http://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=Ehab+Mustafa&feedformat=atomOpasnet - User contributions [en]2024-03-29T00:31:30ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.29.1http://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=41001User:Ehab Mustafa2017-06-12T00:39:22Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Task B: Evaluation of benefit-risk assessment of cinnamon */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 2''' =<br />
<br />
==Using templates==<br />
<br />
This is Just a demonstration of dealing with templates on opasnet. {{Urgenche}}<br />
<br />
==t2b table and Opasnet Base Uploader==<br />
<br />
This is just a demonstration of using this skill on opasnet environment<br />
<br />
<t2b index="Month,Year" unit="Finnish Metrology" obs="Average Temperature"><br />
June|2001|22<br />
June|2007|19<br />
June|2010|17<br />
June|2016|20<br />
</t2b><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Rotterdam and Dutch government.<br />
<br />
:::{{attack|# |This must be a typo, as you are looking at Rotterdam.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
::::{{defend|# |Mistake was revealed and corrected|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 06:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
:{{comment|# |The word 'structurally' is a bit ambiguous here. Does that mean city structure (urban planning) or administrative structures and policy processes? In addition, you mention uncertainties but you do not define how those should be taken into account. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 8''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 9''' =<br />
<br />
==Task A: Evaluation of [[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 4|assessment draft]] by Tine and Tamara==<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || The draft assessment is meant for evaluate the adaptation strategies to climate change in Singapore. Clear and specific questions about the reliability and sufficiency of the indented actions planned for in Singapore's climate change adaptation strategy.<br />
|----<br />
| Causes || Importance for assessing the adaptation strategy raised from the seriousness of the possible impacts brought by climate change in Singapore. This includes Sea level elevation and its impact on Singapore's urban sustainability, increase in rainfall and thread of flooding, and temperature elevation and its impact on public health and energy demand.<br />
|----<br />
| Problem Owner || It was stated that the borders of Singapore are the boundaries of the assessment, so it could be considered that the problem owner are the entire population of Singapore.<br />
|----<br />
| Target || The assessment is especially useful for decision makers, who can use the information derived from this assessment for further development, improvement and implementation of climate change adaptation strategies.<br />
|----<br />
| Interaction || The participant of the assessment were identified (see scope of participation below). However, the way how they could interact was lacking.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Government of Singapore, Citizens of Singapore, and Different working groups.<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| The way and extent how different participants could contribute in the assessment were not well stated.<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| The number of stated participants in the assessment was overwhelming and the background where they come from was diverse. This properly might lead to a comprehensive assessment of good quality.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, correctness of information.<br />
| 4<br />
| The aim of the assessment was clear and the offered information was varied by the solely used reference.<br />
|-----<br />
| rowspan="4"| ''Applicability''<br />
| ''Relevance'': Correspondence between output and its intended use<br />
|1<br />
| Results of the assessment are poorly stated in its right place under the subtitle '''Results'''. They rather briefly mentioned under '''Decisions and scenarios''' section.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Availability'': Accessibility of the output to users<br />
| 4<br />
| It seems that the results and outcomes of the assessment are available to everyone not exclusive to a specific group of the participants.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Usability'': Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s)<br />
| 4<br />
| Taking into account the overwhelming number of the participant, the assessment sounds to be comprehensive and potential to generate useful information to everyone.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Acceptability'': Potential of the output being accepted by its users.<br />
| 5<br />
| The output should be accepted by the users when the broad scope of the participation is considered.<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Efficiency'': Resource expenditure for assessment<br />
|1<br />
| The cost is seems to very high when considering all those participants to be brought on one table for performing the assessment.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
'''Suggestions for improving the quality of the assessment:'''<br />
The assessment did not provide answers to the questions stated in the begging's of the assessment. It would be beneficial to provide a clear set of answers for those in one distinctive section.<br />
<br />
==Task B: Evaluation of [http://opasnet.org/w/Benefit-risk_assessment_of_cinnamon benefit-risk assessment of cinnamon]==<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || This draft Assessment Report is published to support the release for public consultation of the draft Community herbal monograph on Cinnamomum verum J. S. Presl, cortex and corticis aetheroleum. <br />
|-----<br />
| Causes || Inconsistency in the market authorization of cinnamon and its product in different state in the EU.<br />
|-----<br />
| Problem owner || Pharmaceutical firms, medical agencies, health authorities and final consumers<br />
|-----<br />
|Target || The publication of this draft assessment report has been agreed to facilitate the understanding by Interested Parties of the assessment that has been carried out so far and led to the preparation of the draft monograph.<br />
|-----<br />
| Interaction || The assessment was based on collaboration using a wide variety of peer-reviewed clinical and non-clinical data that has been produced in different academic and scientific institutes.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products (HMPC) is the main entity in performing the assessment<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| The assessment is mainly based on scientific literature that was published in accessible journals<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| The access for sources of scientific information used in the assessment is valid as long as the publishing journals exist<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| The assessing entity "Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products" should is supposed to consist of scientist from different backgrounds covering the topic from every possible view<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of participation<br />
| The diversity of the committee guaranteed a comprehensive assessment of a good quality<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, corectnss of information.<br />
| 5<br />
| The purpose of the assessment was well stated. Peer-reviewing of the used scientific data guaranteed its reliability.<br />
|-----<br />
| rowspan="4"| ''Applicability''<br />
| ''Relevance'': Correspondence between output and its intended use<br />
| 3<br />
| The implementation of the assessment outcomes was not identifies. However, the quality of the assessment content makes it helpful in different ways<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Availability'': Accessibility of the output to users<br />
| 5<br />
| The assessment conclusions were well identified in the report of the assessment. The assessment report is freely available on the internet.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Usability'': Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s)<br />
| 5<br />
| The content and conclusions of the assessment are reliable and easy to understand. They would be helpful for different stallholders in the terms of being used.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Acceptability'': Potential of the output being accepted by its users<br />
| 3<br />
| The assessment is generally considered as acceptable. However, a question marks is still raised about the participation of pharmaceutical firms and other business corporation in the assessing committee.<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Efficiency'': Resource expenditure for assessment<br />
| 3<br />
| Thought there was available information on resources expenditure in the report of the assessment, it seems that bringing expertise in the assessing would be of a considerable cost.<br />
|}</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=41000User:Ehab Mustafa2017-06-12T00:38:56Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Task A: Evaluation of assessment draft by Tine and Tamara */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 2''' =<br />
<br />
==Using templates==<br />
<br />
This is Just a demonstration of dealing with templates on opasnet. {{Urgenche}}<br />
<br />
==t2b table and Opasnet Base Uploader==<br />
<br />
This is just a demonstration of using this skill on opasnet environment<br />
<br />
<t2b index="Month,Year" unit="Finnish Metrology" obs="Average Temperature"><br />
June|2001|22<br />
June|2007|19<br />
June|2010|17<br />
June|2016|20<br />
</t2b><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Rotterdam and Dutch government.<br />
<br />
:::{{attack|# |This must be a typo, as you are looking at Rotterdam.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
::::{{defend|# |Mistake was revealed and corrected|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 06:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
:{{comment|# |The word 'structurally' is a bit ambiguous here. Does that mean city structure (urban planning) or administrative structures and policy processes? In addition, you mention uncertainties but you do not define how those should be taken into account. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 8''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 9''' =<br />
<br />
==Task A: Evaluation of [[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 4|assessment draft]] by Tine and Tamara==<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || The draft assessment is meant for evaluate the adaptation strategies to climate change in Singapore. Clear and specific questions about the reliability and sufficiency of the indented actions planned for in Singapore's climate change adaptation strategy.<br />
|----<br />
| Causes || Importance for assessing the adaptation strategy raised from the seriousness of the possible impacts brought by climate change in Singapore. This includes Sea level elevation and its impact on Singapore's urban sustainability, increase in rainfall and thread of flooding, and temperature elevation and its impact on public health and energy demand.<br />
|----<br />
| Problem Owner || It was stated that the borders of Singapore are the boundaries of the assessment, so it could be considered that the problem owner are the entire population of Singapore.<br />
|----<br />
| Target || The assessment is especially useful for decision makers, who can use the information derived from this assessment for further development, improvement and implementation of climate change adaptation strategies.<br />
|----<br />
| Interaction || The participant of the assessment were identified (see scope of participation below). However, the way how they could interact was lacking.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Government of Singapore, Citizens of Singapore, and Different working groups.<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| The way and extent how different participants could contribute in the assessment were not well stated.<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| The number of stated participants in the assessment was overwhelming and the background where they come from was diverse. This properly might lead to a comprehensive assessment of good quality.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, correctness of information.<br />
| 4<br />
| The aim of the assessment was clear and the offered information was varied by the solely used reference.<br />
|-----<br />
| rowspan="4"| ''Applicability''<br />
| ''Relevance'': Correspondence between output and its intended use<br />
|1<br />
| Results of the assessment are poorly stated in its right place under the subtitle '''Results'''. They rather briefly mentioned under '''Decisions and scenarios''' section.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Availability'': Accessibility of the output to users<br />
| 4<br />
| It seems that the results and outcomes of the assessment are available to everyone not exclusive to a specific group of the participants.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Usability'': Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s)<br />
| 4<br />
| Taking into account the overwhelming number of the participant, the assessment sounds to be comprehensive and potential to generate useful information to everyone.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Acceptability'': Potential of the output being accepted by its users.<br />
| 5<br />
| The output should be accepted by the users when the broad scope of the participation is considered.<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Efficiency'': Resource expenditure for assessment<br />
|1<br />
| The cost is seems to very high when considering all those participants to be brought on one table for performing the assessment.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
'''Suggestions for improving the quality of the assessment:'''<br />
The assessment did not provide answers to the questions stated in the begging's of the assessment. It would be beneficial to provide a clear set of answers for those in one distinctive section.<br />
<br />
=='''Task B: Evaluation of [http://opasnet.org/w/Benefit-risk_assessment_of_cinnamon benefit-risk assessment of cinnamon''']==<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || This draft Assessment Report is published to support the release for public consultation of the draft Community herbal monograph on Cinnamomum verum J. S. Presl, cortex and corticis aetheroleum. <br />
|-----<br />
| Causes || Inconsistency in the market authorization of cinnamon and its product in different state in the EU.<br />
|-----<br />
| Problem owner || Pharmaceutical firms, medical agencies, health authorities and final consumers<br />
|-----<br />
|Target || The publication of this draft assessment report has been agreed to facilitate the understanding by Interested Parties of the assessment that has been carried out so far and led to the preparation of the draft monograph.<br />
|-----<br />
| Interaction || The assessment was based on collaboration using a wide variety of peer-reviewed clinical and non-clinical data that has been produced in different academic and scientific institutes.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products (HMPC) is the main entity in performing the assessment<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| The assessment is mainly based on scientific literature that was published in accessible journals<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| The access for sources of scientific information used in the assessment is valid as long as the publishing journals exist<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| The assessing entity "Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products" should is supposed to consist of scientist from different backgrounds covering the topic from every possible view<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of participation<br />
| The diversity of the committee guaranteed a comprehensive assessment of a good quality<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, corectnss of information.<br />
| 5<br />
| The purpose of the assessment was well stated. Peer-reviewing of the used scientific data guaranteed its reliability.<br />
|-----<br />
| rowspan="4"| ''Applicability''<br />
| ''Relevance'': Correspondence between output and its intended use<br />
| 3<br />
| The implementation of the assessment outcomes was not identifies. However, the quality of the assessment content makes it helpful in different ways<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Availability'': Accessibility of the output to users<br />
| 5<br />
| The assessment conclusions were well identified in the report of the assessment. The assessment report is freely available on the internet.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Usability'': Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s)<br />
| 5<br />
| The content and conclusions of the assessment are reliable and easy to understand. They would be helpful for different stallholders in the terms of being used.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Acceptability'': Potential of the output being accepted by its users<br />
| 3<br />
| The assessment is generally considered as acceptable. However, a question marks is still raised about the participation of pharmaceutical firms and other business corporation in the assessing committee.<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Efficiency'': Resource expenditure for assessment<br />
| 3<br />
| Thought there was available information on resources expenditure in the report of the assessment, it seems that bringing expertise in the assessing would be of a considerable cost.<br />
|}</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=Congestion_charge&diff=40999Congestion charge2017-06-12T00:36:36Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Question */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Category:Traffic]]<br />
[[Category:Climate change]]<br />
{{assessment|moderator=Jouni|status=ongoing}}<br />
<br />
== Question ==<br />
<br />
What reasons are there for implementing or not implementing a congestion charging system in a city? What values and combinations of values result in which combination?<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
* The questions are generic, but we aim to look at the issue also specifically in Helsinki.<br />
* We look at the current situation.<br />
<br />
===Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
* {{comment|# |Who could use this information and how? Fill in your thoughts.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 11:36, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
{{comment|# |The assessment would help the authorities in Helsinki city to decide about the implementation of congestion charge policy|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 00:31, 12 June 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
* Students on the course [[Decision analysis and risk management 2017]].<br />
* Participation happens on this page (including the related talk page) and also on [https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B5dY4ezoJ5FOWFdnT2NoS0tfa28 Google Drive], which contains three things:<br />
*# Real-time online editor for the three tables for [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EuSt-YonlHQyNELCAftSiZ72jAsPKhw5q5MqQhbY10/edit Items, Relations, and Evaluations].<br />
*# Real-time online editor for the [https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/18PJNYL91_xAgygDKuITptISnUFMWh3K5SUtxqn0w0y0/edit causal diagram] below.<br />
*# Real-time online chat that happens on a [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Jk3jK27MwHJesXMwdHwan9i5WwTF--hB4ekxwqau9U0/edit# Google Document].<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
<br />
{{comment|# |What options do exist? Fill in your thoughts.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 11:36, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{comment|# |Definitely, more intensive studies by expertise will be required before taking a final decision |--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 00:36, 12 June 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
<br />
The assessment will be performed during April-May 2017.<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
In order to reach the sustainable mode of transport, road charges can be used. They can smoothen the trip and transport chain, control the congestion, make the transport system conveniently accessible and enhance the competitiveness of public transport.<br />
The road charges can take part in a compact urban structure of the core area, the rail corridors and the centers of the municipality.<br />
<br />
Road charges will cause costs but their costs are relatively low in comparison to the costs that congestions will cause in the lack of these constructions for the road users.<br />
<br />
In order for the road charges to be effective, new legislations that give permission for them to be constructed is required to be implemented. Fixed-term experimental legislations can be an alternative for this administration.<br />
<br />
Costs are really important in this case. Therefore the revenue of the road charge needs to be spent for the area in which the road charge is implemented. It should be considered that the funding for the area stated by the state or municipality is not influenced negatively because of the existence of the road charge.<br />
<br />
The transport system and the urban structure have to be optimized effectively in terms of socio-economic aspects that can be somehow tackled through the costs. <br />
Pressure can be caused in the planning since the road charges cause a high financial burden for some individuals that will lead to modification in their travel habits. <br />
<br />
Road charges enhance the city centre's’ role as service, employment and commercial hub. However, the attractiveness of the zone between the rings for commercial uses will decrease. <br />
<br />
Minimization of negative externalities of traffic demand on road network.<br />
<br />
*Road pricing (key economic tools)<br />
*Profit target (pricing model)<br />
*Improvement of traffic network system, minimum environmental impact,<br />
*Definition of congestion is decreasing transporters natural speed.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
<br />
[[File:Congestion charge causal diagram.png|400px|thumb|The causal diagram is based on this [https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/18PJNYL91_xAgygDKuITptISnUFMWh3K5SUtxqn0w0y0/edit Google drawing], which should be updated and uploaded to Opasnet from time to time.]]<br />
<br />
These tables are being written to Google Sheet (for easier user interface) and copied here from time to time. See [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EuSt-YonlHQyNELCAftSiZ72jAsPKhw5q5MqQhbY10/edit#gid=0 Google Sheets].<br />
<br />
==== Items ====<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Contents of Items table<br />
|----<br />
! Column|| Explanation<br />
|----<br />
|| ID|| Unique identifier of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Name|| A short descriptive name for this row. Used when making a reference to this row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Timestamp|| Time when the row was added.<br />
|----<br />
|| User|| Who added the row (first name)<br />
|----<br />
|| Type|| It the item a factual statement (fact) or value statement (value); or decision, action or variable?<br />
|----<br />
|| Description|| Verbal description of the content of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<t2b name="Items" index="ID,Name,Timestamp,User,Type" obs="Description" unit="-"><br />
I1| Air Quality|20.5.17 0:00|edem|fact|congestion charge affect air quality<br />
I2| Health|15.5.17 0:00|edem|fact|Congestion charge scheme will improve the populations’ health<br />
I3|Choices|15.5.17 0:00|edem|value|Congestion charge scheme constrains individual choice and behavior.<br />
I4| Roads usage|15.5.17 0:00|edem|value|The economic viability of tariffs and transformation of urban space will encourage more use of roads and cars.<br />
I5| Capital growth in |29.4.17 1:07|edem|value|congestion charge schemes can restrict urban mobility and human capital growth.<br />
