposure of metal and metal oxide engineered nanomaterials (ENMs), carbon-based ENMs, and nanoplastics in animal models, with a minor discussion of intravenous injections. Although the literature suggests that the placenta is an efficient barrier in preventing nanomaterials from reaching the fetus, nanomaterials that accumulate in the placenta may interfere with its development and function. Furthermore, some studies have demonstrated a decrease in placental weight and association with adverse fetal health outcomes following oral exposure to nanomaterials. Since nanomaterials are increasingly used in food, food packaging, and have been discovered in drinking water, the risk for adverse impacts on placental development and functions, with secondary effects on embryo-fetal development, following unintentional maternal ingestion of nanomaterials requires further investigation.}, journal={REPRODUCTIVE TOXICOLOGY}, author={Mortensen, Ninell P. and Johnson, Leah M. and Grieger, Khara D. and Ambroso, Jeffrey L. and Fennell, Timothy R.}, year={2019}, month={Dec}, pages={150–165} }
 @article{grieger_felgenhauer_renn_wiener_borsuk_2019, title={Emerging risk governance for stratospheric aerosol injection as a climate management technology}, volume={39}, ISSN={2194-5403 2194-5411}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10669-019-09730-6}, DOI={10.1007/s10669-019-09730-6}, number={4}, journal={Environment Systems and Decisions}, publisher={Springer Science and Business Media LLC}, author={Grieger, Khara D. and Felgenhauer, Tyler and Renn, Ortwin and Wiener, Jonathan and Borsuk, Mark}, year={2019}, month={Apr}, pages={371–382} }
 @article{porcari_borsella_benighaus_grieger_isigonis_chakravarty_kines_jensen_2019, title={From risk perception to risk governance in nanotechnology: a multi-stakeholder study}, volume={21}, ISSN={["1572-896X"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-019-4689-9}, DOI={10.1007/s11051-019-4689-9}, abstractNote={Abstract Nanotechnology is widely used in several industrial and consumer sectors and has the potential to grow further and expand globally. An exploration of stakeholder (SH)’s perceptions is essential to ensuring that robust risk governance processes are in place for nanotechnology and nano-related products. In response, numerous studies have been conducted to investigate SH’s perceptions of nanotechnology and nano-related products over the past 15 years. To build on this work and to capture current perceptions across a wide panel of SHs, we conducted a multi-national and cross-sectoral SH study of awareness, perceptions and opinions regarding the use and potential impact on society and the environment of nanomaterials (NMs) and nano-related products, and SH’s expectations about risk governance. The study was conducted using both quantitative and qualitative inquiries and targeted more than 3000 SHs across different sectors in a total of 15 countries. Results showed a tendency towards more convergence of opinions amongst all the relevant SHs and the public respondents than in past studies. There was consensus on the crucial importance of having unbiased, scientific and trustable information regarding the potential impacts of NMs and nano-related products on the environment, health and safety. SHs were interested in having more internationally harmonised and robust regulation for NMs and nano-related products; improved scientific evidence on nanomaterial hazards, exposures and effects; as well as specific guidance on the safe use of NMs. Overall, this work provides an updated scenario of SHs’ perceptions regarding nanotechnology and nano-related products, underscoring the importance of including SH needs in effective risk governance strategies.}, number={11}, journal={JOURNAL OF NANOPARTICLE RESEARCH}, publisher={Springer Science and Business Media LLC}, author={Porcari, Andrea and Borsella, Elisabetta and Benighaus, Christina and Grieger, Khara and Isigonis, Panagiotis and Chakravarty, Somik and Kines, Pete and Jensen, Keld Alstrup}, year={2019}, month={Nov} }
 @misc{grieger_kuiken_2019, title={Lessons Learned for Risk Governance of Synthetic Biology, Nanomaterials, and Other Emerging Technologies in a Post-2020 World}, url={https://research.ncsu.edu/ges/2019/12/lessons-learned-risk-governance-synbio-nano-post2020-world/}, journal={Genetic Engineering and Society Center}, author={Grieger, K.D. and Kuiken, T.}, year={2019} }
 @article{isigonis_hristozov_benighaus_giubilato_grieger_pizzol_semenzin_linkov_zabeo_marcomini_2019, title={Risk Governance of Nanomaterials: Review of Criteria and Tools for Risk Communication, Evaluation, and Mitigation}, volume={9}, ISSN={2079-4991}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nano9050696}, DOI={10.3390/nano9050696}, abstractNote={Nanotechnologies have been increasingly used in industrial applications and consumer products across several sectors, including construction, transportation, energy, and healthcare. The widespread application of these technologies has raised concerns regarding their environmental, health, societal, and economic impacts. This has led to the investment of enormous resources in Europe and beyond into the development of tools to facilitate the risk assessment and management of nanomaterials, and to inform more robust risk governance process. In this context, several risk governance frameworks have been developed. In our study, we present and review those, and identify a set of criteria and tools for risk evaluation, mitigation, and communication, the implementation of which can inform better risk management decision-making by various stakeholders from e.g., industry, regulators, and the civil society. Based on our analysis, we recommend specific methods from decision science and information technologies that can improve the existing risk governance tools so that they can communicate, evaluate, and mitigate risks more transparently, taking stakeholder perspectives and expert opinion into account, and considering all relevant criteria in establishing the risk-benefit balance of these emerging technologies to enable more robust decisions about the governance of their risks.}, number={5}, journal={Nanomaterials}, publisher={MDPI AG}, author={Isigonis, Panagiotis and Hristozov, Danail and Benighaus, Christina and Giubilato, Elisa and Grieger, Khara and Pizzol, Lisa and Semenzin, Elena and Linkov, Igor and Zabeo, Alex and Marcomini, Antonio}, year={2019}, month={May}, pages={696} }
 @inbook{grieger_hjorth_carpenter_klaessig_lefevre_gunsch_soratana_landis_wickson_hristozov_et al._2019, title={Sustainable Environmental Remediation Using NZVI by Managing Benefit-Risk Trade-Offs}, ISBN={9783319953380 9783319953403}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95340-3_15}, DOI={10.1007/978-3-319-95340-3_15}, abstractNote={Ensuring the sustainable development and use of NZVI for in situ remediation requires the incorporation of a multitude of factors and criteria, including those related to technology performance, cost, potential impacts to the environment and human health, as well as ethical, social, and legal concerns. This chapter provides an overview of these factors in order to help guide the sustainable development of NZVI. Among other main results, we find that while there are promising findings regarding its performance and effectiveness as a remediation technique, there are also growing concerns regarding its impacts to the environment and health. To date, most of this research has focused on the potential (eco)toxicological effects of NZVI with limited research on broader issues such as social or ethical implications. In fact, the social implications of NZVI, including the ability for a range of stakeholders and members of the public to be active participants in decision-making processes, have either been minimal or nonexistent. We also find that marketplace limitations appear to be serious obstacles to ensuring the sustainable development and use of NZVI as an environmental remediation technology, including questions pertaining to the validity of its cost-competitiveness. In order to balance the potential benefits, risks, and uncertainty characteristics of NZVI, there are a number of decision support frameworks and risk analysis tools which may be applied, including multi-criteria decision analysis, life cycle assessment, as well as diverse risk characterization or screening tools (e.g., NanoRiskCat). While several of these frameworks and tools may be suited for NZVI in theory, very few of them have been applied to NZVI in practice. In conclusion, these results indicate that while NZVI has potential to reduce environmental contaminants through in situ remediation, its development and use, particularly at field-scale sites, has not proceeded in the most sustainable manner possible thus far. In light of this, we provide specific recommendations to help ensure the sustainable development and use of NZVI, including recommendations specific for diverse stakeholder groups such as researchers, academics, industry, and government officials.}, booktitle={Nanoscale Zerovalent Iron Particles for Environmental Restoration}, publisher={Springer International Publishing}, author={Grieger, Khara and Hjorth, Rune and Carpenter, Alexis Wells and Klaessig, Frederick and Lefevre, Emilie and Gunsch, Claudia and Soratana, Kullapa and Landis, Amy E. and Wickson, Fern and Hristozov, Danail and et al.}, editor={Phenrat, T. and Lowry, G.V.Editors}, year={2019}, pages={511–562} }
