Skip to main content

Molecular tools for bathing water assessment in Europe: Balancing social science research with a rapidly developing environmental science evidence-base

Oliver, David M, Hanley, Nick D, van Niekerk, Melanie, Kay, David, Heathwaite, A Louise, Rabinovici, Sharyl J M, Kinzelman, Julie L, Fleming, Lora E, Porter, Jonathan, Shaikh, Sabina, and others. (2015) Molecular tools for bathing water assessment in Europe: Balancing social science research with a rapidly developing environmental science evidence-base. Ambio: a journal of the human environment, 45 (1). pp. 52-62. ISSN 0044-7447. E-ISSN 1654-7209. (doi:10.1007/s13280-015-0698-9)

This is the latest version of this item.

Abstract

The use of molecular tools, principally qPCR, versus traditional culture-based methods for quantifying microbial parameters (e.g., Fecal Indicator Organisms) in bathing waters generates considerable ongoing debate at the science-policy interface. Advances in science have allowed the development and application of molecular biological methods for rapid (~2 h) quantification of microbial pollution in bathing and recreational waters. In contrast, culture-based methods can take between 18 and 96 h for sample processing. Thus, molecular tools offer an opportunity to provide a more meaningful statement of microbial risk to water-users by providing near-real-time information enabling potentially more informed decision-making with regard to water-based activities. However, complementary studies concerning the potential costs and benefits of adopting rapid methods as a regulatory tool are in short supply. We report on findings from an international Working Group that examined the breadth of social impacts, challenges, and research opportunities associated with the application of molecular tools to bathing water regulations.

Item Type: Article
DOI/Identification number: 10.1007/s13280-015-0698-9
Uncontrolled keywords: Bathing Water Directive; Fecal indicator organism; Microbial pollution; Public perception; Recreational water quality; Risk communication
Subjects: G Geography. Anthropology. Recreation > GE Environmental Sciences
S Agriculture
Divisions: Faculties > Social Sciences > School of Anthropology and Conservation
Depositing User: Robert Fish
Date Deposited: 30 Aug 2016 11:23 UTC
Last Modified: 29 May 2019 17:45 UTC
Resource URI: https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/57017 (The current URI for this page, for reference purposes)
Fish, R: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7198-0403

Available versions of this item

  • Depositors only (login required):

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year