I6|Toxicity charge unfair|15.5.17 0:00|edem|value|Toxicity charge as a form of congestion charge is unfair to old car users<br />
I7|Prevent misuse of shared resource|15.5.17 0:00|edem|value|congestion charge prevents the occurrence of misuse use of shared resource <br />
I8|economic|15.5.17 0:00|kaisu|value|financially cost-saving <br />
I9|effect on traffic|15.5.17 0:00|kaisu|fact|changes the traffic flow both in terms of space and time<br />
I10|Congestion charge need to be dynamics|15.5.17 0:00|Tamara|value|To ensure air quality standards, the congestion charge scheme needs to be dynamic<br />
I11|Choose CC system: none, VE1, VE3|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|decision|Decision for the city council to make: to choose one congestion charge policy or none.<br />
I12|Investment and implementation costs|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Costs occurring from the investment and operation (on annual basis) of the congestion charge system<br />
I13|Number of cars during rush hours|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Number of cars during rush hours on important busy streets (answer to this variable can most easily be described as a map with congestion situation on different streets)<br />
I14|Tax revenue|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Amount of taxes collected from the congestion charge system<br />
I15|People's values|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|indicator|People's values and attitudes about congestion charge, freedom to drive etc.<br />
I16|People's behaviour|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|decision|Actions that people take based on their values, economic incentives, and practicalities<br />
I17|Transport mode distribution (car, bus, bike, walk)|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Numbers of people in different traffic modes in Helsinki (especially during rush hour)<br />
I18|Reachability of downtown and suburban areas|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|How accessible different places in the city are, in respect of time or money needed to go there, or their attractiveness<br />
I19|Active transport (physical exercise)|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Amount of physical exercise that people do to reach the places where they are going rather than because of training (also known as active transport)<br />
I20|Air pollution and CO2 emissions|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Emissions that occur from the traffic (specified spatially and temporally, because rush hour emissions expose more people than otherwise)<br />
I21|Climate and health impacts|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|indicator|A summary indicator of climate and health impacts of congestion charge policies<br />
I22|Economic impacts|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|indicator|A summary indicator of economic impacts for different stakeholders (citizens, car drivers, overall societal impacts, companies in downtown or suburban areas)<br />
I23|Need-based pricing model|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|value|Pricing modeling strategy based on planned profit target should be avoided in this case.<br />
I24|Urban structure|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Tariffication of urban space will contribute to physically dissect Helsinki into price zones<br />
I25|Social modification|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|value|Social space should be a citizen entitlement<br />
I26|Segment-based toll gate strategy|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|value|Utilise toll gate strategies based on segments<br />
I27|Pilot driver behavior|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|value|Drivers to behavioral shift should be weighed before piloting (using heuristic analysis based on nudge theory)<br />
I28|Social activities should be planned|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|value|Social activities and commercial accessibility should be planned before implementation so smart solutions won't create a constraint<br />
</t2b><br />
<br />
==== Relations ====<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Contents of Relations table<br />
|----<br />
! Column|| Explanation<br />
|----<br />
|| ID|| Unique identifier of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Name|| A short descriptive name for this row. Used when making a reference to this row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Timestamp|| Time when the row was added.<br />
|----<br />
|| User|| Who added the row (first name)<br />
|----<br />
|| Subject|| Name or identifier of the thing we are talking about<br />
|----<br />
|| Predicate|| Predicate of a sentence (i.e. a verb describing a relation). For list of relations, see [[Structure of shared understanding]]<br />
|----<br />
|| Object|| Name or identifier of a thing, or number (see above)<br />
|----<br />
|| Description|| Verbal description of the content of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<t2b name="Relations" index="ID,Name,Timestamp,User,Subject,Predicate,Object" obs="Description" unit="-"><br />
R1||15.5.17 12:00|ehab|decrease in 10 % PM emission|affect|Improvement of Air Quality|<br />
R2| Health|15.5.17 0:00|tamara|reduction in road accident|supports|Improvement of Health|<br />
R3|Choices|15.5.17 0:00|Amr|improvement in public transport patronage|supports|Affect Choices|<br />
R4|Roads usage|15.5.17 0:00|Tine||against|Encouragement of Roads usage|<br />
R5|Capital growth|15.5.17 0:00|Amr| Viable increase in bussiness occupancies out of Helsinki center|against|Against human capital growth in center of helsinki|<br />
R6|Toxicity charge |15.5.17 0:00|edem|equal tariff scheme|supports|Toxicity charge unfair|<br />
R7|Shared resource|15.5.17 0:00|edem|effective usage of road|makes relevant |Prevent misuse of shared resource|<br />
R8|economic|15.5.17 0:00|kaisu|Climate and health impacts|associates to|economic|<br />
R9|effect on traffic|15.5.17 0:00|kaisu|effective usage of road|affect|effect on traffic|<br />
R10|Congestion charge needs to be dynamic|15.5.17 0:00|Tamara|Congestion charge need to be dynamics|support|Congestion charge needs to be dynamic|<br />
R11|Choose CC system: none, VE1, VE3|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Choose CC system: none, VE1, VE3|affect|Tax revenue|<br />
R12|Investment and implementation costs|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Investment and implementation costs|affect|economic|<br />
R13|Number of cars during rush hours|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Number of cars during rush hours|affect|Reachability of downtown and suburban areas|<br />
R14|Tax revenue|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|tax revenue |makes relevant|decision of council to choose a congestion charge|<br />
R15|People's values|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|People's values|support|Prevent misuse of shared resource|<br />
R16|People's behaviour|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|People's behaviour|affect|Transport mode distribution (car, bus, bike, walk)|<br />
R17|Transport mode distribution (car, bus, bike, walk)|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|effect on traffic|affect|People's behaviour|<br />
R18|Reachability of downtown and suburban areas|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|reachability of downtown and suburban areas|support|active transport(physical exercise)|<br />
R19|Active transport (physical exercise)|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Active transport (physical exercise)|affect|Improvement of Health|<br />
R20|Air pollution and CO2 emissions|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Air pollution and CO2 emissios |affect |climate and health impacts|<br />
R21|Climate and health impacts|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Climate and health impacts|makes relevant|Tax revenue|<br />
R22|Economic impacts|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|tax revenue |affects|economic impart|<br />
</t2b><br />
<br />
==== Evaluations ====<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Contents of Evaluations table<br />
|----<br />
! Column|| Explanation<br />
|----<br />
|| ID|| Unique identifier of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Name|| A short descriptive name for this row. Used when making a reference to this row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Timestamp|| Time when the row was added.<br />
|----<br />
|| User|| Who added the row (first name)<br />
|----<br />
|| Subject|| Name or identifier of the thing we are talking about<br />
|----<br />
|| Evaluation|| One of the relations listed below. The content goes to column Object.<br />
* Truth: Either True or False<br />
* Probability: A value between 0 and 1<br />
* Better than: An item or relation that is worse than subject<br />
* More important than: An item or relation that is less important than subject<br />
* Utility: A value between 0 (least preferred choice) and 1 (most preferred choice)<br />
|----<br />
|| Object|| Name or identifier of a thing, or number (see above)<br />
|----<br />
|| Description|| Verbal description of the content of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<t2b name="Evaluations" index="ID,Name,Timestamp,User,Subject,Evaluation,Object" obs="Description" unit="-"><br />
E1| Air Quality|15.5.17 12:00|ehab|reduction in levels of emissions||Improvement of Air Quality|<br />
E2| Health|30.12.99 0:00|tamara|reduction in road accident||Improvement of Health|<br />
E3|Choices|30.12.99 0:00|Amr|improvement in public transport patronage||Affect Choices|<br />
E4|Roads usage|30.12.99 0:00|Tine|||Encouragement of Roads usage|<br />
E5|Capital growth|30.12.99 0:00|Amr| Viable increase in bussiness occupancies out of Helsinki center||Against human capital growth in center of helsinki|<br />
E6|Toxicity charge |30.12.99 0:00|edem|equal tariff scheme||Toxicity charge unfair|<br />
E7|Shared resource|30.12.99 0:00|edem|effective usage of road||Prevent misuse of shared resource|<br />
</t2b><br />
<br />
* {{comment|# |Add links to pages that belong to this assessment.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 11:36, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{comment|# |https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B5dY4ezoJ5FOWFdnT2NoS0tfa28|Google Drive Work Environment--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 00:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
<rcode graphics=1><br />
library(OpasnetUtils)<br />
library(OpasnetUtilsExt)<br />
#library(gsheet)<br />
library(reshape2)<br />
library(igraph)<br />
oprint(google.point_kml)<br />
oprint(google.show_kml_data_on_maps)<br />
<br />
if(FALSE){<br />
items <- gsheet2tbl("https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EuSt-YonlHQyNELCAftSiZ72jAsPKhw5q5MqQhbY10/edit")[1:6]<br />
relations <- gsheet2tbl("https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EuSt-YonlHQyNELCAftSiZ72jAsPKhw5q5MqQhbY10/edit#gid=781892235")[1:8]<br />
evaluations <- gsheet2tbl("https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EuSt-YonlHQyNELCAftSiZ72jAsPKhw5q5MqQhbY10/edit#gid=1821973371")[1:8]<br />
<br />
index <- rbind(<br />
cbind(items[c("ID", "Name")], Table = "items"),<br />
cbind(relations[c("ID", "Name")], Table = "relations"),<br />
cbind(evaluations[c("ID", "Name")], Table = "evaluations")<br />
)<br />
index <- melt(<br />
index,<br />
measure.vars = c("ID", "Name"),<br />
variable.name = "Column",<br />
value.name = "Identifier"<br />
)<br />
index <- index[!is.na(index$Identifier),]<br />
if(anyDuplicated(index$Identifier)) {<br />
cat("Warning: The following names are duplicated:\n")<br />
oprint(index[index$Identifier %in% index$Identifier[duplicated(index$Identifier)],])<br />
}<br />
#colnames(items) <- paste(colnames(items), "I", sep="_")<br />
#colnames(relations) <- paste(colnames(relations), "R", sep="_")<br />
colnames(evaluations)[colnames(evaluations)=="Evaluation"] <- "Predicate"<br />
relations <- rbind(relations, evaluations)<br />
}<br />
objects.latest("Op_fi5642", code_name = "preprocessing")<br />
<br />
jy2 <- jy<br />
for(i in 1:ncol(jy2)) jy2[[i]] <- as.character(jy2[[i]])<br />
jy2 <- jy2[1:100,]<br />
it <- data.frame(<br />
Name = c(jy2$Subjekti, jy2$Objekti),<br />
stringsAsFactors = TRUE<br />
)<br />
it <- it[!duplicated(it$Name) , , drop = FALSE]<br />
<br />
jygraph <- graph.data.frame(<br />
jy2[c(1,3,2,4:ncol(jy2))], <br />
directed = TRUE, <br />
vertices = it<br />
)<br />
<br />
plo <- plot.igraph(jygraph, <br />
vertex.label.cex = 0.8, <br />
vertex.label = NA,<br />
vertex.size = 2, #V(jygraph)$vsize, <br />
vertex.color = "Skyblue2",#V(jygraph)$vcolor, <br />
vertex.shape = "circle",#V(jygraph)$vshape,<br />
vertex.frame.color = "Black",<br />
vertex.label.family = "Helvetica",<br />
edge.color = "Black",#E(jygraph)$ecolor,<br />
edge.width = 0.5, #E(jygraph)$ewidth,<br />
edge.arrow.size = 0.5,<br />
layout = layout.fruchterman.reingold<br />
)<br />
l <- layout.fruchterman.reingold(jygraph)<br />
oprint(l)<br />
######################################<br />
<br />
#library(maptools)<br />
#library(RgoogleMaps)<br />
</rcode><br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
* [[Voting age]]<br />
* [[Structure of shared understanding]]<br />
* Osmo Soininvaara: Why we should have congestion charge. 3.4.2017 [http://www.soininvaara.fi/2017/04/03/kaupunkirakentamisen-aika-35-ruuhkamaksut/]<br />
* Helsinki: Regional congestion charge would improve air quality in Helsinki. 3.5.2017 [http://www.hel.fi/www/uutiset/fi/ymparistokeskus/ruuhkamaksu-030517] [http://www.hel.fi/www/uutiset/fi/ymparistokeskus/ruuhkamaksu-030517?pd=v]<br />
'''Articles in Wikipedia<br />
* [[:en:Congestion pricing|Congestion pricing]]<br />
* [[:en:London congestion charge|London congestion charge]]<br />
* [[:fi:Ruuhkamaksu|Ruuhkamaksu]]<br />
<br />
{{hidden|<br />
1 = <br />
== Add a discussion item, relation, or evaluation ==<br />
<br />
<rcode name="add" embed=1 label="Add a thing" showcode=-1 variables="<br />
name:thing|description:What kind of thing are you adding?|type:selection|options:<br />
'Items';Item;<br />
'Relations';Relation;<br />
'Evaluations';Evaluation|<br />
name:name|description:A short name for the thing|type:text|<br />
name:description|description:A description of the thing|type:textbox|<br />
name:type|description:Is this a value or factual statement?|type:selection|options:<br />
'Value';Value statement;'Fact';Factual statement;'I don't know';I don't know|<br />
category:Item|<br />
category_conditions:thing;'Items'|<br />
name:subject|description:The ID of the subject in the relation|type:text|<br />
category:Relation|<br />
category_conditions:thing;'Relations'|<br />
name:predicate|description:What is the relation (predicate)?|type:selection|options:<br />
'connects';connects with (by some non-specified way);<br />
'can coincide with';can conincide with;<br />
'instance of';is an instance of class;<br />
'subclass of';is a subclass of class|<br />
name:object|description:The ID of the object in the relation|type:text|<br />
name:type|description:Is the truth value for an item or a relation?|type:selection|options:<br />
'Item';For an item;'Relation';For a relation|<br />
category:Evaluation|<br />
category_conditions:thing;'Evaluations'|<br />
name:subject|description:The ID of the item or relation you want to evaluate|type:text|<br />
name:evaluation|description:Is the item or relation true?|type:selection|options:<br />
'True';It is true;'Maybe';It is maybe true;'False';It is false|<br />
name:pagename|type:hidden|default:'{{PAGENAME}}'|<br />
name:ident|type:hidden|default:'Op_en{{PAGEID}}'<br />
"><br />
library(OpasnetUtils)<br />
<br />
obs <- tryCatch(<br />
opbase.data(ident, subset = thing), <br />
error = function(...) return(NULL)<br />
)<br />
<br />
if (!is.null(obs)) {<br />
if ("Obs" %in% colnames(obs)) {<br />
at <- "replace"<br />
obs <- 1<br />
} else {<br />
at <- "append"<br />
obs <- obs$ID<br />
obs <- gsub("[A-Za-z]", "", as.character(obs))<br />
obs <- max(as.integer(obs)) + 1<br />
}<br />
} else {<br />
at <- "replace"<br />
obs <- 1<br />
}<br />
at <- "replace"<br />
obs <- 1<br />
<br />
dat <- data.frame(<br />
ID = obs,<br />
Timestamp = date(), <br />
User = wiki_username,<br />
Description = description<br />
)<br />
<br />
if(thing == "Items") {<br />
dat <- cbind(dat, data.frame(<br />
Type = type,<br />
Result = name<br />
))<br />
}<br />
<br />
if(thing == "Relations") {<br />
dat <- cbind(dat, data.frame(<br />
Subject = subject,<br />
Predicate = predicate, <br />
Object = object,<br />
Result = name<br />
))<br />
}<br />
if(thing == "Evaluations") {<br />
dat <- cbind(dat, data.frame(<br />
Thing = type,<br />
Subject = subject, <br />
Evaluation = evaluation,<br />
Result = name<br />
))<br />
}<br />
oprint(dat)<br />
<br />
opbase.upload(<br />
dat, <br />
ident = ident, <br />
name = pagename, <br />
subset = thing, <br />
act_type = at, <br />
language = "eng", <br />
who = wiki_username<br />
)<br />
<br />
# IF YOU HAVE TO EMPTY THE REMOVED THINGS, YOU HAVE TO DO IT BY HAND WITH THIS CODE<br />
if (FALSE) {<br />
dat <- data.frame(<br />
Timestamp = date(), <br />
User = wiki_username,<br />
Reason = "Initiation", <br />
Thing = thing,<br />
Result = "NA"<br />
)<br />
opbase.upload(<br />
dat, <br />
ident = ident, <br />
name = pagename, <br />
subset = "Removes", <br />
act_type = at, <br />
language = "eng", <br />
who = wiki_username<br />
)<br />
}<br />
cat("Your item has been successfully saved.\n")<br />
</rcode><br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
;<span id="Show">Current discussion things.</span><br />
<br />
<rcode name="show" label="Show discussion things" embed=1 showcode=-1 variables="<br />
name:thing|description:What kind of things do you want to see?|type:selection|options:<br />
'Items';Item;<br />
'Relations';Relation;<br />
'Evaluations';Evaluation|<br />
name:ident|type:hidden|default:'Op_en{{PAGEID}}'|<br />
name:pagename|type:hidden|default:'{{PAGENAME}}'<br />
"><br />
library(OpasnetUtils)<br />
<br />
pagename <- gsub(" ", "_", pagename)<br />
dat <- tryCatch(<br />
opbase.data(ident, subset = thing), <br />
error = function(...) return(NULL)<br />
)<br />
<br />
if (is.null(dat)) oprint("No things were found") else {<br />
poistot <- tryCatch(<br />
opbase.data(ident, subset = "Removes"), <br />
error = function(...) return(NULL)<br />
)<br />
<br />
if (!is.null(poistot)) dat <- dat[!dat$ID %in% poistot$Result[poistot$Thing == thing] , ]<br />
<br />
if(nrow(dat) == 0) {<br />
oprint("No items to show.")<br />
} else {<br />
oprint(dat, include.rownames = FALSE)<br />
}<br />
}<br />
</rcode><br />
<br />
'''Items to be removed'''<br />
<br />
<rcode name="remove" embed=1 label="Remove a thing" showcode=-1 variables="<br />
name:thing|description:What kind of thing are you removing?|type:selection|options:<br />
'Items';Item;<br />
'Relations';Relation;<br />
'Evaluations';Evaluation|<br />
name:id|description:ID of the thing to be removed|type:text|<br />
name:reason|description:Reason to remove|type:selection|options:<br />
;- Select reason -;<br />
'Item has been handled in other ways';Item has been handled in other ways;<br />
'Item is irrelevant';Item is irrelevant;<br />
'Item is vandalism';Item is vandalism (use sparingly)|<br />
name:ident|type:hidden|default:'Op_en{{PAGEID}}'|<br />
name:pagename|type:hidden|default:'{{PAGENAME}}'<br />
"><br />
library(OpasnetUtils)<br />
<br />
dat <- data.frame(<br />
Timestamp = date(), <br />
User = wiki_username,<br />
Reason = reason, <br />
Thing = thing,<br />
Result = id<br />
)<br />
<br />
opbase.upload(<br />
dat, <br />
ident = ident, <br />
name = pagename, <br />
subset = "Removes", <br />
act_type = "append", <br />
language = "eng",<br />
who = wiki_username<br />
)<br />
<br />
oprint("The thing has been successfully removed.\n")<br />
<br />
pois <- opbase.data(ident, subset = thing)<br />
<br />
oprint(pois[pois$ID == id & pois$Thing == thing , ], include.rownames = FALSE)<br />
<br />
</rcode><br />
}}</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=Congestion_charge&diff=40998Congestion charge2017-06-12T00:31:07Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Intended use and users */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Category:Traffic]]<br />
[[Category:Climate change]]<br />
{{assessment|moderator=Jouni|status=ongoing}}<br />
<br />
== Question ==<br />
<br />
What reasons are there for implementing or not implementing a congestion charging system in a city? What values and combinations of values result in which combination?<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
* The questions are generic, but we aim to look at the issue also specifically in Helsinki.<br />
* We look at the current situation.<br />
<br />
===Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
* {{comment|# |Who could use this information and how? Fill in your thoughts.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 11:36, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
{{comment|# |The assessment would help the authorities in Helsinki city to decide about the implementation of congestion charge policy|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 00:31, 12 June 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
* Students on the course [[Decision analysis and risk management 2017]].<br />
* Participation happens on this page (including the related talk page) and also on [https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B5dY4ezoJ5FOWFdnT2NoS0tfa28 Google Drive], which contains three things:<br />
*# Real-time online editor for the three tables for [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EuSt-YonlHQyNELCAftSiZ72jAsPKhw5q5MqQhbY10/edit Items, Relations, and Evaluations].<br />
*# Real-time online editor for the [https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/18PJNYL91_xAgygDKuITptISnUFMWh3K5SUtxqn0w0y0/edit causal diagram] below.<br />
*# Real-time online chat that happens on a [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Jk3jK27MwHJesXMwdHwan9i5WwTF--hB4ekxwqau9U0/edit# Google Document].<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
<br />
{{comment|# |What options do exist? Fill in your thoughts.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 11:36, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
<br />
The assessment will be performed during April-May 2017.<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
In order to reach the sustainable mode of transport, road charges can be used. They can smoothen the trip and transport chain, control the congestion, make the transport system conveniently accessible and enhance the competitiveness of public transport.<br />
The road charges can take part in a compact urban structure of the core area, the rail corridors and the centers of the municipality.<br />
<br />
Road charges will cause costs but their costs are relatively low in comparison to the costs that congestions will cause in the lack of these constructions for the road users.<br />
<br />
In order for the road charges to be effective, new legislations that give permission for them to be constructed is required to be implemented. Fixed-term experimental legislations can be an alternative for this administration.<br />
<br />
Costs are really important in this case. Therefore the revenue of the road charge needs to be spent for the area in which the road charge is implemented. It should be considered that the funding for the area stated by the state or municipality is not influenced negatively because of the existence of the road charge.<br />
<br />
The transport system and the urban structure have to be optimized effectively in terms of socio-economic aspects that can be somehow tackled through the costs. <br />
Pressure can be caused in the planning since the road charges cause a high financial burden for some individuals that will lead to modification in their travel habits. <br />
<br />
Road charges enhance the city centre's’ role as service, employment and commercial hub. However, the attractiveness of the zone between the rings for commercial uses will decrease. <br />
<br />
Minimization of negative externalities of traffic demand on road network.<br />
<br />
*Road pricing (key economic tools)<br />
*Profit target (pricing model)<br />
*Improvement of traffic network system, minimum environmental impact,<br />
*Definition of congestion is decreasing transporters natural speed.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
<br />
[[File:Congestion charge causal diagram.png|400px|thumb|The causal diagram is based on this [https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/18PJNYL91_xAgygDKuITptISnUFMWh3K5SUtxqn0w0y0/edit Google drawing], which should be updated and uploaded to Opasnet from time to time.]]<br />
<br />
These tables are being written to Google Sheet (for easier user interface) and copied here from time to time. See [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EuSt-YonlHQyNELCAftSiZ72jAsPKhw5q5MqQhbY10/edit#gid=0 Google Sheets].<br />
<br />
==== Items ====<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Contents of Items table<br />
|----<br />
! Column|| Explanation<br />
|----<br />
|| ID|| Unique identifier of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Name|| A short descriptive name for this row. Used when making a reference to this row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Timestamp|| Time when the row was added.<br />
|----<br />
|| User|| Who added the row (first name)<br />
|----<br />
|| Type|| It the item a factual statement (fact) or value statement (value); or decision, action or variable?<br />
|----<br />
|| Description|| Verbal description of the content of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<t2b name="Items" index="ID,Name,Timestamp,User,Type" obs="Description" unit="-"><br />
I1| Air Quality|20.5.17 0:00|edem|fact|congestion charge affect air quality<br />
I2| Health|15.5.17 0:00|edem|fact|Congestion charge scheme will improve the populations’ health<br />
I3|Choices|15.5.17 0:00|edem|value|Congestion charge scheme constrains individual choice and behavior.<br />
I4| Roads usage|15.5.17 0:00|edem|value|The economic viability of tariffs and transformation of urban space will encourage more use of roads and cars.<br />
I5| Capital growth in |29.4.17 1:07|edem|value|congestion charge schemes can restrict urban mobility and human capital growth.<br />
I6|Toxicity charge unfair|15.5.17 0:00|edem|value|Toxicity charge as a form of congestion charge is unfair to old car users<br />
I7|Prevent misuse of shared resource|15.5.17 0:00|edem|value|congestion charge prevents the occurrence of misuse use of shared resource <br />
I8|economic|15.5.17 0:00|kaisu|value|financially cost-saving <br />
I9|effect on traffic|15.5.17 0:00|kaisu|fact|changes the traffic flow both in terms of space and time<br />
I10|Congestion charge need to be dynamics|15.5.17 0:00|Tamara|value|To ensure air quality standards, the congestion charge scheme needs to be dynamic<br />
I11|Choose CC system: none, VE1, VE3|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|decision|Decision for the city council to make: to choose one congestion charge policy or none.<br />
I12|Investment and implementation costs|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Costs occurring from the investment and operation (on annual basis) of the congestion charge system<br />
I13|Number of cars during rush hours|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Number of cars during rush hours on important busy streets (answer to this variable can most easily be described as a map with congestion situation on different streets)<br />
I14|Tax revenue|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Amount of taxes collected from the congestion charge system<br />
I15|People's values|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|indicator|People's values and attitudes about congestion charge, freedom to drive etc.<br />
I16|People's behaviour|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|decision|Actions that people take based on their values, economic incentives, and practicalities<br />
I17|Transport mode distribution (car, bus, bike, walk)|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Numbers of people in different traffic modes in Helsinki (especially during rush hour)<br />
I18|Reachability of downtown and suburban areas|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|How accessible different places in the city are, in respect of time or money needed to go there, or their attractiveness<br />
I19|Active transport (physical exercise)|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Amount of physical exercise that people do to reach the places where they are going rather than because of training (also known as active transport)<br />
I20|Air pollution and CO2 emissions|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Emissions that occur from the traffic (specified spatially and temporally, because rush hour emissions expose more people than otherwise)<br />
I21|Climate and health impacts|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|indicator|A summary indicator of climate and health impacts of congestion charge policies<br />
I22|Economic impacts|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|indicator|A summary indicator of economic impacts for different stakeholders (citizens, car drivers, overall societal impacts, companies in downtown or suburban areas)<br />
I23|Need-based pricing model|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|value|Pricing modeling strategy based on planned profit target should be avoided in this case.<br />
I24|Urban structure|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Tariffication of urban space will contribute to physically dissect Helsinki into price zones<br />
I25|Social modification|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|value|Social space should be a citizen entitlement<br />
I26|Segment-based toll gate strategy|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|value|Utilise toll gate strategies based on segments<br />
I27|Pilot driver behavior|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|value|Drivers to behavioral shift should be weighed before piloting (using heuristic analysis based on nudge theory)<br />
I28|Social activities should be planned|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|value|Social activities and commercial accessibility should be planned before implementation so smart solutions won't create a constraint<br />
</t2b><br />
<br />
==== Relations ====<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Contents of Relations table<br />
|----<br />
! Column|| Explanation<br />
|----<br />
|| ID|| Unique identifier of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Name|| A short descriptive name for this row. Used when making a reference to this row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Timestamp|| Time when the row was added.<br />
|----<br />
|| User|| Who added the row (first name)<br />
|----<br />
|| Subject|| Name or identifier of the thing we are talking about<br />
|----<br />
|| Predicate|| Predicate of a sentence (i.e. a verb describing a relation). For list of relations, see [[Structure of shared understanding]]<br />
|----<br />
|| Object|| Name or identifier of a thing, or number (see above)<br />
|----<br />
|| Description|| Verbal description of the content of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<t2b name="Relations" index="ID,Name,Timestamp,User,Subject,Predicate,Object" obs="Description" unit="-"><br />
R1||15.5.17 12:00|ehab|decrease in 10 % PM emission|affect|Improvement of Air Quality|<br />
R2| Health|15.5.17 0:00|tamara|reduction in road accident|supports|Improvement of Health|<br />
R3|Choices|15.5.17 0:00|Amr|improvement in public transport patronage|supports|Affect Choices|<br />
R4|Roads usage|15.5.17 0:00|Tine||against|Encouragement of Roads usage|<br />
R5|Capital growth|15.5.17 0:00|Amr| Viable increase in bussiness occupancies out of Helsinki center|against|Against human capital growth in center of helsinki|<br />
R6|Toxicity charge |15.5.17 0:00|edem|equal tariff scheme|supports|Toxicity charge unfair|<br />
R7|Shared resource|15.5.17 0:00|edem|effective usage of road|makes relevant |Prevent misuse of shared resource|<br />
R8|economic|15.5.17 0:00|kaisu|Climate and health impacts|associates to|economic|<br />
R9|effect on traffic|15.5.17 0:00|kaisu|effective usage of road|affect|effect on traffic|<br />
R10|Congestion charge needs to be dynamic|15.5.17 0:00|Tamara|Congestion charge need to be dynamics|support|Congestion charge needs to be dynamic|<br />
R11|Choose CC system: none, VE1, VE3|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Choose CC system: none, VE1, VE3|affect|Tax revenue|<br />
R12|Investment and implementation costs|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Investment and implementation costs|affect|economic|<br />
R13|Number of cars during rush hours|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Number of cars during rush hours|affect|Reachability of downtown and suburban areas|<br />
R14|Tax revenue|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|tax revenue |makes relevant|decision of council to choose a congestion charge|<br />
R15|People's values|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|People's values|support|Prevent misuse of shared resource|<br />
R16|People's behaviour|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|People's behaviour|affect|Transport mode distribution (car, bus, bike, walk)|<br />
R17|Transport mode distribution (car, bus, bike, walk)|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|effect on traffic|affect|People's behaviour|<br />
R18|Reachability of downtown and suburban areas|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|reachability of downtown and suburban areas|support|active transport(physical exercise)|<br />
R19|Active transport (physical exercise)|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Active transport (physical exercise)|affect|Improvement of Health|<br />
R20|Air pollution and CO2 emissions|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Air pollution and CO2 emissios |affect |climate and health impacts|<br />
R21|Climate and health impacts|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Climate and health impacts|makes relevant|Tax revenue|<br />
R22|Economic impacts|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|tax revenue |affects|economic impart|<br />
</t2b><br />
<br />
==== Evaluations ====<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Contents of Evaluations table<br />
|----<br />
! Column|| Explanation<br />
|----<br />
|| ID|| Unique identifier of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Name|| A short descriptive name for this row. Used when making a reference to this row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Timestamp|| Time when the row was added.<br />
|----<br />
|| User|| Who added the row (first name)<br />
|----<br />
|| Subject|| Name or identifier of the thing we are talking about<br />
|----<br />
|| Evaluation|| One of the relations listed below. The content goes to column Object.<br />
* Truth: Either True or False<br />
* Probability: A value between 0 and 1<br />
* Better than: An item or relation that is worse than subject<br />
* More important than: An item or relation that is less important than subject<br />
* Utility: A value between 0 (least preferred choice) and 1 (most preferred choice)<br />
|----<br />
|| Object|| Name or identifier of a thing, or number (see above)<br />
|----<br />
|| Description|| Verbal description of the content of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<t2b name="Evaluations" index="ID,Name,Timestamp,User,Subject,Evaluation,Object" obs="Description" unit="-"><br />
E1| Air Quality|15.5.17 12:00|ehab|reduction in levels of emissions||Improvement of Air Quality|<br />
E2| Health|30.12.99 0:00|tamara|reduction in road accident||Improvement of Health|<br />
E3|Choices|30.12.99 0:00|Amr|improvement in public transport patronage||Affect Choices|<br />
E4|Roads usage|30.12.99 0:00|Tine|||Encouragement of Roads usage|<br />
E5|Capital growth|30.12.99 0:00|Amr| Viable increase in bussiness occupancies out of Helsinki center||Against human capital growth in center of helsinki|<br />
E6|Toxicity charge |30.12.99 0:00|edem|equal tariff scheme||Toxicity charge unfair|<br />
E7|Shared resource|30.12.99 0:00|edem|effective usage of road||Prevent misuse of shared resource|<br />
</t2b><br />
<br />
* {{comment|# |Add links to pages that belong to this assessment.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 11:36, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{comment|# |https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B5dY4ezoJ5FOWFdnT2NoS0tfa28|Google Drive Work Environment--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 00:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
<rcode graphics=1><br />
library(OpasnetUtils)<br />
library(OpasnetUtilsExt)<br />
#library(gsheet)<br />
library(reshape2)<br />
library(igraph)<br />
oprint(google.point_kml)<br />
oprint(google.show_kml_data_on_maps)<br />
<br />
if(FALSE){<br />
items <- gsheet2tbl("https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EuSt-YonlHQyNELCAftSiZ72jAsPKhw5q5MqQhbY10/edit")[1:6]<br />
relations <- gsheet2tbl("https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EuSt-YonlHQyNELCAftSiZ72jAsPKhw5q5MqQhbY10/edit#gid=781892235")[1:8]<br />
evaluations <- gsheet2tbl("https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EuSt-YonlHQyNELCAftSiZ72jAsPKhw5q5MqQhbY10/edit#gid=1821973371")[1:8]<br />
<br />
index <- rbind(<br />
cbind(items[c("ID", "Name")], Table = "items"),<br />
cbind(relations[c("ID", "Name")], Table = "relations"),<br />
cbind(evaluations[c("ID", "Name")], Table = "evaluations")<br />
)<br />
index <- melt(<br />
index,<br />
measure.vars = c("ID", "Name"),<br />
variable.name = "Column",<br />
value.name = "Identifier"<br />
)<br />
index <- index[!is.na(index$Identifier),]<br />
if(anyDuplicated(index$Identifier)) {<br />
cat("Warning: The following names are duplicated:\n")<br />
oprint(index[index$Identifier %in% index$Identifier[duplicated(index$Identifier)],])<br />
}<br />
#colnames(items) <- paste(colnames(items), "I", sep="_")<br />
#colnames(relations) <- paste(colnames(relations), "R", sep="_")<br />
colnames(evaluations)[colnames(evaluations)=="Evaluation"] <- "Predicate"<br />
relations <- rbind(relations, evaluations)<br />
}<br />
objects.latest("Op_fi5642", code_name = "preprocessing")<br />
<br />
jy2 <- jy<br />
for(i in 1:ncol(jy2)) jy2[[i]] <- as.character(jy2[[i]])<br />
jy2 <- jy2[1:100,]<br />
it <- data.frame(<br />
Name = c(jy2$Subjekti, jy2$Objekti),<br />
stringsAsFactors = TRUE<br />
)<br />
it <- it[!duplicated(it$Name) , , drop = FALSE]<br />
<br />
jygraph <- graph.data.frame(<br />
jy2[c(1,3,2,4:ncol(jy2))], <br />
directed = TRUE, <br />
vertices = it<br />
)<br />
<br />
plo <- plot.igraph(jygraph, <br />
vertex.label.cex = 0.8, <br />
vertex.label = NA,<br />
vertex.size = 2, #V(jygraph)$vsize, <br />
vertex.color = "Skyblue2",#V(jygraph)$vcolor, <br />
vertex.shape = "circle",#V(jygraph)$vshape,<br />
vertex.frame.color = "Black",<br />
vertex.label.family = "Helvetica",<br />
edge.color = "Black",#E(jygraph)$ecolor,<br />
edge.width = 0.5, #E(jygraph)$ewidth,<br />
edge.arrow.size = 0.5,<br />
layout = layout.fruchterman.reingold<br />
)<br />
l <- layout.fruchterman.reingold(jygraph)<br />
oprint(l)<br />
######################################<br />
<br />
#library(maptools)<br />
#library(RgoogleMaps)<br />
</rcode><br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
* [[Voting age]]<br />
* [[Structure of shared understanding]]<br />
* Osmo Soininvaara: Why we should have congestion charge. 3.4.2017 [http://www.soininvaara.fi/2017/04/03/kaupunkirakentamisen-aika-35-ruuhkamaksut/]<br />
* Helsinki: Regional congestion charge would improve air quality in Helsinki. 3.5.2017 [http://www.hel.fi/www/uutiset/fi/ymparistokeskus/ruuhkamaksu-030517] [http://www.hel.fi/www/uutiset/fi/ymparistokeskus/ruuhkamaksu-030517?pd=v]<br />
'''Articles in Wikipedia<br />
* [[:en:Congestion pricing|Congestion pricing]]<br />
* [[:en:London congestion charge|London congestion charge]]<br />
* [[:fi:Ruuhkamaksu|Ruuhkamaksu]]<br />
<br />
{{hidden|<br />
1 = <br />
== Add a discussion item, relation, or evaluation ==<br />
<br />
<rcode name="add" embed=1 label="Add a thing" showcode=-1 variables="<br />
name:thing|description:What kind of thing are you adding?|type:selection|options:<br />
'Items';Item;<br />
'Relations';Relation;<br />
'Evaluations';Evaluation|<br />
name:name|description:A short name for the thing|type:text|<br />
name:description|description:A description of the thing|type:textbox|<br />
name:type|description:Is this a value or factual statement?|type:selection|options:<br />
'Value';Value statement;'Fact';Factual statement;'I don't know';I don't know|<br />
category:Item|<br />
category_conditions:thing;'Items'|<br />
name:subject|description:The ID of the subject in the relation|type:text|<br />
category:Relation|<br />
category_conditions:thing;'Relations'|<br />
name:predicate|description:What is the relation (predicate)?|type:selection|options:<br />
'connects';connects with (by some non-specified way);<br />
'can coincide with';can conincide with;<br />
'instance of';is an instance of class;<br />
'subclass of';is a subclass of class|<br />
name:object|description:The ID of the object in the relation|type:text|<br />
name:type|description:Is the truth value for an item or a relation?|type:selection|options:<br />
'Item';For an item;'Relation';For a relation|<br />
category:Evaluation|<br />
category_conditions:thing;'Evaluations'|<br />
name:subject|description:The ID of the item or relation you want to evaluate|type:text|<br />
name:evaluation|description:Is the item or relation true?|type:selection|options:<br />
'True';It is true;'Maybe';It is maybe true;'False';It is false|<br />
name:pagename|type:hidden|default:'{{PAGENAME}}'|<br />
name:ident|type:hidden|default:'Op_en{{PAGEID}}'<br />
"><br />
library(OpasnetUtils)<br />
<br />
obs <- tryCatch(<br />
opbase.data(ident, subset = thing), <br />
error = function(...) return(NULL)<br />
)<br />
<br />
if (!is.null(obs)) {<br />
if ("Obs" %in% colnames(obs)) {<br />
at <- "replace"<br />
obs <- 1<br />
} else {<br />
at <- "append"<br />
obs <- obs$ID<br />
obs <- gsub("[A-Za-z]", "", as.character(obs))<br />
obs <- max(as.integer(obs)) + 1<br />
}<br />
} else {<br />
at <- "replace"<br />
obs <- 1<br />
}<br />
at <- "replace"<br />
obs <- 1<br />
<br />
dat <- data.frame(<br />
ID = obs,<br />
Timestamp = date(), <br />
User = wiki_username,<br />
Description = description<br />
)<br />
<br />
if(thing == "Items") {<br />
dat <- cbind(dat, data.frame(<br />
Type = type,<br />
Result = name<br />
))<br />
}<br />
<br />
if(thing == "Relations") {<br />
dat <- cbind(dat, data.frame(<br />
Subject = subject,<br />
Predicate = predicate, <br />
Object = object,<br />
Result = name<br />
))<br />
}<br />
if(thing == "Evaluations") {<br />
dat <- cbind(dat, data.frame(<br />
Thing = type,<br />
Subject = subject, <br />
Evaluation = evaluation,<br />
Result = name<br />
))<br />
}<br />
oprint(dat)<br />
<br />
opbase.upload(<br />
dat, <br />
ident = ident, <br />
name = pagename, <br />
subset = thing, <br />
act_type = at, <br />
language = "eng", <br />
who = wiki_username<br />
)<br />
<br />
# IF YOU HAVE TO EMPTY THE REMOVED THINGS, YOU HAVE TO DO IT BY HAND WITH THIS CODE<br />
if (FALSE) {<br />
dat <- data.frame(<br />
Timestamp = date(), <br />
User = wiki_username,<br />
Reason = "Initiation", <br />
Thing = thing,<br />
Result = "NA"<br />
)<br />
opbase.upload(<br />
dat, <br />
ident = ident, <br />
name = pagename, <br />
subset = "Removes", <br />
act_type = at, <br />
language = "eng", <br />
who = wiki_username<br />
)<br />
}<br />
cat("Your item has been successfully saved.\n")<br />
</rcode><br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
;<span id="Show">Current discussion things.</span><br />
<br />
<rcode name="show" label="Show discussion things" embed=1 showcode=-1 variables="<br />
name:thing|description:What kind of things do you want to see?|type:selection|options:<br />
'Items';Item;<br />
'Relations';Relation;<br />
'Evaluations';Evaluation|<br />
name:ident|type:hidden|default:'Op_en{{PAGEID}}'|<br />
name:pagename|type:hidden|default:'{{PAGENAME}}'<br />
"><br />
library(OpasnetUtils)<br />
<br />
pagename <- gsub(" ", "_", pagename)<br />
dat <- tryCatch(<br />
opbase.data(ident, subset = thing), <br />
error = function(...) return(NULL)<br />
)<br />
<br />
if (is.null(dat)) oprint("No things were found") else {<br />
poistot <- tryCatch(<br />
opbase.data(ident, subset = "Removes"), <br />
error = function(...) return(NULL)<br />
)<br />
<br />
if (!is.null(poistot)) dat <- dat[!dat$ID %in% poistot$Result[poistot$Thing == thing] , ]<br />
<br />
if(nrow(dat) == 0) {<br />
oprint("No items to show.")<br />
} else {<br />
oprint(dat, include.rownames = FALSE)<br />
}<br />
}<br />
</rcode><br />
<br />
'''Items to be removed'''<br />
<br />
<rcode name="remove" embed=1 label="Remove a thing" showcode=-1 variables="<br />
name:thing|description:What kind of thing are you removing?|type:selection|options:<br />
'Items';Item;<br />
'Relations';Relation;<br />
'Evaluations';Evaluation|<br />
name:id|description:ID of the thing to be removed|type:text|<br />
name:reason|description:Reason to remove|type:selection|options:<br />
;- Select reason -;<br />
'Item has been handled in other ways';Item has been handled in other ways;<br />
'Item is irrelevant';Item is irrelevant;<br />
'Item is vandalism';Item is vandalism (use sparingly)|<br />
name:ident|type:hidden|default:'Op_en{{PAGEID}}'|<br />
name:pagename|type:hidden|default:'{{PAGENAME}}'<br />
"><br />
library(OpasnetUtils)<br />
<br />
dat <- data.frame(<br />
Timestamp = date(), <br />
User = wiki_username,<br />
Reason = reason, <br />
Thing = thing,<br />
Result = id<br />
)<br />
<br />
opbase.upload(<br />
dat, <br />
ident = ident, <br />
name = pagename, <br />
subset = "Removes", <br />
act_type = "append", <br />
language = "eng",<br />
who = wiki_username<br />
)<br />
<br />
oprint("The thing has been successfully removed.\n")<br />
<br />
pois <- opbase.data(ident, subset = thing)<br />
<br />
oprint(pois[pois$ID == id & pois$Thing == thing , ], include.rownames = FALSE)<br />
<br />
</rcode><br />
}}</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=Congestion_charge&diff=40997Congestion charge2017-06-12T00:27:32Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Evaluations */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Category:Traffic]]<br />
[[Category:Climate change]]<br />
{{assessment|moderator=Jouni|status=ongoing}}<br />
<br />
== Question ==<br />
<br />
What reasons are there for implementing or not implementing a congestion charging system in a city? What values and combinations of values result in which combination?<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
* The questions are generic, but we aim to look at the issue also specifically in Helsinki.<br />
* We look at the current situation.<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
* {{comment|# |Who could use this information and how? Fill in your thoughts.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 11:36, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
* Students on the course [[Decision analysis and risk management 2017]].<br />
* Participation happens on this page (including the related talk page) and also on [https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B5dY4ezoJ5FOWFdnT2NoS0tfa28 Google Drive], which contains three things:<br />
*# Real-time online editor for the three tables for [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EuSt-YonlHQyNELCAftSiZ72jAsPKhw5q5MqQhbY10/edit Items, Relations, and Evaluations].<br />
*# Real-time online editor for the [https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/18PJNYL91_xAgygDKuITptISnUFMWh3K5SUtxqn0w0y0/edit causal diagram] below.<br />
*# Real-time online chat that happens on a [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Jk3jK27MwHJesXMwdHwan9i5WwTF--hB4ekxwqau9U0/edit# Google Document].<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
<br />
{{comment|# |What options do exist? Fill in your thoughts.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 11:36, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
<br />
The assessment will be performed during April-May 2017.<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
In order to reach the sustainable mode of transport, road charges can be used. They can smoothen the trip and transport chain, control the congestion, make the transport system conveniently accessible and enhance the competitiveness of public transport.<br />
The road charges can take part in a compact urban structure of the core area, the rail corridors and the centers of the municipality.<br />
