Where do the authors work, and what are their areas of expertise? Note any other publications by the authors with relevance to the 6Cities project.
What are the main findings or arguments presented in the article or report?
Describe at least three ways that the argument is supported.
What three (or more) quotes capture the message of the article or report?
What were the methods, tools and/or data used to produce the claims or arguments made in the article or report?
How (if at all) are health disparities or other equity issues addressed in the article or report?
Where has this article or report been referenced or discussed? (In some journals, you can see this in a sidebar.)
Can you learn anything from the article or report’s bibliography that tells us something about how the article or report was produced?
What three points, details or references from the text did you follow up on to advance your understanding of how air pollution science has been produced and used in governance and education in different settings?
addendum Does the article provide information or perspective on any of the thematics already identified as important for the 6Cities project?
(Our list of thematics will be continually updated here). As of 23 Oct 2013:
The tools, methods and findings of air pollution research travel broadly, forming an international community that may be consolidating into an “epistemic community” (Hass 1990).
Open data initiatives are enabling air pollution research and action.
Scientific capacity to link air pollution to health impacts has grown dramatically in recent years, although much of this research has yet to be translated into policy.
Increasingly, researchers themselves are calling for specific policies and interventions.
Scientific capacity to link air pollution to economic impacts has also grown dramatically.
A notable group of environmental health researchers and advocates now argue for making air pollution knowledge more actionable by tightening its resolution, leveraging diverse data types (potentially including citizen science) and new capacity in data analytics.
Across sites, there is growing recognition of a need to improve understanding of air pollution, health impacts, and mitigation opportunities at the neighborhood level.
There continues to be considerable distance between air quality sciences and health sciences, and between government agencies responsible for environment, health, transportation, education, and other elements of the air pollution calculus. Stakeholders often refer to the problem as one of “stove-pipes” and “research silos.”
There is a growing need for capacity to characterize pollutants from distant (sometimes international) sources; enhanced capacity for this will in turn create complex transboundary governance challenges.
Air pollution has been at the center of increasing NGO activities in many contexts, with NGOs playing increasingly significant roles in governance (Francesch-Huidobro 2007; Mai and Francesch-Huidobro 2014).
Confidence in capacity to decrease air pollution and associated health impacts varies across settings.
Ports have become important sites of air pollution monitoring, modelling, and mitigation, but present particular challenges.
There have been important developments in capacity to share air quality information.
addendum
Does the article provide information or perspective on any of the thematics already identified as important for the 6Cities project?
(Our list of thematics will be continually updated here). As of 23 Oct 2013: