Uppföljning av efterbehandlingsåtgärder : Undersökning av hur nyckeltal i statliga åtgärdsprojekt kan användas för att följa upp och hantera riskreduktion

Sammanfattning: After remediation of contaminated sites, a follow-up should be done including an assessment of risk reduction. For remediation projects financed by governmental grant, indicators are required which will provide follow-up data. This study examines how the indicators can be used to follow-up and handle risk reduction regarding health and/or the environment, where both short- and long-term perspectives are considered. Furthermore, the study examines how the indicators can be used regarding a national viewpoint and if there is a need to adjust the requirements of the indicators. The study was limited to remediation projects financed by governmental grant to carry out a comparable evaluation. Indictors from 69 projects have been collected, of which 67 have been compiled at a project level. A compilation of, among other things, pollution amounts has also been done for a national perspective. Several of the indicators can be used to assess risk reduction, however, quantitative data are lacking for many of the projects. Furthermore, it is difficult to assess the risk reduction without knowledge of remediation goals and in some cases qualitative data. From the data that has been evaluated, it seems that the projects at a national level generally maintain a high level of ambition with a high degree of risk reduction. For example an average reduction in the amount of pollution of 85% in 31 of 67 projects and an average reduction in the spread of 86.5% in 8 of 67 projects were obtained for the primarily pollution. However, it can be discussed whether it is representative with so few projects for evaluation at the national level. To be improved, the indicators should be reviewed regarding risk reduction. Additions are proposed to improve the possibility to assess risk reduction in both short and long term, and indicators related to, for example, exposure and ecological parameters can be added to obtain more project specific indicators. However, this means requirements for sampling and the risk assessment already before the remediation. Furthermore, it may be necessary to adjust the indicators to suit more remediation methods. Among other things, there is reason to review the assessment of risk reduction regarding methods relating to water. The results also indicate that other factors such as quality assurance, how follow-up takes place regarding data processing and how sampling is carried out should be reviewed for the key figures to be filled in adequately. The study is limited as not all reported projects have been included due to delimitation. To obtain a more complete evaluation, it is recommended that all projects should be included in a future study. The possibility of including privately financed projects should also be reviewed to get a better picture of how successful the remediation work is at national level.