<br />
Road charges will cause costs but their costs are relatively low in comparison to the costs that congestions will cause in the lack of these constructions for the road users.<br />
<br />
In order for the road charges to be effective, new legislations that give permission for them to be constructed is required to be implemented. Fixed-term experimental legislations can be an alternative for this administration.<br />
<br />
Costs are really important in this case. Therefore the revenue of the road charge needs to be spent for the area in which the road charge is implemented. It should be considered that the funding for the area stated by the state or municipality is not influenced negatively because of the existence of the road charge.<br />
<br />
The transport system and the urban structure have to be optimized effectively in terms of socio-economic aspects that can be somehow tackled through the costs. <br />
Pressure can be caused in the planning since the road charges cause a high financial burden for some individuals that will lead to modification in their travel habits. <br />
<br />
Road charges enhance the city centre's’ role as service, employment and commercial hub. However, the attractiveness of the zone between the rings for commercial uses will decrease. <br />
<br />
Minimization of negative externalities of traffic demand on road network.<br />
<br />
*Road pricing (key economic tools)<br />
*Profit target (pricing model)<br />
*Improvement of traffic network system, minimum environmental impact,<br />
*Definition of congestion is decreasing transporters natural speed.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
<br />
[[File:Congestion charge causal diagram.png|400px|thumb|The causal diagram is based on this [https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/18PJNYL91_xAgygDKuITptISnUFMWh3K5SUtxqn0w0y0/edit Google drawing], which should be updated and uploaded to Opasnet from time to time.]]<br />
<br />
These tables are being written to Google Sheet (for easier user interface) and copied here from time to time. See [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EuSt-YonlHQyNELCAftSiZ72jAsPKhw5q5MqQhbY10/edit#gid=0 Google Sheets].<br />
<br />
==== Items ====<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Contents of Items table<br />
|----<br />
! Column|| Explanation<br />
|----<br />
|| ID|| Unique identifier of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Name|| A short descriptive name for this row. Used when making a reference to this row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Timestamp|| Time when the row was added.<br />
|----<br />
|| User|| Who added the row (first name)<br />
|----<br />
|| Type|| It the item a factual statement (fact) or value statement (value); or decision, action or variable?<br />
|----<br />
|| Description|| Verbal description of the content of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<t2b name="Items" index="ID,Name,Timestamp,User,Type" obs="Description" unit="-"><br />
I1| Air Quality|20.5.17 0:00|edem|fact|congestion charge affect air quality<br />
I2| Health|15.5.17 0:00|edem|fact|Congestion charge scheme will improve the populations’ health<br />
I3|Choices|15.5.17 0:00|edem|value|Congestion charge scheme constrains individual choice and behavior.<br />
I4| Roads usage|15.5.17 0:00|edem|value|The economic viability of tariffs and transformation of urban space will encourage more use of roads and cars.<br />
I5| Capital growth in |29.4.17 1:07|edem|value|congestion charge schemes can restrict urban mobility and human capital growth.<br />
I6|Toxicity charge unfair|15.5.17 0:00|edem|value|Toxicity charge as a form of congestion charge is unfair to old car users<br />
I7|Prevent misuse of shared resource|15.5.17 0:00|edem|value|congestion charge prevents the occurrence of misuse use of shared resource <br />
I8|economic|15.5.17 0:00|kaisu|value|financially cost-saving <br />
I9|effect on traffic|15.5.17 0:00|kaisu|fact|changes the traffic flow both in terms of space and time<br />
I10|Congestion charge need to be dynamics|15.5.17 0:00|Tamara|value|To ensure air quality standards, the congestion charge scheme needs to be dynamic<br />
I11|Choose CC system: none, VE1, VE3|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|decision|Decision for the city council to make: to choose one congestion charge policy or none.<br />
I12|Investment and implementation costs|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Costs occurring from the investment and operation (on annual basis) of the congestion charge system<br />
I13|Number of cars during rush hours|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Number of cars during rush hours on important busy streets (answer to this variable can most easily be described as a map with congestion situation on different streets)<br />
I14|Tax revenue|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Amount of taxes collected from the congestion charge system<br />
I15|People's values|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|indicator|People's values and attitudes about congestion charge, freedom to drive etc.<br />
I16|People's behaviour|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|decision|Actions that people take based on their values, economic incentives, and practicalities<br />
I17|Transport mode distribution (car, bus, bike, walk)|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Numbers of people in different traffic modes in Helsinki (especially during rush hour)<br />
I18|Reachability of downtown and suburban areas|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|How accessible different places in the city are, in respect of time or money needed to go there, or their attractiveness<br />
I19|Active transport (physical exercise)|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Amount of physical exercise that people do to reach the places where they are going rather than because of training (also known as active transport)<br />
I20|Air pollution and CO2 emissions|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Emissions that occur from the traffic (specified spatially and temporally, because rush hour emissions expose more people than otherwise)<br />
I21|Climate and health impacts|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|indicator|A summary indicator of climate and health impacts of congestion charge policies<br />
I22|Economic impacts|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|indicator|A summary indicator of economic impacts for different stakeholders (citizens, car drivers, overall societal impacts, companies in downtown or suburban areas)<br />
I23|Need-based pricing model|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|value|Pricing modeling strategy based on planned profit target should be avoided in this case.<br />
I24|Urban structure|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Tariffication of urban space will contribute to physically dissect Helsinki into price zones<br />
I25|Social modification|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|value|Social space should be a citizen entitlement<br />
I26|Segment-based toll gate strategy|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|value|Utilise toll gate strategies based on segments<br />
I27|Pilot driver behavior|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|value|Drivers to behavioral shift should be weighed before piloting (using heuristic analysis based on nudge theory)<br />
I28|Social activities should be planned|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|value|Social activities and commercial accessibility should be planned before implementation so smart solutions won't create a constraint<br />
</t2b><br />
<br />
==== Relations ====<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Contents of Relations table<br />
|----<br />
! Column|| Explanation<br />
|----<br />
|| ID|| Unique identifier of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Name|| A short descriptive name for this row. Used when making a reference to this row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Timestamp|| Time when the row was added.<br />
|----<br />
|| User|| Who added the row (first name)<br />
|----<br />
|| Subject|| Name or identifier of the thing we are talking about<br />
|----<br />
|| Predicate|| Predicate of a sentence (i.e. a verb describing a relation). For list of relations, see [[Structure of shared understanding]]<br />
|----<br />
|| Object|| Name or identifier of a thing, or number (see above)<br />
|----<br />
|| Description|| Verbal description of the content of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<t2b name="Relations" index="ID,Name,Timestamp,User,Subject,Predicate,Object" obs="Description" unit="-"><br />
R1||15.5.17 12:00|ehab|decrease in 10 % PM emission|affect|Improvement of Air Quality|<br />
R2| Health|15.5.17 0:00|tamara|reduction in road accident|supports|Improvement of Health|<br />
R3|Choices|15.5.17 0:00|Amr|improvement in public transport patronage|supports|Affect Choices|<br />
R4|Roads usage|15.5.17 0:00|Tine||against|Encouragement of Roads usage|<br />
R5|Capital growth|15.5.17 0:00|Amr| Viable increase in bussiness occupancies out of Helsinki center|against|Against human capital growth in center of helsinki|<br />
R6|Toxicity charge |15.5.17 0:00|edem|equal tariff scheme|supports|Toxicity charge unfair|<br />
R7|Shared resource|15.5.17 0:00|edem|effective usage of road|makes relevant |Prevent misuse of shared resource|<br />
R8|economic|15.5.17 0:00|kaisu|Climate and health impacts|associates to|economic|<br />
R9|effect on traffic|15.5.17 0:00|kaisu|effective usage of road|affect|effect on traffic|<br />
R10|Congestion charge needs to be dynamic|15.5.17 0:00|Tamara|Congestion charge need to be dynamics|support|Congestion charge needs to be dynamic|<br />
R11|Choose CC system: none, VE1, VE3|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Choose CC system: none, VE1, VE3|affect|Tax revenue|<br />
R12|Investment and implementation costs|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Investment and implementation costs|affect|economic|<br />
R13|Number of cars during rush hours|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Number of cars during rush hours|affect|Reachability of downtown and suburban areas|<br />
R14|Tax revenue|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|tax revenue |makes relevant|decision of council to choose a congestion charge|<br />
R15|People's values|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|People's values|support|Prevent misuse of shared resource|<br />
R16|People's behaviour|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|People's behaviour|affect|Transport mode distribution (car, bus, bike, walk)|<br />
R17|Transport mode distribution (car, bus, bike, walk)|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|effect on traffic|affect|People's behaviour|<br />
R18|Reachability of downtown and suburban areas|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|reachability of downtown and suburban areas|support|active transport(physical exercise)|<br />
R19|Active transport (physical exercise)|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Active transport (physical exercise)|affect|Improvement of Health|<br />
R20|Air pollution and CO2 emissions|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Air pollution and CO2 emissios |affect |climate and health impacts|<br />
R21|Climate and health impacts|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Climate and health impacts|makes relevant|Tax revenue|<br />
R22|Economic impacts|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|tax revenue |affects|economic impart|<br />
</t2b><br />
<br />
==== Evaluations ====<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Contents of Evaluations table<br />
|----<br />
! Column|| Explanation<br />
|----<br />
|| ID|| Unique identifier of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Name|| A short descriptive name for this row. Used when making a reference to this row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Timestamp|| Time when the row was added.<br />
|----<br />
|| User|| Who added the row (first name)<br />
|----<br />
|| Subject|| Name or identifier of the thing we are talking about<br />
|----<br />
|| Evaluation|| One of the relations listed below. The content goes to column Object.<br />
* Truth: Either True or False<br />
* Probability: A value between 0 and 1<br />
* Better than: An item or relation that is worse than subject<br />
* More important than: An item or relation that is less important than subject<br />
* Utility: A value between 0 (least preferred choice) and 1 (most preferred choice)<br />
|----<br />
|| Object|| Name or identifier of a thing, or number (see above)<br />
|----<br />
|| Description|| Verbal description of the content of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<t2b name="Evaluations" index="ID,Name,Timestamp,User,Subject,Evaluation,Object" obs="Description" unit="-"><br />
E1| Air Quality|15.5.17 12:00|ehab|reduction in levels of emissions||Improvement of Air Quality|<br />
E2| Health|30.12.99 0:00|tamara|reduction in road accident||Improvement of Health|<br />
E3|Choices|30.12.99 0:00|Amr|improvement in public transport patronage||Affect Choices|<br />
E4|Roads usage|30.12.99 0:00|Tine|||Encouragement of Roads usage|<br />
E5|Capital growth|30.12.99 0:00|Amr| Viable increase in bussiness occupancies out of Helsinki center||Against human capital growth in center of helsinki|<br />
E6|Toxicity charge |30.12.99 0:00|edem|equal tariff scheme||Toxicity charge unfair|<br />
E7|Shared resource|30.12.99 0:00|edem|effective usage of road||Prevent misuse of shared resource|<br />
</t2b><br />
<br />
* {{comment|# |Add links to pages that belong to this assessment.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 11:36, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{comment|# |https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B5dY4ezoJ5FOWFdnT2NoS0tfa28|Google Drive Work Environment--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 00:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
<rcode graphics=1><br />
library(OpasnetUtils)<br />
library(OpasnetUtilsExt)<br />
#library(gsheet)<br />
library(reshape2)<br />
library(igraph)<br />
oprint(google.point_kml)<br />
oprint(google.show_kml_data_on_maps)<br />
<br />
if(FALSE){<br />
items <- gsheet2tbl("https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EuSt-YonlHQyNELCAftSiZ72jAsPKhw5q5MqQhbY10/edit")[1:6]<br />
relations <- gsheet2tbl("https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EuSt-YonlHQyNELCAftSiZ72jAsPKhw5q5MqQhbY10/edit#gid=781892235")[1:8]<br />
evaluations <- gsheet2tbl("https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EuSt-YonlHQyNELCAftSiZ72jAsPKhw5q5MqQhbY10/edit#gid=1821973371")[1:8]<br />
<br />
index <- rbind(<br />
cbind(items[c("ID", "Name")], Table = "items"),<br />
cbind(relations[c("ID", "Name")], Table = "relations"),<br />
cbind(evaluations[c("ID", "Name")], Table = "evaluations")<br />
)<br />
index <- melt(<br />
index,<br />
measure.vars = c("ID", "Name"),<br />
variable.name = "Column",<br />
value.name = "Identifier"<br />
)<br />
index <- index[!is.na(index$Identifier),]<br />
if(anyDuplicated(index$Identifier)) {<br />
cat("Warning: The following names are duplicated:\n")<br />
oprint(index[index$Identifier %in% index$Identifier[duplicated(index$Identifier)],])<br />
}<br />
#colnames(items) <- paste(colnames(items), "I", sep="_")<br />
#colnames(relations) <- paste(colnames(relations), "R", sep="_")<br />
colnames(evaluations)[colnames(evaluations)=="Evaluation"] <- "Predicate"<br />
relations <- rbind(relations, evaluations)<br />
}<br />
objects.latest("Op_fi5642", code_name = "preprocessing")<br />
<br />
jy2 <- jy<br />
for(i in 1:ncol(jy2)) jy2[[i]] <- as.character(jy2[[i]])<br />
jy2 <- jy2[1:100,]<br />
it <- data.frame(<br />
Name = c(jy2$Subjekti, jy2$Objekti),<br />
stringsAsFactors = TRUE<br />
)<br />
it <- it[!duplicated(it$Name) , , drop = FALSE]<br />
<br />
jygraph <- graph.data.frame(<br />
jy2[c(1,3,2,4:ncol(jy2))], <br />
directed = TRUE, <br />
vertices = it<br />
)<br />
<br />
plo <- plot.igraph(jygraph, <br />
vertex.label.cex = 0.8, <br />
vertex.label = NA,<br />
vertex.size = 2, #V(jygraph)$vsize, <br />
vertex.color = "Skyblue2",#V(jygraph)$vcolor, <br />
vertex.shape = "circle",#V(jygraph)$vshape,<br />
vertex.frame.color = "Black",<br />
vertex.label.family = "Helvetica",<br />
edge.color = "Black",#E(jygraph)$ecolor,<br />
edge.width = 0.5, #E(jygraph)$ewidth,<br />
edge.arrow.size = 0.5,<br />
layout = layout.fruchterman.reingold<br />
)<br />
l <- layout.fruchterman.reingold(jygraph)<br />
oprint(l)<br />
######################################<br />
<br />
#library(maptools)<br />
#library(RgoogleMaps)<br />
</rcode><br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
* [[Voting age]]<br />
* [[Structure of shared understanding]]<br />
* Osmo Soininvaara: Why we should have congestion charge. 3.4.2017 [http://www.soininvaara.fi/2017/04/03/kaupunkirakentamisen-aika-35-ruuhkamaksut/]<br />
* Helsinki: Regional congestion charge would improve air quality in Helsinki. 3.5.2017 [http://www.hel.fi/www/uutiset/fi/ymparistokeskus/ruuhkamaksu-030517] [http://www.hel.fi/www/uutiset/fi/ymparistokeskus/ruuhkamaksu-030517?pd=v]<br />
'''Articles in Wikipedia<br />
* [[:en:Congestion pricing|Congestion pricing]]<br />
* [[:en:London congestion charge|London congestion charge]]<br />
* [[:fi:Ruuhkamaksu|Ruuhkamaksu]]<br />
<br />
{{hidden|<br />
1 = <br />
== Add a discussion item, relation, or evaluation ==<br />
<br />
<rcode name="add" embed=1 label="Add a thing" showcode=-1 variables="<br />
name:thing|description:What kind of thing are you adding?|type:selection|options:<br />
'Items';Item;<br />
'Relations';Relation;<br />
'Evaluations';Evaluation|<br />
name:name|description:A short name for the thing|type:text|<br />
name:description|description:A description of the thing|type:textbox|<br />
name:type|description:Is this a value or factual statement?|type:selection|options:<br />
'Value';Value statement;'Fact';Factual statement;'I don't know';I don't know|<br />
category:Item|<br />
category_conditions:thing;'Items'|<br />
name:subject|description:The ID of the subject in the relation|type:text|<br />
category:Relation|<br />
category_conditions:thing;'Relations'|<br />
name:predicate|description:What is the relation (predicate)?|type:selection|options:<br />
'connects';connects with (by some non-specified way);<br />
'can coincide with';can conincide with;<br />
'instance of';is an instance of class;<br />
'subclass of';is a subclass of class|<br />
name:object|description:The ID of the object in the relation|type:text|<br />
name:type|description:Is the truth value for an item or a relation?|type:selection|options:<br />
'Item';For an item;'Relation';For a relation|<br />
category:Evaluation|<br />
category_conditions:thing;'Evaluations'|<br />
name:subject|description:The ID of the item or relation you want to evaluate|type:text|<br />
name:evaluation|description:Is the item or relation true?|type:selection|options:<br />
'True';It is true;'Maybe';It is maybe true;'False';It is false|<br />
name:pagename|type:hidden|default:'{{PAGENAME}}'|<br />
name:ident|type:hidden|default:'Op_en{{PAGEID}}'<br />
"><br />
library(OpasnetUtils)<br />
<br />
obs <- tryCatch(<br />
opbase.data(ident, subset = thing), <br />
error = function(...) return(NULL)<br />
)<br />
<br />
if (!is.null(obs)) {<br />
if ("Obs" %in% colnames(obs)) {<br />
at <- "replace"<br />
obs <- 1<br />
} else {<br />
at <- "append"<br />
obs <- obs$ID<br />
obs <- gsub("[A-Za-z]", "", as.character(obs))<br />
obs <- max(as.integer(obs)) + 1<br />
}<br />
} else {<br />
at <- "replace"<br />
obs <- 1<br />
}<br />
at <- "replace"<br />
obs <- 1<br />
<br />
dat <- data.frame(<br />
ID = obs,<br />
Timestamp = date(), <br />
User = wiki_username,<br />
Description = description<br />
)<br />
<br />
if(thing == "Items") {<br />
dat <- cbind(dat, data.frame(<br />
Type = type,<br />
Result = name<br />
))<br />
}<br />
<br />
if(thing == "Relations") {<br />
dat <- cbind(dat, data.frame(<br />
Subject = subject,<br />
Predicate = predicate, <br />
Object = object,<br />
Result = name<br />
))<br />
}<br />
if(thing == "Evaluations") {<br />
dat <- cbind(dat, data.frame(<br />
Thing = type,<br />
Subject = subject, <br />
Evaluation = evaluation,<br />
Result = name<br />
))<br />
}<br />
oprint(dat)<br />
<br />
opbase.upload(<br />
dat, <br />
ident = ident, <br />
name = pagename, <br />
subset = thing, <br />
act_type = at, <br />
language = "eng", <br />
who = wiki_username<br />
)<br />
<br />
# IF YOU HAVE TO EMPTY THE REMOVED THINGS, YOU HAVE TO DO IT BY HAND WITH THIS CODE<br />
if (FALSE) {<br />
dat <- data.frame(<br />
Timestamp = date(), <br />
User = wiki_username,<br />
Reason = "Initiation", <br />
Thing = thing,<br />
Result = "NA"<br />
)<br />
opbase.upload(<br />
dat, <br />
ident = ident, <br />
name = pagename, <br />
subset = "Removes", <br />
act_type = at, <br />
language = "eng", <br />
who = wiki_username<br />
)<br />
}<br />
cat("Your item has been successfully saved.\n")<br />
</rcode><br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
;<span id="Show">Current discussion things.</span><br />
<br />
<rcode name="show" label="Show discussion things" embed=1 showcode=-1 variables="<br />
name:thing|description:What kind of things do you want to see?|type:selection|options:<br />
'Items';Item;<br />
'Relations';Relation;<br />
'Evaluations';Evaluation|<br />
name:ident|type:hidden|default:'Op_en{{PAGEID}}'|<br />
name:pagename|type:hidden|default:'{{PAGENAME}}'<br />
"><br />
library(OpasnetUtils)<br />
<br />
pagename <- gsub(" ", "_", pagename)<br />
dat <- tryCatch(<br />
opbase.data(ident, subset = thing), <br />
error = function(...) return(NULL)<br />
)<br />
<br />
if (is.null(dat)) oprint("No things were found") else {<br />
poistot <- tryCatch(<br />
opbase.data(ident, subset = "Removes"), <br />
error = function(...) return(NULL)<br />
)<br />
<br />
if (!is.null(poistot)) dat <- dat[!dat$ID %in% poistot$Result[poistot$Thing == thing] , ]<br />
<br />
if(nrow(dat) == 0) {<br />
oprint("No items to show.")<br />
} else {<br />
oprint(dat, include.rownames = FALSE)<br />
}<br />
}<br />
</rcode><br />
<br />
'''Items to be removed'''<br />
<br />
<rcode name="remove" embed=1 label="Remove a thing" showcode=-1 variables="<br />
name:thing|description:What kind of thing are you removing?|type:selection|options:<br />
'Items';Item;<br />
'Relations';Relation;<br />
'Evaluations';Evaluation|<br />
name:id|description:ID of the thing to be removed|type:text|<br />
name:reason|description:Reason to remove|type:selection|options:<br />
;- Select reason -;<br />
'Item has been handled in other ways';Item has been handled in other ways;<br />
'Item is irrelevant';Item is irrelevant;<br />
'Item is vandalism';Item is vandalism (use sparingly)|<br />
name:ident|type:hidden|default:'Op_en{{PAGEID}}'|<br />
name:pagename|type:hidden|default:'{{PAGENAME}}'<br />
"><br />
library(OpasnetUtils)<br />
<br />
dat <- data.frame(<br />
Timestamp = date(), <br />
User = wiki_username,<br />
Reason = reason, <br />
Thing = thing,<br />
Result = id<br />
)<br />
<br />
opbase.upload(<br />
dat, <br />
ident = ident, <br />
name = pagename, <br />
subset = "Removes", <br />
act_type = "append", <br />
language = "eng",<br />
who = wiki_username<br />
)<br />
<br />
oprint("The thing has been successfully removed.\n")<br />
<br />
pois <- opbase.data(ident, subset = thing)<br />
<br />
oprint(pois[pois$ID == id & pois$Thing == thing , ], include.rownames = FALSE)<br />
<br />
</rcode><br />
}}</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=Congestion_charge&diff=40996Congestion charge2017-06-12T00:23:58Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Evaluations */</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Category:Traffic]]<br />
[[Category:Climate change]]<br />
{{assessment|moderator=Jouni|status=ongoing}}<br />
<br />
== Question ==<br />
<br />
What reasons are there for implementing or not implementing a congestion charging system in a city? What values and combinations of values result in which combination?<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
* The questions are generic, but we aim to look at the issue also specifically in Helsinki.<br />
* We look at the current situation.<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
* {{comment|# |Who could use this information and how? Fill in your thoughts.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 11:36, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