 @article{grieger_bossa_levis_von borries_strader_cuchiara_hendren_hansen_jones_2018, title={Application and testing of risk screening tools for nanomaterial risk analysis}, volume={5}, ISSN={2051-8153 2051-8161}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/C8EN00518D}, DOI={10.1039/C8EN00518D}, abstractNote={The field of engineered nanomaterial (ENM) risk analysis has matured significantly in the past decade. While there is a suite of new, emerging tools to evaluate ENM risks and make decisions regarding these risks, there has not yet been thorough testing of these tools. This analysis applies and tests three risk screening tools (NanoRiskCat, LICARA nanoSCAN, NanoGRID) using a common case study focused on ENMs designed for water treatment technologies, compares results generated, and highlights key lessons learned and best practices for stakeholders involved in developing and/or applying ENM risk screening tools. NanoRiskCat was found to be most useful for providing a visual aid to characterize the potential exposure and health impact profiles of the ENMs, while LICARA nanoSCAN was most useful for providing guidance on proceeding with ENM-enabled innovations. NanoGRID was helpful for characterizing data on potential ENM exposure and hazards and providing detailed guidance for subsequent laboratory-based testing. At the same time, several key challenges were identified during tool application and testing phases, ranging from minor inconveniences to more complex, foundational issues. Key lessons learned and potential best practices gleaned from this analysis include: i) risk screening tools can be used together in a complementary manner; ii) risk managers and other users should be clear on the selection of underlying data and impacts on results; iii) multidisciplinary teams are essential for tool completion; and iv) continued testing and validation of emerging risk analysis tools for ENMs is a continued research need.}, number={8}, journal={Environmental Science: Nano}, publisher={Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)}, author={Grieger, Khara and Bossa, Nathan and Levis, James W. and von Borries, Kerstin Johanna Felicitas and Strader, Phillip and Cuchiara, Maude and Hendren, Christine Ogilvie and Hansen, Steffen Foss and Jones, Jacob L.}, year={2018}, pages={1844–1858} }
 @book{grieger_ruzante_lillys_lambertini_linkov_2018, title={Decision Analysis Support for Implementing a Risk-Informed Decision-Making System in the FDA Foods and Veterinary Medicine Program: Final Report}, institution={U.S. Food and Drug Administration}, author={Grieger, K.D. and Ruzante, J. and Lillys, T. and Lambertini, T. and Linkov, I.}, year={2018} }
 @article{lebov_grieger_womack_zaccaro_whitehead_kowalcyk_macdonald_2017, title={A framework for One Health research}, volume={3}, ISSN={2352-7714}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.onehlt.2017.03.004}, DOI={10.1016/j.onehlt.2017.03.004}, abstractNote={The need for multidisciplinary research to address today's complex health and environmental challenges has never been greater. The One Health (OH) approach to research ensures that human, animal, and environmental health questions are evaluated in an integrated and holistic manner to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the problem and potential solutions than would be possible with siloed approaches. However, the OH approach is complex, and there is limited guidance available for investigators regarding the practical design and implementation of OH research. In this paper we provide a framework to guide researchers through conceptualizing and planning an OH study. We discuss key steps in designing an OH study, including conceptualization of hypotheses and study aims, identification of collaborators for a multi-disciplinary research team, study design options, data sources and collection methods, and analytical methods. We illustrate these concepts through the presentation of a case study of health impacts associated with land application of biosolids. Finally, we discuss opportunities for applying an OH approach to identify solutions to current global health issues, and the need for cross-disciplinary funding sources to foster an OH approach to research.}, journal={One Health}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={Lebov, J. and Grieger, K. and Womack, D. and Zaccaro, D. and Whitehead, N. and Kowalcyk, B. and MacDonald, P.D.M.}, year={2017}, month={Jun}, pages={44–50} }
 @book{jovanovic_ahmad_quintero_porcari_borsella_hristozov_grieger_jensen_2017, title={Comprehensive analysis of available tools and methodologies for Horizon Scanning}, institution={caLIBRAte research project}, author={Jovanovic, A. and Ahmad, M. and Quintero, F.A. and Porcari, A. and Borsella, E. and Hristozov, D. and Grieger, K.D. and Jensen, K.}, year={2017} }
 @book{grieger_aceituno_andrews_womack_li_havellar_2017, title={Develop and Validate Risk Ranking Model v3 to Inform RRM-PT List}, institution={United States Food and Drug Administration}, author={Grieger, K.D. and Aceituno, A. and Andrews, L. and Womack, D. and Li, M. and Havellar, A.}, year={2017} }
 @article{ruzante_grieger_woodward_lambertini_kowalcyk_2017, title={The Use of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis in Food Safety Risk-Benefit Assessment}, volume={37}, number={2}, journal={Food Protection Trends}, author={Ruzante, J. and Grieger, K. and Woodward, K. and Lambertini, E. and Kowalcyk, B.}, year={2017}, pages={132–139} }
 @article{hjorth_holden_hansen_colman_grieger_hendren_2017, title={The role of alternative testing strategies in environmental risk assessment of engineered nanomaterials}, volume={4}, ISSN={2051-8153 2051-8161}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/c6en00443a}, DOI={10.1039/c6en00443a}, abstractNote={Within toxicology there is a pressure to find new test systems and organisms to replace, reduce and refine animal testing. In nanoecotoxicology the need for alternative testing strategies (ATS) is further emphasized as the validity of tests and risk assessment practices developed for dissolved chemicals are challenged. Nonetheless, standardized whole organism animal testing is still considered the gold standard for environmental risk assessment. Advancing risk analysis of engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) through ATS was discussed in September 2014 at an international Society for Risk Analysis (SRA) workshop in Washington, D.C. and serves as the point of departure for this paper. Here we present the main outcomes by describing and defining the use of ATS for ENMs as well as discussing its future role in environmental risk science. We conclude that diversity in testing should be encouraged to avoid “selective ignorance” and that, through an iterative process with low-tier and high-tier testing, data-generation can be validated to ensure relevant endpoints. Furthermore, simplified screening of ENMs could enable early decision-making on material design, while complex multispecies studies should be utilized to skip uncertain environmental extrapolations and give rise to more accurate risk analysis.}, number={2}, journal={Environmental Science: Nano}, publisher={Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)}, author={Hjorth, Rune and Holden, Patricia A. and Hansen, Steffen Foss and Colman, Benjamin P. and Grieger, Khara and Hendren, Christine Ogilvie}, year={2017}, pages={292–301} }
