From data to decisions – Quality assurance in radon policy

  • Peter Bossew German Federal Office for Radiation Protection, Berlin, Germany
  • Eric Petermann German Federal Office for Radiation Protection, Berlin, Germany
Keywords: Radon policy, quality assurance, decision making, stakeholder interests


Radon abatement policy is the response to the detrimental effect of indoor radon which is estimated to cause hundred thousands of lung cancer fatalities worldwide annually. The policy consists of decisions to implement measures. Decisions rest on data and (sometimes competing) interests, among them health protection. Its weight as an argument depends, among other factors, on knowledge about its subject – in this case, levels, effects, and geographical distribution of exposure to radon. Therefore, the quality assurance of radon policy depends on one of the underlying knowledge, from data to decisions derived from them. Some aspects of the quality assurance chain are discussed in this article.


Download data is not yet available.


  1. Zeeb H, Shannoun F, eds. WHO handbook on indoor radon: A public health perspective. 2009. Available from: [cited 21 June 2021].

  2. European Commission (EC). Council Directive 2013/59/Euratom of 5 December 2013 laying down basic safety standards for protection against the dangers arising from exposure to ionising radiation, etc. Official Journal of the European Union 2014; 57(L13): 1–73. Available from: [cited 21 June 2021].

  3. MetroRADON. Available from: [cited 21 June 2021].

  4. Guo, K L (2008) DECIDE. The Health Care Manager, 27(2), 118–127. doi: 10.1097/01.hcm.0000285046.27290.90; (accessed 20 June 2021)

  5. Deleuze G, Guattari F. Capitalisme et Schizophrénie 2 – Mille Plateaux. Paris: Minuit; 1980. ISBN 978-2707303073. Available from: [cited 10 March 2022]

  6. Friedmann H. Final results of the Austrian radon project. Health Phys 2005; 89(4): 339–48. doi: 10.1097/01.hp.0000167228.18113.27

  7. Cinelli G, Bochicchio F, Bossew P, Carpentieri C, De Cort M, Gruber V, et al. Similarities and differences between radon surveys across Europe: Results from MetroRADON questionnaire. JERA 2021. Journal of the European Radon Association 2022, 3: 7605. doi: 10.35815/radon.v3.7605

  8. European Commission (EC), Joint Research Centre, Cinelli G, De Cort M, Tollefsen T, eds. European atlas of natural radiation. Luxembourg: Publication Office of the European Union; 2019. Printed version: ISBN 978-92-76-08259-0. doi: 10.2760/520053; Catalogue number KJ-02-19-425-EN-C; Online version: ISBN 978-92-76-08258-3; doi: 10.2760/46388; Catalogue number KJ-02-19-425-EN-N. Available from: [cited 24 June 2021].

  9. Fisher P. (2008) Uncertainty, Semantic. In: Shekhar S., Xiong H. (eds) Encyclopedia of GIS. Springer, Boston, MA. doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-35973-1_1425

  10. Fox S. Ontological uncertainty and semantic uncertainty in global network organizations. 2008. Available from: [cited 22 June 2021].

  11. Bossew P, Čeliković I, Cinelli G, Ciotoli GC, Domingos F, Gruber V, et al. On harmonization of radon maps. JERA 2021. Journal of the European Radon Association 2022, 3: 7554. doi: 10.35815/radon.v3.7554.

  12. Gray A, Read S, McGale P, Darby S. Lung cancer deaths from indoor radon and the cost effectiveness and potential of policies to reduce them. BMJ 2009; 338: a3110. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a3110

How to Cite
Bossew P., & Petermann E. (2022). From data to decisions – Quality assurance in radon policy. Journal of the European Radon Association, 3.
Original Research Articles