* Students on the course [[Decision analysis and risk management 2017]].<br />
* Participation happens on this page (including the related talk page) and also on [https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B5dY4ezoJ5FOWFdnT2NoS0tfa28 Google Drive], which contains three things:<br />
*# Real-time online editor for the three tables for [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EuSt-YonlHQyNELCAftSiZ72jAsPKhw5q5MqQhbY10/edit Items, Relations, and Evaluations].<br />
*# Real-time online editor for the [https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/18PJNYL91_xAgygDKuITptISnUFMWh3K5SUtxqn0w0y0/edit causal diagram] below.<br />
*# Real-time online chat that happens on a [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Jk3jK27MwHJesXMwdHwan9i5WwTF--hB4ekxwqau9U0/edit# Google Document].<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
<br />
{{comment|# |What options do exist? Fill in your thoughts.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 11:36, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
<br />
The assessment will be performed during April-May 2017.<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
In order to reach the sustainable mode of transport, road charges can be used. They can smoothen the trip and transport chain, control the congestion, make the transport system conveniently accessible and enhance the competitiveness of public transport.<br />
The road charges can take part in a compact urban structure of the core area, the rail corridors and the centers of the municipality.<br />
<br />
Road charges will cause costs but their costs are relatively low in comparison to the costs that congestions will cause in the lack of these constructions for the road users.<br />
<br />
In order for the road charges to be effective, new legislations that give permission for them to be constructed is required to be implemented. Fixed-term experimental legislations can be an alternative for this administration.<br />
<br />
Costs are really important in this case. Therefore the revenue of the road charge needs to be spent for the area in which the road charge is implemented. It should be considered that the funding for the area stated by the state or municipality is not influenced negatively because of the existence of the road charge.<br />
<br />
The transport system and the urban structure have to be optimized effectively in terms of socio-economic aspects that can be somehow tackled through the costs. <br />
Pressure can be caused in the planning since the road charges cause a high financial burden for some individuals that will lead to modification in their travel habits. <br />
<br />
Road charges enhance the city centre's’ role as service, employment and commercial hub. However, the attractiveness of the zone between the rings for commercial uses will decrease. <br />
<br />
Minimization of negative externalities of traffic demand on road network.<br />
<br />
*Road pricing (key economic tools)<br />
*Profit target (pricing model)<br />
*Improvement of traffic network system, minimum environmental impact,<br />
*Definition of congestion is decreasing transporters natural speed.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
<br />
[[File:Congestion charge causal diagram.png|400px|thumb|The causal diagram is based on this [https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/18PJNYL91_xAgygDKuITptISnUFMWh3K5SUtxqn0w0y0/edit Google drawing], which should be updated and uploaded to Opasnet from time to time.]]<br />
<br />
These tables are being written to Google Sheet (for easier user interface) and copied here from time to time. See [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EuSt-YonlHQyNELCAftSiZ72jAsPKhw5q5MqQhbY10/edit#gid=0 Google Sheets].<br />
<br />
==== Items ====<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Contents of Items table<br />
|----<br />
! Column|| Explanation<br />
|----<br />
|| ID|| Unique identifier of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Name|| A short descriptive name for this row. Used when making a reference to this row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Timestamp|| Time when the row was added.<br />
|----<br />
|| User|| Who added the row (first name)<br />
|----<br />
|| Type|| It the item a factual statement (fact) or value statement (value); or decision, action or variable?<br />
|----<br />
|| Description|| Verbal description of the content of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<t2b name="Items" index="ID,Name,Timestamp,User,Type" obs="Description" unit="-"><br />
I1| Air Quality|20.5.17 0:00|edem|fact|congestion charge affect air quality<br />
I2| Health|15.5.17 0:00|edem|fact|Congestion charge scheme will improve the populations’ health<br />
I3|Choices|15.5.17 0:00|edem|value|Congestion charge scheme constrains individual choice and behavior.<br />
I4| Roads usage|15.5.17 0:00|edem|value|The economic viability of tariffs and transformation of urban space will encourage more use of roads and cars.<br />
I5| Capital growth in |29.4.17 1:07|edem|value|congestion charge schemes can restrict urban mobility and human capital growth.<br />
I6|Toxicity charge unfair|15.5.17 0:00|edem|value|Toxicity charge as a form of congestion charge is unfair to old car users<br />
I7|Prevent misuse of shared resource|15.5.17 0:00|edem|value|congestion charge prevents the occurrence of misuse use of shared resource <br />
I8|economic|15.5.17 0:00|kaisu|value|financially cost-saving <br />
I9|effect on traffic|15.5.17 0:00|kaisu|fact|changes the traffic flow both in terms of space and time<br />
I10|Congestion charge need to be dynamics|15.5.17 0:00|Tamara|value|To ensure air quality standards, the congestion charge scheme needs to be dynamic<br />
I11|Choose CC system: none, VE1, VE3|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|decision|Decision for the city council to make: to choose one congestion charge policy or none.<br />
I12|Investment and implementation costs|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Costs occurring from the investment and operation (on annual basis) of the congestion charge system<br />
I13|Number of cars during rush hours|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Number of cars during rush hours on important busy streets (answer to this variable can most easily be described as a map with congestion situation on different streets)<br />
I14|Tax revenue|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Amount of taxes collected from the congestion charge system<br />
I15|People's values|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|indicator|People's values and attitudes about congestion charge, freedom to drive etc.<br />
I16|People's behaviour|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|decision|Actions that people take based on their values, economic incentives, and practicalities<br />
I17|Transport mode distribution (car, bus, bike, walk)|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Numbers of people in different traffic modes in Helsinki (especially during rush hour)<br />
I18|Reachability of downtown and suburban areas|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|How accessible different places in the city are, in respect of time or money needed to go there, or their attractiveness<br />
I19|Active transport (physical exercise)|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Amount of physical exercise that people do to reach the places where they are going rather than because of training (also known as active transport)<br />
I20|Air pollution and CO2 emissions|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Emissions that occur from the traffic (specified spatially and temporally, because rush hour emissions expose more people than otherwise)<br />
I21|Climate and health impacts|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|indicator|A summary indicator of climate and health impacts of congestion charge policies<br />
I22|Economic impacts|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|indicator|A summary indicator of economic impacts for different stakeholders (citizens, car drivers, overall societal impacts, companies in downtown or suburban areas)<br />
I23|Need-based pricing model|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|value|Pricing modeling strategy based on planned profit target should be avoided in this case.<br />
I24|Urban structure|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|variable|Tariffication of urban space will contribute to physically dissect Helsinki into price zones<br />
I25|Social modification|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|value|Social space should be a citizen entitlement<br />
I26|Segment-based toll gate strategy|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|value|Utilise toll gate strategies based on segments<br />
I27|Pilot driver behavior|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|value|Drivers to behavioral shift should be weighed before piloting (using heuristic analysis based on nudge theory)<br />
I28|Social activities should be planned|16.5.17 0:00|Jouni|value|Social activities and commercial accessibility should be planned before implementation so smart solutions won't create a constraint<br />
</t2b><br />
<br />
==== Relations ====<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Contents of Relations table<br />
|----<br />
! Column|| Explanation<br />
|----<br />
|| ID|| Unique identifier of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Name|| A short descriptive name for this row. Used when making a reference to this row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Timestamp|| Time when the row was added.<br />
|----<br />
|| User|| Who added the row (first name)<br />
|----<br />
|| Subject|| Name or identifier of the thing we are talking about<br />
|----<br />
|| Predicate|| Predicate of a sentence (i.e. a verb describing a relation). For list of relations, see [[Structure of shared understanding]]<br />
|----<br />
|| Object|| Name or identifier of a thing, or number (see above)<br />
|----<br />
|| Description|| Verbal description of the content of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<t2b name="Relations" index="ID,Name,Timestamp,User,Subject,Predicate,Object" obs="Description" unit="-"><br />
R1||15.5.17 12:00|ehab|decrease in 10 % PM emission|affect|Improvement of Air Quality|<br />
R2| Health|15.5.17 0:00|tamara|reduction in road accident|supports|Improvement of Health|<br />
R3|Choices|15.5.17 0:00|Amr|improvement in public transport patronage|supports|Affect Choices|<br />
R4|Roads usage|15.5.17 0:00|Tine||against|Encouragement of Roads usage|<br />
R5|Capital growth|15.5.17 0:00|Amr| Viable increase in bussiness occupancies out of Helsinki center|against|Against human capital growth in center of helsinki|<br />
R6|Toxicity charge |15.5.17 0:00|edem|equal tariff scheme|supports|Toxicity charge unfair|<br />
R7|Shared resource|15.5.17 0:00|edem|effective usage of road|makes relevant |Prevent misuse of shared resource|<br />
R8|economic|15.5.17 0:00|kaisu|Climate and health impacts|associates to|economic|<br />
R9|effect on traffic|15.5.17 0:00|kaisu|effective usage of road|affect|effect on traffic|<br />
R10|Congestion charge needs to be dynamic|15.5.17 0:00|Tamara|Congestion charge need to be dynamics|support|Congestion charge needs to be dynamic|<br />
R11|Choose CC system: none, VE1, VE3|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Choose CC system: none, VE1, VE3|affect|Tax revenue|<br />
R12|Investment and implementation costs|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Investment and implementation costs|affect|economic|<br />
R13|Number of cars during rush hours|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Number of cars during rush hours|affect|Reachability of downtown and suburban areas|<br />
R14|Tax revenue|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|tax revenue |makes relevant|decision of council to choose a congestion charge|<br />
R15|People's values|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|People's values|support|Prevent misuse of shared resource|<br />
R16|People's behaviour|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|People's behaviour|affect|Transport mode distribution (car, bus, bike, walk)|<br />
R17|Transport mode distribution (car, bus, bike, walk)|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|effect on traffic|affect|People's behaviour|<br />
R18|Reachability of downtown and suburban areas|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|reachability of downtown and suburban areas|support|active transport(physical exercise)|<br />
R19|Active transport (physical exercise)|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Active transport (physical exercise)|affect|Improvement of Health|<br />
R20|Air pollution and CO2 emissions|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Air pollution and CO2 emissios |affect |climate and health impacts|<br />
R21|Climate and health impacts|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|Climate and health impacts|makes relevant|Tax revenue|<br />
R22|Economic impacts|15.5.17 0:00|Jouni|tax revenue |affects|economic impart|<br />
</t2b><br />
<br />
==== Evaluations ====<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Contents of Evaluations table<br />
|----<br />
! Column|| Explanation<br />
|----<br />
|| ID|| Unique identifier of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Name|| A short descriptive name for this row. Used when making a reference to this row.<br />
|----<br />
|| Timestamp|| Time when the row was added.<br />
|----<br />
|| User|| Who added the row (first name)<br />
|----<br />
|| Subject|| Name or identifier of the thing we are talking about<br />
|----<br />
|| Evaluation|| One of the relations listed below. The content goes to column Object.<br />
* Truth: Either True or False<br />
* Probability: A value between 0 and 1<br />
* Better than: An item or relation that is worse than subject<br />
* More important than: An item or relation that is less important than subject<br />
* Utility: A value between 0 (least preferred choice) and 1 (most preferred choice)<br />
|----<br />
|| Object|| Name or identifier of a thing, or number (see above)<br />
|----<br />
|| Description|| Verbal description of the content of the row.<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<t2b name="Evaluations" index="ID,Name,Timestamp,User,Subject,Evaluation,Object" obs="Description" unit="-"><br />
E1| Air Quality|15.5.17 12:00|ehab|reduction in levels of emissions||Improvement of Air Quality|<br />
E2| Health|30.12.99 0:00|tamara|reduction in road accident||Improvement of Health|<br />
E3|Choices|30.12.99 0:00|Amr|improvement in public transport patronage||Affect Choices|<br />
E4|Roads usage|30.12.99 0:00|Tine|||Encouragement of Roads usage|<br />
E5|Capital growth|30.12.99 0:00|Amr| Viable increase in bussiness occupancies out of Helsinki center||Against human capital growth in center of helsinki|<br />
E6|Toxicity charge |30.12.99 0:00|edem|equal tariff scheme||Toxicity charge unfair|<br />
E7|Shared resource|30.12.99 0:00|edem|effective usage of road||Prevent misuse of shared resource|<br />
</t2b><br />
<br />
* {{comment|# |Add links to pages that belong to this assessment.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 11:36, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{comment|# |https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B5dY4ezoJ5FOWFdnT2NoS0tfa28|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 00:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
<rcode graphics=1><br />
library(OpasnetUtils)<br />
library(OpasnetUtilsExt)<br />
#library(gsheet)<br />
library(reshape2)<br />
library(igraph)<br />
oprint(google.point_kml)<br />
oprint(google.show_kml_data_on_maps)<br />
<br />
if(FALSE){<br />
items <- gsheet2tbl("https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EuSt-YonlHQyNELCAftSiZ72jAsPKhw5q5MqQhbY10/edit")[1:6]<br />
relations <- gsheet2tbl("https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EuSt-YonlHQyNELCAftSiZ72jAsPKhw5q5MqQhbY10/edit#gid=781892235")[1:8]<br />
evaluations <- gsheet2tbl("https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EuSt-YonlHQyNELCAftSiZ72jAsPKhw5q5MqQhbY10/edit#gid=1821973371")[1:8]<br />
<br />
index <- rbind(<br />
cbind(items[c("ID", "Name")], Table = "items"),<br />
cbind(relations[c("ID", "Name")], Table = "relations"),<br />
cbind(evaluations[c("ID", "Name")], Table = "evaluations")<br />
)<br />
index <- melt(<br />
index,<br />
measure.vars = c("ID", "Name"),<br />
variable.name = "Column",<br />
value.name = "Identifier"<br />
)<br />
index <- index[!is.na(index$Identifier),]<br />
if(anyDuplicated(index$Identifier)) {<br />
cat("Warning: The following names are duplicated:\n")<br />
oprint(index[index$Identifier %in% index$Identifier[duplicated(index$Identifier)],])<br />
}<br />
#colnames(items) <- paste(colnames(items), "I", sep="_")<br />
#colnames(relations) <- paste(colnames(relations), "R", sep="_")<br />
colnames(evaluations)[colnames(evaluations)=="Evaluation"] <- "Predicate"<br />
relations <- rbind(relations, evaluations)<br />
}<br />
objects.latest("Op_fi5642", code_name = "preprocessing")<br />
<br />
jy2 <- jy<br />
for(i in 1:ncol(jy2)) jy2[[i]] <- as.character(jy2[[i]])<br />
jy2 <- jy2[1:100,]<br />
it <- data.frame(<br />
Name = c(jy2$Subjekti, jy2$Objekti),<br />
stringsAsFactors = TRUE<br />
)<br />
it <- it[!duplicated(it$Name) , , drop = FALSE]<br />
<br />
jygraph <- graph.data.frame(<br />
jy2[c(1,3,2,4:ncol(jy2))], <br />
directed = TRUE, <br />
vertices = it<br />
)<br />
<br />
plo <- plot.igraph(jygraph, <br />
vertex.label.cex = 0.8, <br />
vertex.label = NA,<br />
vertex.size = 2, #V(jygraph)$vsize, <br />
vertex.color = "Skyblue2",#V(jygraph)$vcolor, <br />
vertex.shape = "circle",#V(jygraph)$vshape,<br />
vertex.frame.color = "Black",<br />
vertex.label.family = "Helvetica",<br />
edge.color = "Black",#E(jygraph)$ecolor,<br />
edge.width = 0.5, #E(jygraph)$ewidth,<br />
edge.arrow.size = 0.5,<br />
layout = layout.fruchterman.reingold<br />
)<br />
l <- layout.fruchterman.reingold(jygraph)<br />
oprint(l)<br />
######################################<br />
<br />
#library(maptools)<br />
#library(RgoogleMaps)<br />
</rcode><br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
* [[Voting age]]<br />
* [[Structure of shared understanding]]<br />
* Osmo Soininvaara: Why we should have congestion charge. 3.4.2017 [http://www.soininvaara.fi/2017/04/03/kaupunkirakentamisen-aika-35-ruuhkamaksut/]<br />
* Helsinki: Regional congestion charge would improve air quality in Helsinki. 3.5.2017 [http://www.hel.fi/www/uutiset/fi/ymparistokeskus/ruuhkamaksu-030517] [http://www.hel.fi/www/uutiset/fi/ymparistokeskus/ruuhkamaksu-030517?pd=v]<br />
'''Articles in Wikipedia<br />
* [[:en:Congestion pricing|Congestion pricing]]<br />
* [[:en:London congestion charge|London congestion charge]]<br />
* [[:fi:Ruuhkamaksu|Ruuhkamaksu]]<br />
<br />
{{hidden|<br />
1 = <br />
== Add a discussion item, relation, or evaluation ==<br />
<br />
<rcode name="add" embed=1 label="Add a thing" showcode=-1 variables="<br />
name:thing|description:What kind of thing are you adding?|type:selection|options:<br />
'Items';Item;<br />
'Relations';Relation;<br />
'Evaluations';Evaluation|<br />
name:name|description:A short name for the thing|type:text|<br />
name:description|description:A description of the thing|type:textbox|<br />
name:type|description:Is this a value or factual statement?|type:selection|options:<br />
'Value';Value statement;'Fact';Factual statement;'I don't know';I don't know|<br />
category:Item|<br />
category_conditions:thing;'Items'|<br />
name:subject|description:The ID of the subject in the relation|type:text|<br />
category:Relation|<br />
category_conditions:thing;'Relations'|<br />
name:predicate|description:What is the relation (predicate)?|type:selection|options:<br />
'connects';connects with (by some non-specified way);<br />
'can coincide with';can conincide with;<br />
'instance of';is an instance of class;<br />
'subclass of';is a subclass of class|<br />
name:object|description:The ID of the object in the relation|type:text|<br />
name:type|description:Is the truth value for an item or a relation?|type:selection|options:<br />
'Item';For an item;'Relation';For a relation|<br />
category:Evaluation|<br />
category_conditions:thing;'Evaluations'|<br />
name:subject|description:The ID of the item or relation you want to evaluate|type:text|<br />
name:evaluation|description:Is the item or relation true?|type:selection|options:<br />
'True';It is true;'Maybe';It is maybe true;'False';It is false|<br />
name:pagename|type:hidden|default:'{{PAGENAME}}'|<br />
name:ident|type:hidden|default:'Op_en{{PAGEID}}'<br />
"><br />
library(OpasnetUtils)<br />
<br />
obs <- tryCatch(<br />
opbase.data(ident, subset = thing), <br />
error = function(...) return(NULL)<br />
)<br />
<br />
if (!is.null(obs)) {<br />
if ("Obs" %in% colnames(obs)) {<br />
at <- "replace"<br />
obs <- 1<br />
} else {<br />
at <- "append"<br />
obs <- obs$ID<br />
obs <- gsub("[A-Za-z]", "", as.character(obs))<br />
obs <- max(as.integer(obs)) + 1<br />
}<br />
} else {<br />
at <- "replace"<br />
obs <- 1<br />
}<br />
at <- "replace"<br />
obs <- 1<br />
<br />
dat <- data.frame(<br />
ID = obs,<br />
Timestamp = date(), <br />
User = wiki_username,<br />
Description = description<br />
)<br />
<br />
if(thing == "Items") {<br />
dat <- cbind(dat, data.frame(<br />
Type = type,<br />
Result = name<br />
))<br />
}<br />
<br />
if(thing == "Relations") {<br />
dat <- cbind(dat, data.frame(<br />
Subject = subject,<br />
Predicate = predicate, <br />
Object = object,<br />
Result = name<br />
))<br />
}<br />
if(thing == "Evaluations") {<br />
dat <- cbind(dat, data.frame(<br />
Thing = type,<br />
Subject = subject, <br />
Evaluation = evaluation,<br />
Result = name<br />
))<br />
}<br />
oprint(dat)<br />
<br />
opbase.upload(<br />
dat, <br />
ident = ident, <br />
name = pagename, <br />
subset = thing, <br />
act_type = at, <br />
language = "eng", <br />
who = wiki_username<br />
)<br />
<br />
# IF YOU HAVE TO EMPTY THE REMOVED THINGS, YOU HAVE TO DO IT BY HAND WITH THIS CODE<br />
if (FALSE) {<br />
dat <- data.frame(<br />
Timestamp = date(), <br />
User = wiki_username,<br />
Reason = "Initiation", <br />
Thing = thing,<br />
Result = "NA"<br />
)<br />
opbase.upload(<br />
dat, <br />
ident = ident, <br />
name = pagename, <br />
subset = "Removes", <br />
act_type = at, <br />
language = "eng", <br />
who = wiki_username<br />
)<br />
}<br />
cat("Your item has been successfully saved.\n")<br />
</rcode><br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
;<span id="Show">Current discussion things.</span><br />
<br />
<rcode name="show" label="Show discussion things" embed=1 showcode=-1 variables="<br />
name:thing|description:What kind of things do you want to see?|type:selection|options:<br />
'Items';Item;<br />
'Relations';Relation;<br />
'Evaluations';Evaluation|<br />
name:ident|type:hidden|default:'Op_en{{PAGEID}}'|<br />
name:pagename|type:hidden|default:'{{PAGENAME}}'<br />
"><br />
library(OpasnetUtils)<br />
<br />
pagename <- gsub(" ", "_", pagename)<br />
dat <- tryCatch(<br />
opbase.data(ident, subset = thing), <br />
error = function(...) return(NULL)<br />
)<br />
<br />
if (is.null(dat)) oprint("No things were found") else {<br />
poistot <- tryCatch(<br />
opbase.data(ident, subset = "Removes"), <br />
error = function(...) return(NULL)<br />
)<br />
<br />
if (!is.null(poistot)) dat <- dat[!dat$ID %in% poistot$Result[poistot$Thing == thing] , ]<br />
<br />
if(nrow(dat) == 0) {<br />
oprint("No items to show.")<br />
} else {<br />
oprint(dat, include.rownames = FALSE)<br />
}<br />
}<br />
</rcode><br />
<br />
'''Items to be removed'''<br />
<br />
<rcode name="remove" embed=1 label="Remove a thing" showcode=-1 variables="<br />
name:thing|description:What kind of thing are you removing?|type:selection|options:<br />
'Items';Item;<br />
'Relations';Relation;<br />
'Evaluations';Evaluation|<br />
name:id|description:ID of the thing to be removed|type:text|<br />
name:reason|description:Reason to remove|type:selection|options:<br />
;- Select reason -;<br />
'Item has been handled in other ways';Item has been handled in other ways;<br />
'Item is irrelevant';Item is irrelevant;<br />
'Item is vandalism';Item is vandalism (use sparingly)|<br />
name:ident|type:hidden|default:'Op_en{{PAGEID}}'|<br />
name:pagename|type:hidden|default:'{{PAGENAME}}'<br />