 @article{powers_grieger_meacham_gooding_gift_lehmann_hendren_davis_burgoon_2016, title={Applying comprehensive environmental assessment to research planning for multiwalled carbon nanotubes: Refinements to inform future stakeholder engagement}, volume={12}, ISSN={1551-3777}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ieam.1663}, DOI={10.1002/ieam.1663}, abstractNote={Risk assessments and risk management efforts to protect human health and the environment can benefit from early, coordinated research planning by researchers, risk assessors, and risk managers. However, approaches for engaging these and other stakeholders in research planning have not received much attention in the environmental scientific literature. The Comprehensive Environmental Assessment (CEA) approach under development by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is a means to manage complex information and input from diverse stakeholder perspectives on research planning that will ultimately support environmental and human health decision making. The objectives of this article are to 1) describe the outcomes of applying lessons learned from previous CEA applications to planning research on engineered nanomaterial, multiwalled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) and 2) discuss new insights and refinements for future efforts to engage stakeholders in research planning for risk assessment and risk management of environmental issues. Although framed in terms of MWCNTs, this discussion is intended to enhance research planning to support assessments for other environmental issues as well. Key insights for research planning include the potential benefits of 1) ensuring that participants have research, risk assessment, and risk management expertise in addition to diverse disciplinary backgrounds; 2) including an early scoping step before rounds of formal ratings; 3) using a familiar numeric scale (e.g., US dollars) versus ordinal rating scales of “importance”; 4) applying virtual communication tools to supplement face‐to‐face interaction between participants; and 5) refining criteria to guide development of specific, actionable research questions. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2016;12:96–108. © 2015 SETAC}, number={1}, journal={Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management}, publisher={Wiley}, author={Powers, Christina M and Grieger, Khara and Meacham, Connie A and Gooding, Meredith Lassiter and Gift, Jeffrey S and Lehmann, Geniece M and Hendren, Christine O and Davis, J Michael and Burgoon, Lyle}, year={2016}, month={Jan}, pages={96–108} }
 @book{grieger_kowalcyk_li_havelaar_2016, title={Deliverable: Evaluate Options to Aggregate Risk Scores in RRM-PT}, institution={United States Food and Drug Administration}, author={Grieger, K.D. and Kowalcyk, B. and Li, M. and Havelaar, A.}, year={2016} }
 @book{grieger_kowalcyk_sifleet_aceituno_2016, title={Identify, Collect Data, and Perform Expert Elicitation for New Food-Hazard Pairs involving Human Food}, institution={United States Food and Drug Administration}, author={Grieger, K.D. and Kowalcyk, B. and Sifleet, S. and Aceituno, A.}, year={2016} }
 @article{grieger_hansen_mortensen_cates_kowalcyk_2016, title={International Implications of Labeling Foods Containing Engineered Nanomaterials}, volume={79}, ISSN={0362-028X 1944-9097}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.4315/0362-028x.jfp-15-335}, DOI={10.4315/0362-028x.jfp-15-335}, abstractNote={To provide greater transparency and comprehensive information to consumers regarding their purchase choices, the European Parliament and the Council have mandated via Regulation 1169/2011 that foods containing engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) be labeled. This review covers the main concerns related to the use of ENMs in foods and the potential impacts that this type of food labeling might have on diverse stakeholder groups, including those outside the European Union (EU), e.g., in the United States. We also provide recommendations to stakeholders for overcoming existing challenges related to labeling foods containing ENMs. The revised EU food labeling requirements will likely result in a number of positive developments and a number of challenges for stakeholders in both EU and non-EU countries. Although labeling of foods containing ENMs will likely improve transparency, provide more information to facilitate consumer decisions, and build trust among food safety authorities and consumers, critical obstacles to the successful implementation of these labeling requirements remain, including the need for (i) harmonized information requirements or regulations between countries in different regions of the world, (ii) clarification of the regulatory definitions of the ENMs to be used for food labeling, (iii) robust techniques to detect, measure, and characterize diverse ENMs in food matrices, and (iv) clarification of the list of ENMs that may be exempt from labeling requirements, such as several food additives used for decades. We recommend that food industries and food safety authorities be more proactive in communicating with the public and consumer groups regarding the potential benefits and risks of using ENMs in foods. Efforts should be made to improve harmonization of information requirements between countries to avoid potential international trade barriers.}, number={5}, journal={Journal of Food Protection}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={Grieger, Khara D. and Hansen, Steffen Foss and Mortensen, Ninell P. and Cates, Sheryl and Kowalcyk, Barbara}, year={2016}, month={May}, pages={830–842} }
 @article{grieger_harrington_mortensen_2016, title={Prioritizing research needs for analytical techniques suited for engineered nanomaterials in food}, volume={50}, ISSN={0924-2244}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2016.02.004}, DOI={10.1016/j.tifs.2016.02.004}, abstractNote={The ability to detect, characterize, and quantify engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) in foods is needed to not only understand consumer exposures to ENMs but also to comply with recent changes to European food labeling laws relevant for ENMs. Significant challenges exist, however, in terms of relying on currently-available analytical tools and techniques suited for ENMs in food, as most of these are still in development. Based on a literature review, this analysis highlights the current state of knowledge in the area of analytical tools relevant for ENMs in food and then proposes strategies to prioritize near-term research and decision support efforts based on selected high-priority ENM-food applications. After reviewing available analytical tools and techniques as well as challenges to using these, we identify and select six ENM-food applications as being of high-priority based on their current use as well as their potential to cause adverse health impacts in vulnerable life stages. Based on these findings, we recommend “fast tracking” the development of analytical techniques suited for high priority ENM-foods as one strategy to prioritize near term research efforts. We also recommend implementing screening-level approaches to first detect ENMs in food followed by characterization techniques to provide minimal ENM characterization information, including elemental composition, size, and size distribution. These strategies may help focus research efforts and decision support priorities in the near-term while the full suite of analytical tools are developed specifically for ENMs in food.}, journal={Trends in Food Science & Technology}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={Grieger, Khara D. and Harrington, James and Mortensen, Ninell}, year={2016}, month={Apr}, pages={219–229} }
 @book{grieger_kowalcyk_ruzante_havelaar_2016, title={Review Public Comments and Provide Recommendations Relevant for Animal Feed/Pet Food in RRM-PT}, institution={United States Food and Drug Administration}, author={Grieger, K.D. and Kowalcyk, B. and Ruzante, J. and Havelaar, A.}, year={2016} }
