Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 265

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 94 of the 94 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Bayesian Networks in Environmental Risk Assessment: A Review

Open access
Kaikkonen, Laura, Parviainen, Tuuli, Rahikainen, Mika, Uusitalo, Laura, Lehikoinen, Annukka·2020·Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management

Abstract

Human activities both depend upon and have consequences on the environment. Environmental risk assessment (ERA) is a process of estimating the probability and consequences of the adverse effects of human activities and other stressors on the environment. Bayesian networks (BNs) can synthesize different types of knowledge and explicitly account for the probabilities of different scenarios, therefore offering a useful tool for ERA. Their use in formal ERA practice has not been evaluated, however, despite their increasing popularity in environmental modeling. This paper reviews the use of BNs in ERA based on peer-reviewed publications. Following a systematic mapping protocol, we identified studies in which BNs have been used in an environmental risk context and evaluated the scope, technical aspects, and use of the models and their results. The review shows that BNs have been applied in ERA, particularly in recent years, and that there is room to develop both the model implementation and participatory modeling practices. Based on this review and the authors’ experience, we outline general guidelines and development ideas for using BNs in ERA. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2021;17:62–78. © 2020 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC) KEY POINTS This paper reviews the use of Bayesian Networks in Environmental Risk Assessments (ERA) based on peer-reviewed publications. The review shows that BNs have been applied in ERA particularly in recent years and that there is room to develop both the model implementation and participatory modeling practices. Based on this review and the authors' experience, we outline general guidelines and development ideas for using BNs in ERA.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ieam.4332

Cites

94 of 94 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 94 references

Metadata

Authors
Kaikkonen, L., Parviainen, T., Rahikainen, M., Uusitalo, L., & Lehikoinen, A.
Venue
Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management
Published
2020-08-01
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
62-78
ISSN
  • 1551-3777 (ISSN-L)
  • 1551-3793
OpenAlex
W3080654259
Cited by
265
References
94
FWCI
17.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Bayesian Networks in Environmental Risk Assessment: A Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/ieam.4332
The paper
Kaikkonen, L., Parviainen, T., Rahikainen, M., Uusitalo, L., & Lehikoinen, A. (2020). Bayesian Networks in Environmental Risk Assessment: A Review. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management. https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.4332

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.