"><br />
library(OpasnetUtils)<br />
<br />
dat <- data.frame(<br />
Timestamp = date(), <br />
User = wiki_username,<br />
Reason = reason, <br />
Thing = thing,<br />
Result = id<br />
)<br />
<br />
opbase.upload(<br />
dat, <br />
ident = ident, <br />
name = pagename, <br />
subset = "Removes", <br />
act_type = "append", <br />
language = "eng",<br />
who = wiki_username<br />
)<br />
<br />
oprint("The thing has been successfully removed.\n")<br />
<br />
pois <- opbase.data(ident, subset = thing)<br />
<br />
oprint(pois[pois$ID == id & pois$Thing == thing , ], include.rownames = FALSE)<br />
<br />
</rcode><br />
}}</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40995User:Ehab Mustafa2017-06-12T00:05:51Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* t2b table and Opasnet Base Uploader */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 2''' =<br />
<br />
==Using templates==<br />
<br />
This is Just a demonstration of dealing with templates on opasnet. {{Urgenche}}<br />
<br />
==t2b table and Opasnet Base Uploader==<br />
<br />
This is just a demonstration of using this skill on opasnet environment<br />
<br />
<t2b index="Month,Year" unit="Finnish Metrology" obs="Average Temperature"><br />
June|2001|22<br />
June|2007|19<br />
June|2010|17<br />
June|2016|20<br />
</t2b><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Rotterdam and Dutch government.<br />
<br />
:::{{attack|# |This must be a typo, as you are looking at Rotterdam.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
::::{{defend|# |Mistake was revealed and corrected|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 06:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
:{{comment|# |The word 'structurally' is a bit ambiguous here. Does that mean city structure (urban planning) or administrative structures and policy processes? In addition, you mention uncertainties but you do not define how those should be taken into account. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 8''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 9''' =<br />
<br />
=='''Task A: Evaluation of [[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 4|assessment draft]] by Tine and Tamara'''==<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || The draft assessment is meant for evaluate the adaptation strategies to climate change in Singapore. Clear and specific questions about the reliability and sufficiency of the indented actions planned for in Singapore's climate change adaptation strategy.<br />
|----<br />
| Causes || Importance for assessing the adaptation strategy raised from the seriousness of the possible impacts brought by climate change in Singapore. This includes Sea level elevation and its impact on Singapore's urban sustainability, increase in rainfall and thread of flooding, and temperature elevation and its impact on public health and energy demand.<br />
|----<br />
| Problem Owner || It was stated that the borders of Singapore are the boundaries of the assessment, so it could be considered that the problem owner are the entire population of Singapore.<br />
|----<br />
| Target || The assessment is especially useful for decision makers, who can use the information derived from this assessment for further development, improvement and implementation of climate change adaptation strategies.<br />
|----<br />
| Interaction || The participant of the assessment were identified (see scope of participation below). However, the way how they could interact was lacking.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Government of Singapore, Citizens of Singapore, and Different working groups.<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| The way and extent how different participants could contribute in the assessment were not well stated.<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| The number of stated participants in the assessment was overwhelming and the background where they come from was diverse. This properly might lead to a comprehensive assessment of good quality.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, correctness of information.<br />
| 4<br />
| The aim of the assessment was clear and the offered information was varied by the solely used reference.<br />
|-----<br />
| rowspan="4"| ''Applicability''<br />
| ''Relevance'': Correspondence between output and its intended use<br />
|1<br />
| Results of the assessment are poorly stated in its right place under the subtitle '''Results'''. They rather briefly mentioned under '''Decisions and scenarios''' section.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Availability'': Accessibility of the output to users<br />
| 4<br />
| It seems that the results and outcomes of the assessment are available to everyone not exclusive to a specific group of the participants.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Usability'': Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s)<br />
| 4<br />
| Taking into account the overwhelming number of the participant, the assessment sounds to be comprehensive and potential to generate useful information to everyone.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Acceptability'': Potential of the output being accepted by its users.<br />
| 5<br />
| The output should be accepted by the users when the broad scope of the participation is considered.<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Efficiency'': Resource expenditure for assessment<br />
|1<br />
| The cost is seems to very high when considering all those participants to be brought on one table for performing the assessment.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
'''Suggestions for improving the quality of the assessment:'''<br />
The assessment did not provide answers to the questions stated in the begging's of the assessment. It would be beneficial to provide a clear set of answers for those in one distinctive section. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=='''Task B: Evaluation of [http://opasnet.org/w/Benefit-risk_assessment_of_cinnamon benefit-risk assessment of cinnamon''']==<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || This draft Assessment Report is published to support the release for public consultation of the draft Community herbal monograph on Cinnamomum verum J. S. Presl, cortex and corticis aetheroleum. <br />
|-----<br />
| Causes || Inconsistency in the market authorization of cinnamon and its product in different state in the EU.<br />
|-----<br />
| Problem owner || Pharmaceutical firms, medical agencies, health authorities and final consumers<br />
|-----<br />
|Target || The publication of this draft assessment report has been agreed to facilitate the understanding by Interested Parties of the assessment that has been carried out so far and led to the preparation of the draft monograph.<br />
|-----<br />
| Interaction || The assessment was based on collaboration using a wide variety of peer-reviewed clinical and non-clinical data that has been produced in different academic and scientific institutes.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products (HMPC) is the main entity in performing the assessment<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| The assessment is mainly based on scientific literature that was published in accessible journals<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| The access for sources of scientific information used in the assessment is valid as long as the publishing journals exist<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| The assessing entity "Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products" should is supposed to consist of scientist from different backgrounds covering the topic from every possible view<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of participation<br />
| The diversity of the committee guaranteed a comprehensive assessment of a good quality<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, corectnss of information.<br />
| 5<br />
| The purpose of the assessment was well stated. Peer-reviewing of the used scientific data guaranteed its reliability.<br />
|-----<br />
| rowspan="4"| ''Applicability''<br />
| ''Relevance'': Correspondence between output and its intended use<br />
| 3<br />
| The implementation of the assessment outcomes was not identifies. However, the quality of the assessment content makes it helpful in different ways<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Availability'': Accessibility of the output to users<br />
| 5<br />
| The assessment conclusions were well identified in the report of the assessment. The assessment report is freely available on the internet.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Usability'': Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s)<br />
| 5<br />
| The content and conclusions of the assessment are reliable and easy to understand. They would be helpful for different stallholders in the terms of being used.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Acceptability'': Potential of the output being accepted by its users<br />
| 3<br />
| The assessment is generally considered as acceptable. However, a question marks is still raised about the participation of pharmaceutical firms and other business corporation in the assessing committee.<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Efficiency'': Resource expenditure for assessment<br />
| 3<br />
| Thought there was available information on resources expenditure in the report of the assessment, it seems that bringing expertise in the assessing would be of a considerable cost.<br />
|}</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40959User:Ehab Mustafa2017-06-11T00:48:01Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 2 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 2''' =<br />
<br />
==Using templates==<br />
<br />
This is Just a demonstration of dealing with templates on opasnet. {{Urgenche}}<br />
<br />
==t2b table and Opasnet Base Uploader==<br />
<br />
This is just a demonstration of using this skill on opasnet environment<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Rotterdam and Dutch government.<br />
<br />
:::{{attack|# |This must be a typo, as you are looking at Rotterdam.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
::::{{defend|# |Mistake was revealed and corrected|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 06:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
:{{comment|# |The word 'structurally' is a bit ambiguous here. Does that mean city structure (urban planning) or administrative structures and policy processes? In addition, you mention uncertainties but you do not define how those should be taken into account. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 8''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 9''' =<br />
<br />
=='''Task A: Evaluation of [[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 4|assessment draft]] by Tine and Tamara'''==<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || The draft assessment is meant for evaluate the adaptation strategies to climate change in Singapore. Clear and specific questions about the reliability and sufficiency of the indented actions planned for in Singapore's climate change adaptation strategy.<br />
|----<br />
| Causes || Importance for assessing the adaptation strategy raised from the seriousness of the possible impacts brought by climate change in Singapore. This includes Sea level elevation and its impact on Singapore's urban sustainability, increase in rainfall and thread of flooding, and temperature elevation and its impact on public health and energy demand.<br />
|----<br />
| Problem Owner || It was stated that the borders of Singapore are the boundaries of the assessment, so it could be considered that the problem owner are the entire population of Singapore.<br />
|----<br />
| Target || The assessment is especially useful for decision makers, who can use the information derived from this assessment for further development, improvement and implementation of climate change adaptation strategies.<br />
|----<br />
| Interaction || The participant of the assessment were identified (see scope of participation below). However, the way how they could interact was lacking.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Government of Singapore, Citizens of Singapore, and Different working groups.<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| The way and extent how different participants could contribute in the assessment were not well stated.<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| The number of stated participants in the assessment was overwhelming and the background where they come from was diverse. This properly might lead to a comprehensive assessment of good quality.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, correctness of information.<br />
| 4<br />
| The aim of the assessment was clear and the offered information was varied by the solely used reference.<br />
|-----<br />
| rowspan="4"| ''Applicability''<br />
| ''Relevance'': Correspondence between output and its intended use<br />
|1<br />
| Results of the assessment are poorly stated in its right place under the subtitle '''Results'''. They rather briefly mentioned under '''Decisions and scenarios''' section.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Availability'': Accessibility of the output to users<br />
| 4<br />
| It seems that the results and outcomes of the assessment are available to everyone not exclusive to a specific group of the participants.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Usability'': Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s)<br />
| 4<br />
| Taking into account the overwhelming number of the participant, the assessment sounds to be comprehensive and potential to generate useful information to everyone.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Acceptability'': Potential of the output being accepted by its users.<br />
| 5<br />
| The output should be accepted by the users when the broad scope of the participation is considered.<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Efficiency'': Resource expenditure for assessment<br />
|1<br />
| The cost is seems to very high when considering all those participants to be brought on one table for performing the assessment.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
'''Suggestions for improving the quality of the assessment:'''<br />
The assessment did not provide answers to the questions stated in the begging's of the assessment. It would be beneficial to provide a clear set of answers for those in one distinctive section. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=='''Task B: Evaluation of [http://opasnet.org/w/Benefit-risk_assessment_of_cinnamon benefit-risk assessment of cinnamon''']==<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || This draft Assessment Report is published to support the release for public consultation of the draft Community herbal monograph on Cinnamomum verum J. S. Presl, cortex and corticis aetheroleum. <br />
|-----<br />
| Causes || Inconsistency in the market authorization of cinnamon and its product in different state in the EU.<br />
|-----<br />
| Problem owner || Pharmaceutical firms, medical agencies, health authorities and final consumers<br />
|-----<br />
|Target || The publication of this draft assessment report has been agreed to facilitate the understanding by Interested Parties of the assessment that has been carried out so far and led to the preparation of the draft monograph.<br />
|-----<br />
| Interaction || The assessment was based on collaboration using a wide variety of peer-reviewed clinical and non-clinical data that has been produced in different academic and scientific institutes.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products (HMPC) is the main entity in performing the assessment<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| The assessment is mainly based on scientific literature that was published in accessible journals<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| The access for sources of scientific information used in the assessment is valid as long as the publishing journals exist<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| The assessing entity "Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products" should is supposed to consist of scientist from different backgrounds covering the topic from every possible view<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of participation<br />
| The diversity of the committee guaranteed a comprehensive assessment of a good quality<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, corectnss of information.<br />
| 5<br />
| The purpose of the assessment was well stated. Peer-reviewing of the used scientific data guaranteed its reliability.<br />
|-----<br />
| rowspan="4"| ''Applicability''<br />
| ''Relevance'': Correspondence between output and its intended use<br />
| 3<br />
| The implementation of the assessment outcomes was not identifies. However, the quality of the assessment content makes it helpful in different ways<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Availability'': Accessibility of the output to users<br />
| 5<br />
| The assessment conclusions were well identified in the report of the assessment. The assessment report is freely available on the internet.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Usability'': Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s)<br />
| 5<br />
| The content and conclusions of the assessment are reliable and easy to understand. They would be helpful for different stallholders in the terms of being used.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Acceptability'': Potential of the output being accepted by its users<br />
| 3<br />
| The assessment is generally considered as acceptable. However, a question marks is still raised about the participation of pharmaceutical firms and other business corporation in the assessing committee.<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Efficiency'': Resource expenditure for assessment<br />
| 3<br />
| Thought there was available information on resources expenditure in the report of the assessment, it seems that bringing expertise in the assessing would be of a considerable cost.<br />
|}</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40958User:Ehab Mustafa2017-06-11T00:45:23Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 2 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 2''' =<br />
<br />
This is Just a demonstration of dealing with templates on opasnet. {{Urgenche}}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Rotterdam and Dutch government.<br />
<br />
:::{{attack|# |This must be a typo, as you are looking at Rotterdam.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
::::{{defend|# |Mistake was revealed and corrected|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 06:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
:{{comment|# |The word 'structurally' is a bit ambiguous here. Does that mean city structure (urban planning) or administrative structures and policy processes? In addition, you mention uncertainties but you do not define how those should be taken into account. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 8''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 9''' =<br />
<br />
=='''Task A: Evaluation of [[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 4|assessment draft]] by Tine and Tamara'''==<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || The draft assessment is meant for evaluate the adaptation strategies to climate change in Singapore. Clear and specific questions about the reliability and sufficiency of the indented actions planned for in Singapore's climate change adaptation strategy.<br />
|----<br />
| Causes || Importance for assessing the adaptation strategy raised from the seriousness of the possible impacts brought by climate change in Singapore. This includes Sea level elevation and its impact on Singapore's urban sustainability, increase in rainfall and thread of flooding, and temperature elevation and its impact on public health and energy demand.<br />
|----<br />
| Problem Owner || It was stated that the borders of Singapore are the boundaries of the assessment, so it could be considered that the problem owner are the entire population of Singapore.<br />
|----<br />
| Target || The assessment is especially useful for decision makers, who can use the information derived from this assessment for further development, improvement and implementation of climate change adaptation strategies.<br />
|----<br />
| Interaction || The participant of the assessment were identified (see scope of participation below). However, the way how they could interact was lacking.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Government of Singapore, Citizens of Singapore, and Different working groups.<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| The way and extent how different participants could contribute in the assessment were not well stated.<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| The number of stated participants in the assessment was overwhelming and the background where they come from was diverse. This properly might lead to a comprehensive assessment of good quality.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, correctness of information.<br />
| 4<br />
| The aim of the assessment was clear and the offered information was varied by the solely used reference.<br />
|-----<br />
| rowspan="4"| ''Applicability''<br />
| ''Relevance'': Correspondence between output and its intended use<br />
|1<br />
| Results of the assessment are poorly stated in its right place under the subtitle '''Results'''. They rather briefly mentioned under '''Decisions and scenarios''' section.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Availability'': Accessibility of the output to users<br />
| 4<br />
| It seems that the results and outcomes of the assessment are available to everyone not exclusive to a specific group of the participants.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Usability'': Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s)<br />
| 4<br />
| Taking into account the overwhelming number of the participant, the assessment sounds to be comprehensive and potential to generate useful information to everyone.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Acceptability'': Potential of the output being accepted by its users.<br />
| 5<br />
| The output should be accepted by the users when the broad scope of the participation is considered.<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Efficiency'': Resource expenditure for assessment<br />
|1<br />
| The cost is seems to very high when considering all those participants to be brought on one table for performing the assessment.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
'''Suggestions for improving the quality of the assessment:'''<br />
The assessment did not provide answers to the questions stated in the begging's of the assessment. It would be beneficial to provide a clear set of answers for those in one distinctive section. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=='''Task B: Evaluation of [http://opasnet.org/w/Benefit-risk_assessment_of_cinnamon benefit-risk assessment of cinnamon''']==<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || This draft Assessment Report is published to support the release for public consultation of the draft Community herbal monograph on Cinnamomum verum J. S. Presl, cortex and corticis aetheroleum. <br />
|-----<br />
| Causes || Inconsistency in the market authorization of cinnamon and its product in different state in the EU.<br />
|-----<br />
| Problem owner || Pharmaceutical firms, medical agencies, health authorities and final consumers<br />
|-----<br />
|Target || The publication of this draft assessment report has been agreed to facilitate the understanding by Interested Parties of the assessment that has been carried out so far and led to the preparation of the draft monograph.<br />
|-----<br />
| Interaction || The assessment was based on collaboration using a wide variety of peer-reviewed clinical and non-clinical data that has been produced in different academic and scientific institutes.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products (HMPC) is the main entity in performing the assessment<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| The assessment is mainly based on scientific literature that was published in accessible journals<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| The access for sources of scientific information used in the assessment is valid as long as the publishing journals exist<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| The assessing entity "Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products" should is supposed to consist of scientist from different backgrounds covering the topic from every possible view<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of participation<br />