 @article{powers_grieger_beaudrie_hendren_michael davis_wang_sayes_macdonell_gift_2015, title={Data dialogues: critical connections for designing and implementing future nanomaterial research}, volume={35}, ISSN={2194-5403 2194-5411}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10669-014-9518-1}, DOI={10.1007/s10669-014-9518-1}, number={1}, journal={Environment Systems and Decisions}, publisher={Springer Science and Business Media LLC}, author={Powers, Christina M. and Grieger, Khara D. and Beaudrie, Christian and Hendren, Christine Ogilvie and Michael Davis, J. and Wang, Amy and Sayes, Christie M. and MacDonell, Margaret and Gift, Jeffrey S.}, year={2015}, month={Mar}, pages={76–87} }
 @article{bates_grieger_trump_keisler_plourde_linkov_2015, title={Emerging Technologies for Environmental Remediation: Integrating Data and Judgment}, volume={50}, ISSN={0013-936X 1520-5851}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b03005}, DOI={10.1021/acs.est.5b03005}, abstractNote={Emerging technologies present significant challenges to researchers, decision-makers, industry professionals, and other stakeholder groups due to the lack of quantitative risk, benefit, and cost data associated with their use. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) can support early decisions for emerging technologies when data is too sparse or uncertain for traditional risk assessment. It does this by integrating expert judgment with available quantitative and qualitative inputs across multiple criteria to provide relative technology scores. Here, an MCDA framework provides preliminary insights on the suitability of emerging technologies for environmental remediation by comparing nanotechnology and synthetic biology to conventional remediation methods. Subject matter experts provided judgments regarding the importance of criteria used in the evaluations and scored the technologies with respect to those criteria. The results indicate that synthetic biology may be preferred over nanotechnology and conventional methods for high expected benefits and low deployment costs but that conventional technology may be preferred over emerging technologies for reduced risks and development costs. In the absence of field data regarding the risks, benefits, and costs of emerging technologies, structuring evidence-based expert judgment through a weighted hierarchy of topical questions may be helpful to inform preliminary risk governance and guide emerging technology development and policy.}, number={1}, journal={Environmental Science & Technology}, publisher={American Chemical Society (ACS)}, author={Bates, Matthew E. and Grieger, Khara D. and Trump, Benjamin D. and Keisler, Jeffrey M. and Plourde, Kenton J. and Linkov, Igor}, year={2015}, month={Dec}, pages={349–358} }
 @misc{grieger_hjorth_rice_kumar_bang_2015, title={Nano-remediation: tiny particles cleaning up big environmental problems}, url={http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/nanoremediation.pdf}, journal={International Union for Conservation of Nature}, author={Grieger, K. and Hjorth, R. and Rice, J. and Kumar, N. and Bang, J.}, year={2015} }
 @inbook{eisenberg_grieger_hristozov_bates_linkov_2015, title={Risk Assessment, Life Cycle Assessment, and Decision Methods for Nanomaterials}, ISBN={9780784414088 9780784479254}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/9780784414088.ch15}, DOI={10.1061/9780784414088.ch15}, abstractNote={More than a decade has passed since the UK Royal Society’s report (RS RAE 2004) spurred research and discussions on the potential health and environmental impacts of engineered nanomaterials (ENMs). Scientists, regulators, and other decision makers are still developing and establishing sound risk assessment (RA) approaches for ENMs. This chapter provides a detailed overview of RA methods and tools for ENMs. It specifically focuses on approaches that apply to ENM risk management despite the paucity of physiochemical and (eco) toxicological data and exposure models. In particular, it focuses on the recommendation to use different methods for different risk-based decision contexts. The chapter first presents select RA methodologies developed for ENM comparative assessment, screening, and management, and then overviews life-cycle analysis for ENMs. The chapter also presents RA frameworks that combine assessments to support decision making. Finally, it describes data needs for ENM RA.}, booktitle={Nanomaterials in the Environment}, publisher={American Society of Civil Engineers}, author={Eisenberg, Daniel A. and Grieger, Khara D. and Hristozov, Danail R. and Bates, Matthew E. and Linkov, Igor}, editor={Brar, Satinder Kaur and Zhang, Tian C. and Verma, Mausam and Surampalli, Rao Y. and Tyagi, Rajeshwar D.Editors}, year={2015}, month={Oct}, pages={383–419} }
 @book{grieger_sayes_chen_ensor_jayanty_2015, title={Safe Handling of Engineered Nanomaterials: Turning Knowledge Into Practice}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.3768/rtipress.2015.op.0022.1505}, DOI={10.3768/rtipress.2015.op.0022.1505}, abstractNote={ii}, institution={RTI Press}, author={Grieger, Khara and Sayes, Christine and Chen, Eric and Ensor, David and Jayanty, RKM}, year={2015}, month={May} }
 @book{grieger_tulloch_kowalcyk_sifleet_2015, title={Update and Validate Risk Ranking Model to Inform High Risk Foods List: High-Risk Foods (HRF) Model}, institution={United States Food and Drug Administration}, author={Grieger, K.D. and Tulloch, M.L. and Kowalcyk, B. and Sifleet, S.}, year={2015} }
 @article{grieger_redmon_money_widder_van der schalie_beaulieu_womack_2014, title={A relative ranking approach for nano-enabled applications to improve risk-based decision making: a case study of Army materiel}, volume={35}, ISSN={2194-5403 2194-5411}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10669-014-9531-4}, DOI={10.1007/s10669-014-9531-4}, number={1}, journal={Environment Systems and Decisions}, publisher={Springer Science and Business Media LLC}, author={Grieger, Khara D. and Redmon, Jennifer Hoponick and Money, Eric S. and Widder, Mark W. and van der Schalie, William H. and Beaulieu, Stephen M. and Womack, Donna}, year={2014}, month={Dec}, pages={42–53} }
 @article{powers_grieger_hendren_meacham_gurevich_lassiter_money_lloyd_beaulieu_2014, title={A web-based tool to engage stakeholders in informing research planning for future decisions on emerging materials}, volume={470-471}, ISSN={0048-9697}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.10.016}, DOI={10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.10.016}, abstractNote={Prioritizing and assessing risks associated with chemicals, industrial materials, or emerging technologies is a complex problem that benefits from the involvement of multiple stakeholder groups. For example, in the case of engineered nanomaterials (ENMs), scientific uncertainties exist that hamper environmental, health, and safety (EHS) assessments. Therefore, alternative approaches to standard EHS assessment methods have gained increased attention. The objective of this paper is to describe the application of a web-based, interactive decision support tool developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) in a pilot study on ENMs. The piloted tool implements U.S. EPA's comprehensive environmental assessment (CEA) approach to prioritize research gaps. When pursued, such research priorities can result in data that subsequently improve the scientific robustness of risk assessments and inform future risk management decisions. Pilot results suggest that the tool was useful in facilitating multi-stakeholder prioritization of research gaps. Results also provide potential improvements for subsequent applications. The outcomes of future CEAWeb applications with larger stakeholder groups may inform the development of funding opportunities for emerging materials across the scientific community (e.g., National Science Foundation Science to Achieve Results [STAR] grants, National Institutes of Health Requests for Proposals).}, journal={Science of The Total Environment}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={Powers, Christina M. and Grieger, Khara D. and Hendren, Christine Ogilvie and Meacham, Connie A. and Gurevich, Gerald and Lassiter, Meredith Gooding and Money, Eric S. and Lloyd, Jennifer M. and Beaulieu, Stephen M.}, year={2014}, month={Feb}, pages={660–668} }
