Week 3-4, due Sept. 20 & 27 11:59pm The key aim of our Six Cities study is to understand different ways air pollution science (including studies of health impacts) has been developed and used in the different cities in our study. We thus need to understand who is producing the science, how they are producing the science (using what tools, data, methods, and through what kinds of collaborations) and how the science travels into policy, programs, the media, and public understanding. Toward this, we will begin to analyze scientific publications, government and NGO reports, and media to track science-to-policy/programming/education pathways. The 6 Cities Article Annotation Structure will help you read for this.
You will need to use judgment (and may need our help, especially at first) choosing sources to annotate. Try to find scientific publications or government reports that address your topic in your city. Archive publications and reports that you find on the wiki page for your city so that you have a stash to work with in later weeks. If you can’t find an article or report that is exactly on target, read and annotate pieces with proximate relevance. See notes on determining proximate relevance below.
You should be able to read and annotate most research articles or reports in under three hours. If you are working for one credit, this means you should annotate about one article or report each week.
The second assignment for this week is to read and comment on an organizational annotation done by another student working on your topic in another city. Use the comment function on each wiki page for this. First ask the author (of the annotation) for any needed clarification or elaboration, then try to draw out comparisons with your annotation on the topic. This exercise will improve the annotations, and will begin the process of developing comparative perspective. If your annotation is commented on, respond, also using the comment function on the page – noting if you have added to the main text.
Note on Determining Proximate Relevance This article isn’t about Beijing, for example, but should reveal something about who is producing air pollution science in China; it may also point to ways the science could or is being used.
Wang Shu, Zhang J, Zeng X, Zeng Y, Wang She. 2009. Association of Traffic-Related Air Pollution with Children’s Neurobehavioral Functions in Quanzhou, China. Environ Health Perspect 117:1612–1618; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.0800023
This article isn’t about Beijing specifically either, but will clearly help us understand a trend in environmental health education in China (even though the article is a bit dated). I also note (because I’ve been looking at this a long time) that Ken Olden is one of the authors; he is a very senior, well respected figure in the US environmental public health community, and former director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.
Ali R, Olden K, Xu S. 2008. Community-Based Participatory Research: A Vehicle to Promote Public Engagement for Environmental Health in China. Environ Health Perspect 116:1281–1284; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.11399
This article is of interest (even though it is about the Shanghai region rather than the Beijing region) because it involves use of an air quality modeling system (the CMAQ) system developed by the US EPA to study China, through a collaboration between US and Chinese researchers (and one of the researchers is at Harvard, so we may be able to interview him).
Ying Zhou1,2, Joshua S. Fu3, Guoshun Zhuang4, Jonathan I. Levy2 Risk-Based Prioritization among Air Pollution Control Strategies in the Yangtze River Delta, China Environ Health Perspect 118:1204-1210 (2010). http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1001991
The key aim of our Six Cities study is to understand different ways air pollution science (including studies of health impacts) has been developed and used in the different cities in our study. We thus need to understand who is producing the science, how they are producing the science (using what tools, data, methods, and through what kinds of collaborations) and how the science travels into policy, programs, the media, and public understanding. Toward this, we will begin to analyze scientific publications, government and NGO reports, and media to track science-to-policy/programming/education pathways. The 6 Cities Article Annotation Structure will help you read for this.
You will need to use judgment (and may need our help, especially at first) choosing sources to annotate. Try to find scientific publications or government reports that address your topic in your city. Archive publications and reports that you find on the wiki page for your city so that you have a stash to work with in later weeks. If you can’t find an article or report that is exactly on target, read and annotate pieces with proximate relevance. See notes on determining proximate relevance below.
You should be able to read and annotate most research articles or reports in under three hours. If you are working for one credit, this means you should annotate about one article or report each week.
The second assignment for this week is to read and comment on an organizational annotation done by another student working on your topic in another city. Use the comment function on each wiki page for this. First ask the author (of the annotation) for any needed clarification or elaboration, then try to draw out comparisons with your annotation on the topic. This exercise will improve the annotations, and will begin the process of developing comparative perspective. If your annotation is commented on, respond, also using the comment function on the page – noting if you have added to the main text.
Note on Determining Proximate Relevance
This article isn’t about Beijing, for example, but should reveal something about who is producing air pollution science in China; it may also point to ways the science could or is being used.
Wang Shu, Zhang J, Zeng X, Zeng Y, Wang She. 2009. Association of Traffic-Related Air Pollution with Children’s Neurobehavioral Functions in Quanzhou, China. Environ Health Perspect 117:1612–1618; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.0800023
This article isn’t about Beijing specifically either, but will clearly help us understand a trend in environmental health education in China (even though the article is a bit dated). I also note (because I’ve been looking at this a long time) that Ken Olden is one of the authors; he is a very senior, well respected figure in the US environmental public health community, and former director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.
Ali R, Olden K, Xu S. 2008. Community-Based Participatory Research: A Vehicle to Promote Public Engagement for Environmental Health in China. Environ Health Perspect 116:1281–1284; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.11399
This article is of interest (even though it is about the Shanghai region rather than the Beijing region) because it involves use of an air quality modeling system (the CMAQ) system developed by the US EPA to study China, through a collaboration between US and Chinese researchers (and one of the researchers is at Harvard, so we may be able to interview him).
Ying Zhou1,2, Joshua S. Fu3, Guoshun Zhuang4, Jonathan I. Levy2 Risk-Based Prioritization among Air Pollution Control Strategies in the Yangtze River Delta, China Environ Health Perspect 118:1204-1210 (2010). http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1001991