| The diversity of the committee guaranteed a comprehensive assessment of a good quality<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, corectnss of information.<br />
| 5<br />
| The purpose of the assessment was well stated. Peer-reviewing of the used scientific data guaranteed its reliability.<br />
|-----<br />
| rowspan="4"| ''Applicability''<br />
| ''Relevance'': Correspondence between output and its intended use<br />
| 3<br />
| The implementation of the assessment outcomes was not identifies. However, the quality of the assessment content makes it helpful in different ways<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Availability'': Accessibility of the output to users<br />
| 5<br />
| The assessment conclusions were well identified in the report of the assessment. The assessment report is freely available on the internet.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Usability'': Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s)<br />
| 5<br />
| The content and conclusions of the assessment are reliable and easy to understand. They would be helpful for different stallholders in the terms of being used.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Acceptability'': Potential of the output being accepted by its users<br />
| 3<br />
| The assessment is generally considered as acceptable. However, a question marks is still raised about the participation of pharmaceutical firms and other business corporation in the assessing committee.<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Efficiency'': Resource expenditure for assessment<br />
| 3<br />
| Thought there was available information on resources expenditure in the report of the assessment, it seems that bringing expertise in the assessing would be of a considerable cost.<br />
|}</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40957User:Ehab Mustafa2017-06-11T00:38:06Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Task B: Evaluation of benefit-risk assessment of cinnamon */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 2''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Rotterdam and Dutch government.<br />
<br />
:::{{attack|# |This must be a typo, as you are looking at Rotterdam.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
::::{{defend|# |Mistake was revealed and corrected|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 06:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
:{{comment|# |The word 'structurally' is a bit ambiguous here. Does that mean city structure (urban planning) or administrative structures and policy processes? In addition, you mention uncertainties but you do not define how those should be taken into account. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 8''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 9''' =<br />
<br />
=='''Task A: Evaluation of [[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 4|assessment draft]] by Tine and Tamara'''==<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || The draft assessment is meant for evaluate the adaptation strategies to climate change in Singapore. Clear and specific questions about the reliability and sufficiency of the indented actions planned for in Singapore's climate change adaptation strategy.<br />
|----<br />
| Causes || Importance for assessing the adaptation strategy raised from the seriousness of the possible impacts brought by climate change in Singapore. This includes Sea level elevation and its impact on Singapore's urban sustainability, increase in rainfall and thread of flooding, and temperature elevation and its impact on public health and energy demand.<br />
|----<br />
| Problem Owner || It was stated that the borders of Singapore are the boundaries of the assessment, so it could be considered that the problem owner are the entire population of Singapore.<br />
|----<br />
| Target || The assessment is especially useful for decision makers, who can use the information derived from this assessment for further development, improvement and implementation of climate change adaptation strategies.<br />
|----<br />
| Interaction || The participant of the assessment were identified (see scope of participation below). However, the way how they could interact was lacking.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Government of Singapore, Citizens of Singapore, and Different working groups.<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| The way and extent how different participants could contribute in the assessment were not well stated.<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| The number of stated participants in the assessment was overwhelming and the background where they come from was diverse. This properly might lead to a comprehensive assessment of good quality.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, correctness of information.<br />
| 4<br />
| The aim of the assessment was clear and the offered information was varied by the solely used reference.<br />
|-----<br />
| rowspan="4"| ''Applicability''<br />
| ''Relevance'': Correspondence between output and its intended use<br />
|1<br />
| Results of the assessment are poorly stated in its right place under the subtitle '''Results'''. They rather briefly mentioned under '''Decisions and scenarios''' section.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Availability'': Accessibility of the output to users<br />
| 4<br />
| It seems that the results and outcomes of the assessment are available to everyone not exclusive to a specific group of the participants.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Usability'': Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s)<br />
| 4<br />
| Taking into account the overwhelming number of the participant, the assessment sounds to be comprehensive and potential to generate useful information to everyone.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Acceptability'': Potential of the output being accepted by its users.<br />
| 5<br />
| The output should be accepted by the users when the broad scope of the participation is considered.<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Efficiency'': Resource expenditure for assessment<br />
|1<br />
| The cost is seems to very high when considering all those participants to be brought on one table for performing the assessment.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
'''Suggestions for improving the quality of the assessment:'''<br />
The assessment did not provide answers to the questions stated in the begging's of the assessment. It would be beneficial to provide a clear set of answers for those in one distinctive section. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=='''Task B: Evaluation of [http://opasnet.org/w/Benefit-risk_assessment_of_cinnamon benefit-risk assessment of cinnamon''']==<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || This draft Assessment Report is published to support the release for public consultation of the draft Community herbal monograph on Cinnamomum verum J. S. Presl, cortex and corticis aetheroleum. <br />
|-----<br />
| Causes || Inconsistency in the market authorization of cinnamon and its product in different state in the EU.<br />
|-----<br />
| Problem owner || Pharmaceutical firms, medical agencies, health authorities and final consumers<br />
|-----<br />
|Target || The publication of this draft assessment report has been agreed to facilitate the understanding by Interested Parties of the assessment that has been carried out so far and led to the preparation of the draft monograph.<br />
|-----<br />
| Interaction || The assessment was based on collaboration using a wide variety of peer-reviewed clinical and non-clinical data that has been produced in different academic and scientific institutes.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products (HMPC) is the main entity in performing the assessment<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| The assessment is mainly based on scientific literature that was published in accessible journals<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| The access for sources of scientific information used in the assessment is valid as long as the publishing journals exist<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| The assessing entity "Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products" should is supposed to consist of scientist from different backgrounds covering the topic from every possible view<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of participation<br />
| The diversity of the committee guaranteed a comprehensive assessment of a good quality<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, corectnss of information.<br />
| 5<br />
| The purpose of the assessment was well stated. Peer-reviewing of the used scientific data guaranteed its reliability.<br />
|-----<br />
| rowspan="4"| ''Applicability''<br />
| ''Relevance'': Correspondence between output and its intended use<br />
| 3<br />
| The implementation of the assessment outcomes was not identifies. However, the quality of the assessment content makes it helpful in different ways<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Availability'': Accessibility of the output to users<br />
| 5<br />
| The assessment conclusions were well identified in the report of the assessment. The assessment report is freely available on the internet.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Usability'': Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s)<br />
| 5<br />
| The content and conclusions of the assessment are reliable and easy to understand. They would be helpful for different stallholders in the terms of being used.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Acceptability'': Potential of the output being accepted by its users<br />
| 3<br />
| The assessment is generally considered as acceptable. However, a question marks is still raised about the participation of pharmaceutical firms and other business corporation in the assessing committee.<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Efficiency'': Resource expenditure for assessment<br />
| 3<br />
| Thought there was available information on resources expenditure in the report of the assessment, it seems that bringing expertise in the assessing would be of a considerable cost.<br />
|}</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40956User:Ehab Mustafa2017-06-10T23:48:35Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Task B: Evaluation of Benefit-risk assessment of cinnamon */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 2''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Rotterdam and Dutch government.<br />
<br />
:::{{attack|# |This must be a typo, as you are looking at Rotterdam.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
::::{{defend|# |Mistake was revealed and corrected|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 06:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
:{{comment|# |The word 'structurally' is a bit ambiguous here. Does that mean city structure (urban planning) or administrative structures and policy processes? In addition, you mention uncertainties but you do not define how those should be taken into account. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 8''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 9''' =<br />
<br />
=='''Task A: Evaluation of [[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 4|assessment draft]] by Tine and Tamara'''==<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || The draft assessment is meant for evaluate the adaptation strategies to climate change in Singapore. Clear and specific questions about the reliability and sufficiency of the indented actions planned for in Singapore's climate change adaptation strategy.<br />
|----<br />
| Causes || Importance for assessing the adaptation strategy raised from the seriousness of the possible impacts brought by climate change in Singapore. This includes Sea level elevation and its impact on Singapore's urban sustainability, increase in rainfall and thread of flooding, and temperature elevation and its impact on public health and energy demand.<br />
|----<br />
| Problem Owner || It was stated that the borders of Singapore are the boundaries of the assessment, so it could be considered that the problem owner are the entire population of Singapore.<br />
|----<br />
| Target || The assessment is especially useful for decision makers, who can use the information derived from this assessment for further development, improvement and implementation of climate change adaptation strategies.<br />
|----<br />
| Interaction || The participant of the assessment were identified (see scope of participation below). However, the way how they could interact was lacking.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Government of Singapore, Citizens of Singapore, and Different working groups.<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| The way and extent how different participants could contribute in the assessment were not well stated.<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| The number of stated participants in the assessment was overwhelming and the background where they come from was diverse. This properly might lead to a comprehensive assessment of good quality.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, correctness of information.<br />
| 4<br />
| The aim of the assessment was clear and the offered information was varied by the solely used reference.<br />
|-----<br />
| rowspan="4"| ''Applicability''<br />
| ''Relevance'': Correspondence between output and its intended use<br />
|1<br />
| Results of the assessment are poorly stated in its right place under the subtitle '''Results'''. They rather briefly mentioned under '''Decisions and scenarios''' section.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Availability'': Accessibility of the output to users<br />
| 4<br />
| It seems that the results and outcomes of the assessment are available to everyone not exclusive to a specific group of the participants.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Usability'': Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s)<br />
| 4<br />
| Taking into account the overwhelming number of the participant, the assessment sounds to be comprehensive and potential to generate useful information to everyone.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Acceptability'': Potential of the output being accepted by its users.<br />
| 5<br />
| The output should be accepted by the users when the broad scope of the participation is considered.<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Efficiency'': Resource expenditure for assessment<br />
|1<br />
| The cost is seems to very high when considering all those participants to be brought on one table for performing the assessment.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
'''Suggestions for improving the quality of the assessment:'''<br />
The assessment did not provide answers to the questions stated in the begging's of the assessment. It would be beneficial to provide a clear set of answers for those in one distinctive section. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=='''Task B: Evaluation of [http://opasnet.org/w/Benefit-risk_assessment_of_cinnamon benefit-risk assessment of cinnamon''']==<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || This draft Assessment Report is published to support the release for public consultation of the draft Community herbal monograph on Cinnamomum verum J. S. Presl, cortex and corticis aetheroleum. <br />
|-----<br />
| Causes || Inconsistency in the market authorization of cinnamon and its product in different state in the EU.<br />
|-----<br />
| Problem owner || Pharmaceutical firms, medical agencies, health authorities and final consumers<br />
|-----<br />
|Target || The publication of this draft assessment report has been agreed to facilitate the understanding by Interested Parties of the assessment that has been carried out so far and led to the preparation of the draft monograph.<br />
|-----<br />
| Interaction || The assessment was based on collaboration using a wide variety of peer-reviewed clinical and non-clinical data that has been produced in different academic and scientific institutes.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products (HMPC) is the main entity in performing the assessment<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| The assessment is mainly based on scientific literature that was published in accessible journals<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| The access for sources of scientific information used in the assessment is valid as long as the publishing journals exist<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| The assessing entity "Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products" should is supposed to consist of scientist from different backgrounds covering the topic from every possible view<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of participation<br />
| The diversity of the committee guaranteed a comprehensive assessment of a good quality<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, corectnss of information.<br />
| 4<br />
|</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40955User:Ehab Mustafa2017-06-10T23:47:57Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: </p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 2''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Rotterdam and Dutch government.<br />
<br />
:::{{attack|# |This must be a typo, as you are looking at Rotterdam.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
::::{{defend|# |Mistake was revealed and corrected|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 06:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
:{{comment|# |The word 'structurally' is a bit ambiguous here. Does that mean city structure (urban planning) or administrative structures and policy processes? In addition, you mention uncertainties but you do not define how those should be taken into account. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 8''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 9''' =<br />
<br />
=='''Task A: Evaluation of [[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 4|assessment draft]] by Tine and Tamara'''==<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || The draft assessment is meant for evaluate the adaptation strategies to climate change in Singapore. Clear and specific questions about the reliability and sufficiency of the indented actions planned for in Singapore's climate change adaptation strategy.<br />
|----<br />
| Causes || Importance for assessing the adaptation strategy raised from the seriousness of the possible impacts brought by climate change in Singapore. This includes Sea level elevation and its impact on Singapore's urban sustainability, increase in rainfall and thread of flooding, and temperature elevation and its impact on public health and energy demand.<br />
|----<br />
| Problem Owner || It was stated that the borders of Singapore are the boundaries of the assessment, so it could be considered that the problem owner are the entire population of Singapore.<br />
|----<br />
| Target || The assessment is especially useful for decision makers, who can use the information derived from this assessment for further development, improvement and implementation of climate change adaptation strategies.<br />
|----<br />
| Interaction || The participant of the assessment were identified (see scope of participation below). However, the way how they could interact was lacking.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Government of Singapore, Citizens of Singapore, and Different working groups.<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| The way and extent how different participants could contribute in the assessment were not well stated.<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| The number of stated participants in the assessment was overwhelming and the background where they come from was diverse. This properly might lead to a comprehensive assessment of good quality.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, correctness of information.<br />
| 4<br />
| The aim of the assessment was clear and the offered information was varied by the solely used reference.<br />
|-----<br />
| rowspan="4"| ''Applicability''<br />
| ''Relevance'': Correspondence between output and its intended use<br />
|1<br />
| Results of the assessment are poorly stated in its right place under the subtitle '''Results'''. They rather briefly mentioned under '''Decisions and scenarios''' section.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Availability'': Accessibility of the output to users<br />
| 4<br />
| It seems that the results and outcomes of the assessment are available to everyone not exclusive to a specific group of the participants.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Usability'': Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s)<br />
| 4<br />
| Taking into account the overwhelming number of the participant, the assessment sounds to be comprehensive and potential to generate useful information to everyone.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Acceptability'': Potential of the output being accepted by its users.<br />
| 5<br />
| The output should be accepted by the users when the broad scope of the participation is considered.<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Efficiency'': Resource expenditure for assessment<br />
|1<br />
| The cost is seems to very high when considering all those participants to be brought on one table for performing the assessment.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
'''Suggestions for improving the quality of the assessment:'''<br />
The assessment did not provide answers to the questions stated in the begging's of the assessment. It would be beneficial to provide a clear set of answers for those in one distinctive section. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
=='''Task B: Evaluation of [http://opasnet.org/w/Benefit-risk_assessment_of_cinnamon Benefit-risk assessment of cinnamon''']==<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || This draft Assessment Report is published to support the release for public consultation of the draft Community herbal monograph on Cinnamomum verum J. S. Presl, cortex and corticis aetheroleum. <br />
|-----<br />
| Causes || Inconsistency in the market authorization of cinnamon and its product in different state in the EU.<br />
|-----<br />
| Problem owner || Pharmaceutical firms, medical agencies, health authorities and final consumers<br />
|-----<br />
|Target || The publication of this draft assessment report has been agreed to facilitate the understanding by Interested Parties of the assessment that has been carried out so far and led to the preparation of the draft monograph.<br />
|-----<br />
| Interaction || The assessment was based on collaboration using a wide variety of peer-reviewed clinical and non-clinical data that has been produced in different academic and scientific institutes.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products (HMPC) is the main entity in performing the assessment<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| The assessment is mainly based on scientific literature that was published in accessible journals<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| The access for sources of scientific information used in the assessment is valid as long as the publishing journals exist<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| The assessing entity "Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products" should is supposed to consist of scientist from different backgrounds covering the topic from every possible view<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of participation<br />
| The diversity of the committee guaranteed a comprehensive assessment of a good quality<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, corectnss of information.<br />
| 4<br />