 @misc{grieger_2014, place={Gland, Switzerland}, title={Investigating the invisible: Biodiversity, Ecosystems, Science}, publisher={International Union for Conservation of Nature}, author={Grieger, K.D.}, year={2014} }
 @article{renn_grieger_øien_andersen_2013, title={Benefit-risk trade-offs in retrospect: how major stakeholders perceive the decision-making process in the Barents Sea oil field development}, volume={16}, ISSN={1366-9877 1466-4461}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2012.761266}, DOI={10.1080/13669877.2012.761266}, abstractNote={This study provides an analysis of risk-benefit communication and participation of the siting process for the Norwegian Goliat oil field development, within the context of a revised model of the International Risk Governance Council’s framework. The main objective of the study is a retrospective review of the decision-making process seen through the lenses of the major stakeholders involved in this process. The research design used qualitative methods of empirical research including stakeholder interviews during a five-day period in 2011 in Northern Norway. Results showed that the siting process of Goliat was dominated primarily by the issue of benefit sharing. In view of potential risks to such oil development, local stakeholders felt entitled to some compensation in terms of shared benefits. However, over the course of time the high hopes that these benefits would materialize and provide additional benefits to the communities which would then be fairly distributed among the beneficiaries have been disappointed. We review the reasons behind these results as well as formulate recommendations regarding potential improvements to the risk-benefit communication process in addition to future siting processes.}, number={9}, journal={Journal of Risk Research}, publisher={Informa UK Limited}, author={Renn, Ortwin and Grieger, Khara D. and Øien, Knut and Andersen, Henning Boje}, year={2013}, month={Oct}, pages={1163–1185} }
 @book{grieger_tulloch_anderson_pierson_mokhtari_beaulieu_2013, title={Development of a Risk Ranking Tool for the Determination of High Risk Foods among FDA-regulated Products}, institution={United States Food and Drug Administration}, author={Grieger, K.D. and Tulloch, M.L. and Anderson, M.E. and Pierson, K.A. and Mokhtari, A.H. and Beaulieu, S.M.}, year={2013} }
 @article{grieger_sayes_hendren_rothrock_mansfield_jayanty_ensor_2013, title={Finding the Key to Responsible Nanomaterial Development}, url={http://ehstoday.com/training/finding-key-responsible-nanomaterial-development?page=1.}, journal={EHS Today}, author={Grieger, K. and Sayes, C. and Hendren, C.O. and Rothrock, G. and Mansfield, C. and Jayanty, R.K.M. and Ensor, D.}, year={2013}, month={Dec} }
 @book{redmon_money_tulloch_grieger_lloyd_sayes_hendren_womack_beaulieu_2013, title={Identifying army materiel incorporating engineered nanomaterials and associated health risks}, institution={U.S. Army Center for Environmental Health Research}, author={Redmon, J.H. and Money, E.S. and Tulloch, M.L. and Grieger, K.D. and Lloyd, J.M. and Sayes, C.M. and Hendren, C.O. and Womack, D.S. and Beaulieu, S.M.}, year={2013} }
 @book{zhang_bhatt_newsome_fisher_grieger_anderson_mokhtari_woodward_tulloch_beaulieu_2013, title={Implement and Evaluate the High Risk Foods (HRF) Model: For Recordkeeping and Product Tracing}, institution={United States Food and Drug Administration}, author={Zhang, J. and Bhatt, T. and Newsome, R. and Fisher, W. and Grieger, K.D. and Anderson, M.E. and Mokhtari, A.H. and Woodward, K.P. and Tulloch, M.L. and Beaulieu, S.M.}, year={2013} }
 @article{hendren_lowry_grieger_money_johnston_wiesner_beaulieu_2013, title={Modeling Approaches for Characterizing and Evaluating Environmental Exposure to Engineered Nanomaterials in Support of Risk-Based Decision Making}, volume={47}, ISSN={0013-936X 1520-5851}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es302749u}, DOI={10.1021/es302749u}, abstractNote={As the use of engineered nanomaterials becomes more prevalent, the likelihood of unintended exposure to these materials also increases. Given the current scarcity of experimental data regarding fate, transport, and bioavailability, determining potential environmental exposure to these materials requires an in depth analysis of modeling techniques that can be used in both the near- and long-term. Here, we provide a critical review of traditional and emerging exposure modeling approaches to highlight the challenges that scientists and decision-makers face when developing environmental exposure and risk assessments for nanomaterials. We find that accounting for nanospecific properties, overcoming data gaps, realizing model limitations, and handling uncertainty are key to developing informative and reliable environmental exposure and risk assessments for engineered nanomaterials. We find methods suited to recognizing and addressing significant uncertainty to be most appropriate for near-term environmental exposure modeling, given the current state of information and the current insufficiency of established deterministic models to address environmental exposure to engineered nanomaterials.}, number={3}, journal={Environmental Science & Technology}, publisher={American Chemical Society (ACS)}, author={Hendren, Christine Ogilvie and Lowry, Michael and Grieger, Khara D. and Money, Eric S. and Johnston, John M. and Wiesner, Mark R. and Beaulieu, Stephen M.}, year={2013}, month={Feb}, pages={1190–1205} }
 @inbook{hansen_grieger_baun_2013, place={New York}, title={Nanomaterials: Regulation and Risk Assessment}, volume={III}, booktitle={Encyclopedia of Environmental Management}, publisher={Taylor & Francis}, author={Hansen, S.F. and Grieger, K. and Baun, A.}, editor={Jorgensen, S.EEditor}, year={2013}, pages={1722–1732} }
 @inbook{grieger_hansen_baun_2013, place={New York}, title={Nanoparticles: Uncertainty Risk Analysis}, volume={III}, booktitle={Encyclopedia of Environmental Management}, publisher={Taylor & Francis}, author={Grieger, K. and Hansen, S.F. and Baun, A.}, year={2013}, pages={1742–1751} }
 @article{hansen_nielsen_knudsen_grieger_baun_2013, title={Operationalization and application of “early warning signs” to screen nanomaterials for harmful properties}, volume={15}, ISSN={2050-7887 2050-7895}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/c2em30571b}, DOI={10.1039/c2em30571b}, abstractNote={In 2001 the European Environment Agency (EEA) published a report that analyzed 14 cases of technological developments that later on turned out to have negative side-effects and they identified 12 “late lessons” for current and future policy-makers to bear in mind when initiating new technological endeavors. This paper explores how the first lesson – “Acknowledge and respond to ignorance, uncertainty and risk in technology appraisal” could be applied to screen nanomaterials. In cases of ignorance, uncertainty and risk, the EEA recommends paying particular attention to important warning signs such as novelty, persistency, whether materials are readily dispersed in the environment, and whether they bioaccumulate or lead to potentially irreversible action. Through an analysis of these criteria using five well-known nanomaterials (titanium dioxide, carbon nanotubes, liposomes, poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) and nanoscale zero-valent iron), it was found that only nanoTiO2 fulfils all the five criteria. Depending on the length of the nanotubes, carbon nanotubes fulfil 3 or 4 criteria whereas liposomes, poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid), nanoscale zero-valent iron fulfil only one criteria. Finally, we discuss how these warning signs can be used by different stakeholders such as nanomaterial researchers and developers, companies and regulators to design benign nanomaterials, communicate what is known about nano-risks and decide on whether to implement precautionary regulatory measures.}, number={1}, journal={Environ. Sci.: Processes Impacts}, publisher={Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)}, author={Hansen, Steffen Foss and Nielsen, Kåre Nolde and Knudsen, Nina and Grieger, Khara D. and Baun, Anders}, year={2013}, pages={190–203} }
 @article{grieger_laurent_miseljic_christensen_baun_olsen_2012, title={Analysis of current research addressing complementary use of life-cycle assessment and risk assessment for engineered nanomaterials: have lessons been learned from previous experience with chemicals?}, volume={14}, ISSN={1388-0764 1572-896X}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11051-012-0958-6}, DOI={10.1007/s11051-012-0958-6}, number={7}, journal={Journal of Nanoparticle Research}, publisher={Springer Science and Business Media LLC}, author={Grieger, Khara D. and Laurent, Alexis and Miseljic, Mirko and Christensen, Frans and Baun, Anders and Olsen, Stig I.}, year={2012}, month={Jun} }
 @article{grieger_wickson_andersen_renn_2012, title={Improving Risk Governance of Emerging Technologies through Public Engagement: The Neglected Case of Nano- Remediation?}, volume={10}, number={1}, journal={International Journal of Emerging Technologies and Society}, author={Grieger, K. and Wickson, F. and Andersen, H.B. and Renn, O.}, year={2012}, pages={61–78} }
 @book{grieger_hendren_smith_scruggs_beaulieu_2012, title={Nanomaterial Case Study Workshop Process: Identifying and Prioritizing Research for Multiwalled Carbon Nanotubes}, institution={United States Environmental Protection Agency}, author={Grieger, K.D. and Hendren, C. and Smith, K.N. and Scruggs, M.D. and Beaulieu, S.M.}, year={2012} }
 @article{grieger_2011, title={Assessing the Potential Risks of Nano-Materials – Emerging Tools for Emerging Risks}, volume={September}, url={https://esra.website/fileadmin/files/newsletter/ESRA_Newsletter_2011_09.pdf}, journal={European Safety and Reliability Association Newsletter}, author={Grieger, K.}, year={2011}, pages={4–5} }
 @article{grieger_hansen_sørensen_baun_2011, title={Conceptual modeling for identification of worst case conditions in environmental risk assessment of nanomaterials using nZVI and C60 as case studies}, volume={409}, ISSN={0048-9697}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.06.021}, DOI={10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.06.021}, abstractNote={Conducting environmental risk assessment of engineered nanomaterials has been an extremely challenging endeavor thus far. Moreover, recent findings from the nano-risk scientific community indicate that it is unlikely that many of these challenges will be easily resolved in the near future, especially given the vast variety and complexity of nanomaterials and their applications. As an approach to help optimize environmental risk assessments of nanomaterials, we apply the Worst-Case Definition (WCD) model to identify best estimates for worst-case conditions of environmental risks of two case studies which use engineered nanoparticles, namely nZVI in soil and groundwater remediation and C60 in an engine oil lubricant. Results generated from this analysis may ultimately help prioritize research areas for environmental risk assessments of nZVI and C60 in these applications as well as demonstrate the use of worst-case conditions to optimize future research efforts for other nanomaterials. Through the application of the WCD model, we find that the most probable worst-case conditions for both case studies include i) active uptake mechanisms, ii) accumulation in organisms, iii) ecotoxicological response mechanisms such as reactive oxygen species (ROS) production and cell membrane damage or disruption, iv) surface properties of nZVI and C60, and v) acute exposure tolerance of organisms. Additional estimates of worst-case conditions for C60 also include the physical location of C60 in the environment from surface run-off, cellular exposure routes for heterotrophic organisms, and the presence of light to amplify adverse effects. Based on results of this analysis, we recommend the prioritization of research for the selected applications within the following areas: organism active uptake ability of nZVI and C60 and ecotoxicological response end-points and response mechanisms including ROS production and cell membrane damage, full nanomaterial characterization taking into account detailed information on nanomaterial surface properties, and investigations of dose–response relationships for a variety of organisms.}, number={19}, journal={Science of The Total Environment}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={Grieger, Khara D. and Hansen, Steffen F. and Sørensen, Peter B. and Baun, Anders}, year={2011}, month={Sep}, pages={4109–4124} }
 @article{grieger_linkov_hansen_baun_2011, title={Environmental risk analysis for nanomaterials: Review and evaluation of frameworks}, volume={6}, ISSN={1743-5390 1743-5404}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17435390.2011.569095}, DOI={10.3109/17435390.2011.569095}, abstractNote={Abstract In response to the challenges of conducting traditional human health and ecological risk assessment for nanomaterials (NM), a number of alternative frameworks have been proposed for NM risk analysis. This paper evaluates various risk analysis frameworks proposed for NM based on a number of criteria. Among other results, most frameworks were found to be flexible for multiple NM, suitable for multiple decision contexts, included life cycle perspectives and precautionary aspects, transparent and able to include qualitative and quantitative data. Nevertheless, most frameworks were primarily applicable to occupational settings with minor environmental considerations, and most have not been thoroughly tested on a wide range of NM. Care should also be taken when selecting the most appropriate risk analysis strategy for a given risk context. Given this, we recommend a multi-faceted approach to assess the environmental risks of NM as well as increased applications and testing of the proposed frameworks for different NM.}, number={2}, journal={Nanotoxicology}, publisher={Informa UK Limited}, author={Grieger, Khara D. and Linkov, Igor and Hansen, Steffen Foss and Baun, Anders}, year={2011}, month={Apr}, pages={196–212} }
 @book{renn_benighaus_schweizer_webler_jovanovic_lim_schneider_klimek_grieger_andersen_2011, title={Modeling the Perception of Emerging Risks. Deliverable for iNTeg-Risk: Early Recognition, Monitoring and Integrated Management of Emerging, New Technology Related, Risks}, author={Renn, O. and Benighaus, C. and Schweizer, P.J. and Webler, T. and Jovanovic, A. and Lim, R. and Schneider, R. and Klimek, P. and Grieger, K. and Andersen, H.B.}, year={2011} }
 @book{duijm_grieger_markert_2011, title={Occupational safety assessment. Deliverable for PlasmaNice: Plasmas for Nanoscale Industrial Surface Processing}, author={Duijm, N.J. and Grieger, K.D. and Markert, F.}, year={2011} }
 @book{kozine_grieger_2011, title={Uncertainty handling (unknown phenomena). Deliverable for iNTeg-Risk: Early Recognition, Monitoring and Integrated Management of Emerging, New Technology Related, Risks.}, author={Kozine, I. and Grieger, K.D.}, year={2011} }
 @article{grieger_2011, title={Understanding and assessing potential environmental risks of nanomaterials: Emerging tools for emerging risks - a PhD project}, volume={17}, number={1}, journal={Miljø og sundhed}, author={Grieger, K.}, year={2011}, pages={43–46} }
 @article{sørensen_thomsen_assmuth_grieger_baun_2010, title={Conscious worst case definition for risk assessment, part I}, volume={408}, ISSN={0048-9697}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.11.010}, DOI={10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.11.010}, abstractNote={This paper helps bridge the gap between scientists and other stakeholders in the areas of human and environmental risk management of chemicals and engineered nanomaterials. This connection is needed due to the evolution of stakeholder awareness and scientific progress related to human and environmental health which involves complex methodological demands on risk management. At the same time, the available scientific knowledge is also becoming more scattered across multiple scientific disciplines. Hence, the understanding of potentially risky situations is increasingly multifaceted, which again challenges risk assessors in terms of giving the ‘right’ relative priority to the multitude of contributing risk factors. A critical issue is therefore to develop procedures that can identify and evaluate worst case risk conditions which may be input to risk level predictions. Therefore, this paper suggests a conceptual modelling procedure that is able to define appropriate worst case conditions in complex risk management. The result of the analysis is an assembly of system models, denoted the Worst Case Definition (WCD) model, to set up and evaluate the conditions of multi-dimensional risk identification and risk quantification. The model can help optimize risk assessment planning by initial screening level analyses and guiding quantitative assessment in relation to knowledge needs for better decision support concerning environmental and human health protection or risk reduction. The WCD model facilitates the evaluation of fundamental uncertainty using knowledge mapping principles and techniques in a way that can improve a complete uncertainty analysis. Ultimately, the WCD is applicable for describing risk contributing factors in relation to many different types of risk management problems since it transparently and effectively handles assumptions and definitions and allows the integration of different forms of knowledge, thereby supporting the inclusion of multifaceted risk components in cumulative risk management.}, number={18}, journal={Science of The Total Environment}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={Sørensen, Peter B. and Thomsen, Marianne and Assmuth, Timo and Grieger, Khara D. and Baun, Anders}, year={2010}, month={Aug}, pages={3852–3859} }
 @book{grieger_gundersen_2010, title={DTU Environment Green Account Report 2009}, institution={Department of Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Denmark}, author={Grieger, K. and Gundersen, A.T.}, year={2010} }
 @article{grieger_fjordbøge_hartmann_eriksson_bjerg_baun_2010, title={Environmental benefits and risks of zero-valent iron nanoparticles (nZVI) for in situ remediation: Risk mitigation or trade-off?}, volume={118}, ISSN={0169-7722}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2010.07.011}, DOI={10.1016/j.jconhyd.2010.07.011}, abstractNote={The use of nanoscaled zero-valent iron particles (nZVI) to remediate contaminated soil and groundwater has received increasing amounts of attention within the last decade, primarily due to its potential for broader application, higher reactivity, and cost-effectiveness compared to conventional zero-valent iron applications and other in situ methods. However, the potential environmental risks of nZVI in in situ field scale applications are largely unknown at the present and traditional environmental risk assessment approaches are not yet able to be completed. Therefore, it may not yet be fully clear how to consider the environmental benefits and risks of nZVI for in situ applications. This analysis therefore addresses the challenges of comprehensively considering and weighing the expected environmental benefits and potential risks of this emerging environmentally-beneficial nanotechnology, particularly relevant for environmental engineers, scientists, and decision makers. We find that most of the benefits of using nZVI are based on near-term considerations, and large data gaps currently exist within almost all aspects of environmental exposure and effect assessments. We also find that while a wide range of decision support tools and frameworks alternative to risk assessment are currently available, a thorough evaluation of these should be undertaken in the near future to assess their full relevancy for nZVI at specific sites. Due to the absence of data in environmental risk evaluations, we apply a 'best' and 'worst' case scenario evaluation as a first step to qualitatively evaluate the current state-of-knowledge regarding the potential environmental risks of nZVI. The result of this preliminary qualitative evaluation indicates that at present, there are no significant grounds on which to form the basis that nZVI currently poses a significant, apparent risk to the environment, although the majority of the most serious criteria (i.e. potential for persistency, bioaccumulation, toxicity) are generally unknown. We recommend that in cases where nZVI may be chosen as the 'best' treatment option, short and long-term environmental monitoring is actively employed at these sites. We furthermore recommend the continued development of responsible nZVI innovation and better facilitated information exchange between nZVI developers, nano-risk researchers, remediation industry, and decision makers.}, number={3-4}, journal={Journal of Contaminant Hydrology}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={Grieger, Khara D. and Fjordbøge, Annika and Hartmann, Nanna B. and Eriksson, Eva and Bjerg, Poul L. and Baun, Anders}, year={2010}, month={Nov}, pages={165–183} }
 @article{wickson_grieger_baun_2010, title={Nature and Nanotechnology: Science, Ideology and Policy}, volume={8}, number={1}, journal={International Journal of Emerging Technologies and Society}, author={Wickson, F. and Grieger, K. and Baun, A.}, year={2010}, pages={5–23} }
 @article{baun_hartmann_grieger_hansen_2010, title={Risikable nanomaterialer?- øget anvendelse af nanomaterialer sætter nye krav til riskovurdering}, volume={3}, journal={Aktuel Naturvidenskab}, author={Baun, A. and Hartmann, N.B. and Grieger, K. and Hansen, S.F.}, year={2010}, pages={30–32} }
 @phdthesis{grieger_2010, title={Understanding and assessing environmental risks of nanomaterials: Emerging tools for emerging risks}, school={Technical University of Denmark}, author={Grieger, K.}, year={2010} }
 @article{kristensen_vinding_grieger_hansen_2009, title={Adopting eco-innovation in Danish polymer industry working with nanotechnology: Drivers, barriers and future strategies}, volume={6}, number={3}, journal={Nanotechnology Law & Business}, author={Kristensen, J. and Vinding, K. and Grieger, K. and Hansen, S.F.}, year={2009}, pages={416–440} }
 @book{eilersen_gundersen_christensen_2009, place={Denmark}, title={DTU Environment Green Account Report 2008}, publisher={Technical University of Denmark, Kongens Lyngby}, author={Eilersen, A.M. and Gundersen, A.T. and Christensen, N.}, year={2009} }
 @misc{elder_lynch_grieger_chan-remillard_gatti_gnewuch_kenawy_korenstein_kuhlbusch_linker_et al._2009, title={Human Health Risks of Engineered Nanomaterials}, ISBN={9781402094903 9781402094910}, ISSN={1874-6519}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9491-0_1}, DOI={10.1007/978-1-4020-9491-0_1}, abstractNote={There are currently hundreds of available consumer products that contain nanoscale materials. Human exposure is, therefore, likely to occur in occupational and environmental settings. Mounting evidence suggests that some nanomaterials exert toxicity in cultured cells or following in vivo exposures, but this is dependent on the physicochemical characteristics of the materials and the dose. This Working Group report summarizes the discussions of an expert scientific panel regarding the gaps in knowledge that impede effective human health risk assessment for nanomaterials, particularly those that are suspended in a gas or liquid and, thus, deposit on skin or in the respiratory tract. In addition to extensive descriptions of material properties, the Group identified as critical research areas: external and internal dose characterization, mechanisms of response, identification of sensitive subpopulations, and the development of screening strategies and technology to support these investigations. Important concepts in defining health risk are reviewed, as are the specific kinds of studies that will quickly reduce the uncertainties in the risk assessment process.}, journal={Nanomaterials: Risks and Benefits}, publisher={Springer Netherlands}, author={Elder, A. and Lynch, I. and Grieger, K. and Chan-Remillard, S. and Gatti, A. and Gnewuch, H. and Kenawy, E. and Korenstein, R. and Kuhlbusch, T. and Linker, F. and et al.}, year={2009}, pages={3–29} }
 @inbook{hansen_grieger_baun_2009, title={Limitations of current regulation of nanomaterials}, booktitle={Governance of Nanotechnologies : Learning from Past Experiences with Risks and Innovative Technologies}, author={Hansen, S.F. and Grieger, K. and Baun, A.}, editor={Craye, M.Editor}, year={2009}, pages={54–58} }
 @inbook{grieger_hansen_baun_2009, title={Limitations of current risk assessment of nanomaterials and uncertainty analysis related to nanomaterials}, booktitle={Governance of Nanotechnologies : Learning from Past Experiences with Risks and Innovative Technologies}, author={Grieger, K. and Hansen, S.F. and Baun, A.}, editor={Craye, M.Editor}, year={2009}, pages={45–54} }
 @article{grieger_baun_owen_2009, title={Redefining risk research priorities for nanomaterials}, volume={12}, ISSN={1388-0764 1572-896X}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11051-009-9829-1}, DOI={10.1007/s11051-009-9829-1}, abstractNote={Chemical-based risk assessment underpins the current approach to responsible development of nanomaterials (NM). It is now recognised, however, that this process may take decades, leaving decision makers with little support in the near term. Despite this, current and near future research efforts are largely directed at establishing (eco)toxicological and exposure data for NM, and comparatively little research has been undertaken on tools or approaches that may facilitate near-term decisions, some of which we briefly outline in this analysis. We propose a reprioritisation of NM risk research efforts to redress this imbalance, including the development of more adaptive risk governance frameworks, alternative/complementary tools to risk assessment, and health and environment surveillance.}, number={2}, journal={Journal of Nanoparticle Research}, publisher={Springer Science and Business Media LLC}, author={Grieger, Khara D. and Baun, Anders and Owen, Richard}, year={2009}, month={Dec}, pages={383–392} }
 @article{baun_hartmann_grieger_hansen_2009, title={Risikovurdering i nano-dimensioner: Øget anvendelse af nanomaterialer sætter nye krav til riskovurdering}, volume={90}, number={3}, journal={Dansk Kemi}, author={Baun, A. and Hartmann, N.B. and Grieger, K. and Hansen, S.F.}, year={2009}, pages={14–16} }
 @article{baun_hartmann_grieger_hansen_2009, title={Setting the limits for engineered nanoparticles in European surface waters – are current approaches appropriate?}, volume={11}, ISSN={1464-0325 1464-0333}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/b909730a}, DOI={10.1039/b909730a}, abstractNote={The current widespread and diverse use of engineered nanoparticles (ENPs) in consumer products is expected to result in direct and indirect emissions to the aquatic environment. In Europe, the Water Framework Directive (WFD) is responsible for maintaining a good chemical and ecological status of surface waters. This review provides an insight to the likely scenarios if an engineered nanoparticle should be considered a "priority substance" in the WFD. Through a brief literature review of the aquatic toxicity of carbon- and metal-containing ENPs and in light of principles to establish environmental quality standards, we conclude that it is impossible to set limit values for ENPs in surface waters now and in the foreseeable future. This is due to the extensive lack of knowledge not only in relation to unknown toxic effects, degradability, and bioaccumulation of ENPs in the aquatic environment, but also due to the questionable validity of test systems and methods to establish environmental quality standards (EQS). From this, we also suggest some paths to follow to compensate for these knowledge gaps which include environmental monitoring and a closer look at the use of ENPs in consumer products.}, number={10}, journal={Journal of Environmental Monitoring}, publisher={Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)}, author={Baun, Anders and Hartmann, Nanna B. and Grieger, Khara D. and Hansen, Steffen Foss}, year={2009}, pages={1774} }
 @misc{owen_crane_grieger_handy_linkov_depledge_2009, title={Strategic Approaches for the Management of Environmental Risk Uncertainties Posed by Nanomaterials}, ISBN={9781402094903 9781402094910}, ISSN={1874-6519}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9491-0_29}, DOI={10.1007/978-1-4020-9491-0_29}, abstractNote={Central to the responsible development of nanotechnologies is an understanding of the risks they pose to the environment. As with any novel material or emerging technology, a scarcity of data introduces potentially high uncertainty in to the characterisation of risk. Early priorities are the identification of key areas of risk uncertainty and the strategic approach for managing and reducing these. This is important as the information subsequently gathered supports decision making and policy development. We identify one important source of uncertainty for the quantification of both hazard and exposure for nanomaterials, the complexity of their behaviour in natural systems. We then outline two approaches for managing this uncertainty, based on experiences with chemicals: one that primarily focuses on hazard and one that initially focuses on exposure. While each approach places emphasis on different information requirements a common feature is the considerable time lag between information gathering and subsequent decision making based on the evidence gathered. Complementary environmental surveillance approaches can act as a safety net, although it is not as yet clear how fit for purpose current monitoring programmes are in this regard.1}, journal={Nanomaterials: Risks and Benefits}, publisher={Springer Netherlands}, author={Owen, R. and Crane, M. and Grieger, K. and Handy, R. and Linkov, I. and Depledge, M.}, year={2009}, pages={369–384} }
 @article{grieger_hansen_baun_2009, title={The known unknowns of nanomaterials: Describing and characterizing uncertainty within environmental, health and safety risks}, volume={3}, ISSN={1743-5390 1743-5404}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17435390902944069}, DOI={10.1080/17435390902944069}, abstractNote={Various stakeholders have acknowledged that uncertainty within determining the potential environmental, health and safety (EHS) risks of nanomaterials (NM) may inhibit nanotechnology from reaching its full potential. A thorough description of such uncertainties is an imperative first step towards closing knowledge gaps and prioritizing research strategies. Through a qualitative uncertainty analysis which systematically screened 31 reports and articles published by leading scientists and authorities on the potential risks of NM, we found that knowledge gaps pervade nearly all aspects of basic EHS knowledge, with a well recognized need for improved testing procedures and equipment, human and environmental effect and exposure assessments and full characterization of NM. We also estimate the current level of knowledge to be at an early state of development, and further empirical research will most likely reduce most knowledge gaps. According to this analysis, research should be prioritized towards the assessment and development of test procedures and equipment and full characterization of NM in order to most effectively reduce uncertainties in the short term.}, number={3}, journal={Nanotoxicology}, publisher={Informa UK Limited}, author={Grieger, Khara D. and Hansen, Steffen F. and Baun, Anders}, year={2009}, month={Jan}, pages={222–233} }
 @article{baun_hartmann_grieger_kusk_2008, title={Ecotoxicity of engineered nanoparticles to aquatic invertebrates: a brief review and recommendations for future toxicity testing}, volume={17}, ISSN={0963-9292 1573-3017}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10646-008-0208-y}, DOI={10.1007/s10646-008-0208-y}, number={5}, journal={Ecotoxicology}, publisher={Springer Science and Business Media LLC}, author={Baun, A. and Hartmann, N. B. and Grieger, K. and Kusk, K. O.}, year={2008}, month={Apr}, pages={387–395} }
 @phdthesis{grieger_2006, title={Pesticide regulations in drinking water versus other beverages: A case of an unjustified discrepancy}, school={Department of Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Denmark}, author={Grieger, K.}, year={2006} }
 @book{grieger_murphy_2003, title={Spatial and temporal patterns in the spread of Austrian pine in four Lake Michigan sand dune habitats: Final report, including brochures, pamphlets, and public information booklets}, institution={State of Michigan, Department of Natural Resources}, author={Grieger, K. and Murphy, P.}, year={2003} }
 @phdthesis{grieger_2003, title={Spatial and temporal patterns of Pinus nigra (Austrian pine) spread in four Lake Michigan sand dune habitats}, school={Michigan State University}, author={Grieger, K.}, year={2003} }