|</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40954User:Ehab Mustafa2017-06-10T23:46:37Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: </p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 2''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Rotterdam and Dutch government.<br />
<br />
:::{{attack|# |This must be a typo, as you are looking at Rotterdam.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
::::{{defend|# |Mistake was revealed and corrected|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 06:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
:{{comment|# |The word 'structurally' is a bit ambiguous here. Does that mean city structure (urban planning) or administrative structures and policy processes? In addition, you mention uncertainties but you do not define how those should be taken into account. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 8''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 9''' =<br />
<br />
'''Task A: Evaluation of [[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 4|assessment draft]] by Tine and Tamara'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || The draft assessment is meant for evaluate the adaptation strategies to climate change in Singapore. Clear and specific questions about the reliability and sufficiency of the indented actions planned for in Singapore's climate change adaptation strategy.<br />
|----<br />
| Causes || Importance for assessing the adaptation strategy raised from the seriousness of the possible impacts brought by climate change in Singapore. This includes Sea level elevation and its impact on Singapore's urban sustainability, increase in rainfall and thread of flooding, and temperature elevation and its impact on public health and energy demand.<br />
|----<br />
| Problem Owner || It was stated that the borders of Singapore are the boundaries of the assessment, so it could be considered that the problem owner are the entire population of Singapore.<br />
|----<br />
| Target || The assessment is especially useful for decision makers, who can use the information derived from this assessment for further development, improvement and implementation of climate change adaptation strategies.<br />
|----<br />
| Interaction || The participant of the assessment were identified (see scope of participation below). However, the way how they could interact was lacking.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Government of Singapore, Citizens of Singapore, and Different working groups.<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| The way and extent how different participants could contribute in the assessment were not well stated.<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| The number of stated participants in the assessment was overwhelming and the background where they come from was diverse. This properly might lead to a comprehensive assessment of good quality.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, correctness of information.<br />
| 4<br />
| The aim of the assessment was clear and the offered information was varied by the solely used reference.<br />
|-----<br />
| rowspan="4"| ''Applicability''<br />
| ''Relevance'': Correspondence between output and its intended use<br />
|1<br />
| Results of the assessment are poorly stated in its right place under the subtitle '''Results'''. They rather briefly mentioned under '''Decisions and scenarios''' section.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Availability'': Accessibility of the output to users<br />
| 4<br />
| It seems that the results and outcomes of the assessment are available to everyone not exclusive to a specific group of the participants.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Usability'': Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s)<br />
| 4<br />
| Taking into account the overwhelming number of the participant, the assessment sounds to be comprehensive and potential to generate useful information to everyone.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Acceptability'': Potential of the output being accepted by its users.<br />
| 5<br />
| The output should be accepted by the users when the broad scope of the participation is considered.<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Efficiency'': Resource expenditure for assessment<br />
|1<br />
| The cost is seems to very high when considering all those participants to be brought on one table for performing the assessment.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
'''Suggestions for improving the quality of the assessment:'''<br />
The assessment did not provide answers to the questions stated in the begging's of the assessment. It would be beneficial to provide a clear set of answers for those in one distinctive section. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Task B: Evaluation of [http://opasnet.org/w/Benefit-risk_assessment_of_cinnamon Benefit-risk assessment of cinnamon''']<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || This draft Assessment Report is published to support the release for public consultation of the draft Community herbal monograph on Cinnamomum verum J. S. Presl, cortex and corticis aetheroleum. <br />
|-----<br />
| Causes || Inconsistency in the market authorization of cinnamon and its product in different state in the EU.<br />
|-----<br />
| Problem owner || Pharmaceutical firms, medical agencies, health authorities and final consumers<br />
|-----<br />
|Target || The publication of this draft assessment report has been agreed to facilitate the understanding by Interested Parties of the assessment that has been carried out so far and led to the preparation of the draft monograph.<br />
|-----<br />
| Interaction || The assessment was based on collaboration using a wide variety of peer-reviewed clinical and non-clinical data that has been produced in different academic and scientific institutes.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products (HMPC) is the main entity in performing the assessment<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| The assessment is mainly based on scientific literature that was published in accessible journals<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| The access for sources of scientific information used in the assessment is valid as long as the publishing journals exist<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| The assessing entity "Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products" should is supposed to consist of scientist from different backgrounds covering the topic from every possible view<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of participation<br />
| The diversity of the committee guaranteed a comprehensive assessment of a good quality<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, corectnss of information.<br />
| 4<br />
|</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40953User:Ehab Mustafa2017-06-10T23:44:22Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 9 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Rotterdam and Dutch government.<br />
<br />
:::{{attack|# |This must be a typo, as you are looking at Rotterdam.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
::::{{defend|# |Mistake was revealed and corrected|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 06:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
:{{comment|# |The word 'structurally' is a bit ambiguous here. Does that mean city structure (urban planning) or administrative structures and policy processes? In addition, you mention uncertainties but you do not define how those should be taken into account. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 8''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 9''' =<br />
<br />
'''Task A: Evaluation of [[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 4|assessment draft]] by Tine and Tamara'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || The draft assessment is meant for evaluate the adaptation strategies to climate change in Singapore. Clear and specific questions about the reliability and sufficiency of the indented actions planned for in Singapore's climate change adaptation strategy.<br />
|----<br />
| Causes || Importance for assessing the adaptation strategy raised from the seriousness of the possible impacts brought by climate change in Singapore. This includes Sea level elevation and its impact on Singapore's urban sustainability, increase in rainfall and thread of flooding, and temperature elevation and its impact on public health and energy demand.<br />
|----<br />
| Problem Owner || It was stated that the borders of Singapore are the boundaries of the assessment, so it could be considered that the problem owner are the entire population of Singapore.<br />
|----<br />
| Target || The assessment is especially useful for decision makers, who can use the information derived from this assessment for further development, improvement and implementation of climate change adaptation strategies.<br />
|----<br />
| Interaction || The participant of the assessment were identified (see scope of participation below). However, the way how they could interact was lacking.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Government of Singapore, Citizens of Singapore, and Different working groups.<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| The way and extent how different participants could contribute in the assessment were not well stated.<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| The number of stated participants in the assessment was overwhelming and the background where they come from was diverse. This properly might lead to a comprehensive assessment of good quality.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, correctness of information.<br />
| 4<br />
| The aim of the assessment was clear and the offered information was varied by the solely used reference.<br />
|-----<br />
| rowspan="4"| ''Applicability''<br />
| ''Relevance'': Correspondence between output and its intended use<br />
|1<br />
| Results of the assessment are poorly stated in its right place under the subtitle '''Results'''. They rather briefly mentioned under '''Decisions and scenarios''' section.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Availability'': Accessibility of the output to users<br />
| 4<br />
| It seems that the results and outcomes of the assessment are available to everyone not exclusive to a specific group of the participants.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Usability'': Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s)<br />
| 4<br />
| Taking into account the overwhelming number of the participant, the assessment sounds to be comprehensive and potential to generate useful information to everyone.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Acceptability'': Potential of the output being accepted by its users.<br />
| 5<br />
| The output should be accepted by the users when the broad scope of the participation is considered.<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Efficiency'': Resource expenditure for assessment<br />
|1<br />
| The cost is seems to very high when considering all those participants to be brought on one table for performing the assessment.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
'''Suggestions for improving the quality of the assessment:'''<br />
The assessment did not provide answers to the questions stated in the begging's of the assessment. It would be beneficial to provide a clear set of answers for those in one distinctive section. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Task B: Evaluation of [http://opasnet.org/w/Benefit-risk_assessment_of_cinnamon Benefit-risk assessment of cinnamon''']<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || This draft Assessment Report is published to support the release for public consultation of the draft Community herbal monograph on Cinnamomum verum J. S. Presl, cortex and corticis aetheroleum. <br />
|-----<br />
| Causes || Inconsistency in the market authorization of cinnamon and its product in different state in the EU.<br />
|-----<br />
| Problem owner || Pharmaceutical firms, medical agencies, health authorities and final consumers<br />
|-----<br />
|Target || The publication of this draft assessment report has been agreed to facilitate the understanding by Interested Parties of the assessment that has been carried out so far and led to the preparation of the draft monograph.<br />
|-----<br />
| Interaction || The assessment was based on collaboration using a wide variety of peer-reviewed clinical and non-clinical data that has been produced in different academic and scientific institutes.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products (HMPC) is the main entity in performing the assessment<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| The assessment is mainly based on scientific literature that was published in accessible journals<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| The access for sources of scientific information used in the assessment is valid as long as the publishing journals exist<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| The assessing entity "Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products" should is supposed to consist of scientist from different backgrounds covering the topic from every possible view<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of participation<br />
| The diversity of the committee guaranteed a comprehensive assessment of a good quality<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, corectnss of information.<br />
| 4<br />
|</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40951User:Ehab Mustafa2017-06-10T18:22:29Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 9 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Rotterdam and Dutch government.<br />
<br />
:::{{attack|# |This must be a typo, as you are looking at Rotterdam.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
::::{{defend|# |Mistake was revealed and corrected|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 06:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
:{{comment|# |The word 'structurally' is a bit ambiguous here. Does that mean city structure (urban planning) or administrative structures and policy processes? In addition, you mention uncertainties but you do not define how those should be taken into account. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 8''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 9''' =<br />
<br />
'''Task A: Evaluation of [[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 4|assessment draft]] by Tine and Tamara'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || The draft assessment is meant for evaluate the adaptation strategies to climate change in Singapore. Clear and specific questions about the reliability and sufficiency of the indented actions planned for in Singapore's climate change adaptation strategy.<br />
|----<br />
| Causes || Importance for assessing the adaptation strategy raised from the seriousness of the possible impacts brought by climate change in Singapore. This includes Sea level elevation and its impact on Singapore's urban sustainability, increase in rainfall and thread of flooding, and temperature elevation and its impact on public health and energy demand.<br />
|----<br />
| Problem Owner || It was stated that the borders of Singapore are the boundaries of the assessment, so it could be considered that the problem owner are the entire population of Singapore.<br />
|----<br />
| Target || The assessment is especially useful for decision makers, who can use the information derived from this assessment for further development, improvement and implementation of climate change adaptation strategies.<br />
|----<br />
| Interaction || The participant of the assessment were identified (see scope of participation below). However, the way how they could interact was lacking.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Government of Singapore, Citizens of Singapore, and Different working groups.<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| The way and extent how different participants could contribute in the assessment were not well stated.<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| The number of stated participants in the assessment was overwhelming and the background where they come from was diverse. This properly might lead to a comprehensive assessment of good quality.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, correctness of information.<br />
| 4<br />
| The aim of the assessment was clear and the offered information was varied by the solely used reference.<br />
|-----<br />
| rowspan="4"| ''Applicability''<br />
| ''Relevance'': Correspondence between output and its intended use<br />
|1<br />
| Results of the assessment are poorly stated in its right place under the subtitle '''Results'''. They rather briefly mentioned under '''Decisions and scenarios''' section.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Availability'': Accessibility of the output to users<br />
| 4<br />
| It seems that the results and outcomes of the assessment are available to everyone not exclusive to a specific group of the participants.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Usability'': Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s)<br />
| 4<br />
| Taking into account the overwhelming number of the participant, the assessment sounds to be comprehensive and potential to generate useful information to everyone.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Acceptability'': Potential of the output being accepted by its users.<br />
| 5<br />
| The output should be accepted by the users when the broad scope of the participation is considered.<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Efficiency'': Resource expenditure for assessment<br />
|1<br />
| The cost is seems to very high when considering all those participants to be brought on one table for performing the assessment.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
'''Suggestions for improving the quality of the assessment:'''<br />
The assessment did not provide answers to the questions stated in the begging's of the assessment. It would be beneficial to provide a clear set of answers for those in one distinctive section. <br />
<br />
'''Task B: Evaluation of [[http://opasnet.org/w/Benefit-risk_assessment_of_cinnamon |Benefit-risk assessment of cinnamon''']]</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40946User:Ehab Mustafa2017-06-10T15:35:43Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 9 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Rotterdam and Dutch government.<br />
<br />
:::{{attack|# |This must be a typo, as you are looking at Rotterdam.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
::::{{defend|# |Mistake was revealed and corrected|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 06:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
:{{comment|# |The word 'structurally' is a bit ambiguous here. Does that mean city structure (urban planning) or administrative structures and policy processes? In addition, you mention uncertainties but you do not define how those should be taken into account. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 8''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 9''' =<br />
<br />
Task A: Evaluation of [[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 4|assessment draft]] by Tine and Tamara<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || The draft assessment is meant for evaluate the adaptation strategies to climate change in Singapore. Clear and specific questions about the reliability and sufficiency of the indented actions planned for in Singapore's climate change adaptation strategy.<br />
|----<br />
| Causes || Importance for assessing the adaptation strategy raised from the seriousness of the possible impacts brought by climate change in Singapore. This includes Sea level elevation and its impact on Singapore's urban sustainability, increase in rainfall and thread of flooding, and temperature elevation and its impact on public health and energy demand.<br />
|----<br />
| Problem Owner || It was stated that the borders of Singapore are the boundaries of the assessment, so it could be considered that the problem owner are the entire population of Singapore.<br />
|----<br />
| Target || The assessment is especially useful for decision makers, who can use the information derived from this assessment for further development, improvement and implementation of climate change adaptation strategies.<br />
|----<br />
| Interaction || The participant of the assessment were identified (see scope of participation below). However, the way how they could interact was lacking.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Government of Singapore, Citizens of Singapore, and Different working groups.<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| The way and extent how different participants could contribute in the assessment were not well stated.<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| The number of stated participants in the assessment was overwhelming and the background where they come from was diverse. This properly might lead to a comprehensive assessment of good quality.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, correctness of information.<br />
| 4<br />
| The aim of the assessment was clear and the offered information was varied by the solely used reference.<br />
|-----<br />
| rowspan="4"| ''Applicability''<br />
| ''Relevance'': Correspondence between output and its intended use<br />
|1<br />
| Results of the assessment are poorly stated in its right place under the subtitle '''Results'''. They rather briefly mentioned under '''Decisions and scenarios''' section.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Availability'': Accessibility of the output to users<br />
| 4<br />
| It seems that the results and outcomes of the assessment are available to everyone not exclusive to a specific group of the participants.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Usability'': Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s)<br />
| 4<br />
| Taking into account the overwhelming number of the participant, the assessment sounds to be comprehensive and potential to generate useful information to everyone.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Acceptability'': Potential of the output being accepted by its users.<br />
| 5<br />
| The output should be accepted by the users when the broad scope of the participation is considered.<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Efficiency'': Resource expenditure for assessment<br />
|1<br />
| The cost is seems to very high when considering all those participants to be brought on one table for performing the assessment.<br />
|}</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40945User:Ehab Mustafa2017-06-10T15:35:00Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 9 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Rotterdam and Dutch government.<br />
<br />
:::{{attack|# |This must be a typo, as you are looking at Rotterdam.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
::::{{defend|# |Mistake was revealed and corrected|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 06:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
:{{comment|# |The word 'structurally' is a bit ambiguous here. Does that mean city structure (urban planning) or administrative structures and policy processes? In addition, you mention uncertainties but you do not define how those should be taken into account. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 8''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 9''' =<br />
<br />
Evaluation of [[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 4|assessment draft]] by Tine and Tamara<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || The draft assessment is meant for evaluate the adaptation strategies to climate change in Singapore. Clear and specific questions about the reliability and sufficiency of the indented actions planned for in Singapore's climate change adaptation strategy.<br />
|----<br />
| Causes || Importance for assessing the adaptation strategy raised from the seriousness of the possible impacts brought by climate change in Singapore. This includes Sea level elevation and its impact on Singapore's urban sustainability, increase in rainfall and thread of flooding, and temperature elevation and its impact on public health and energy demand.<br />
|----<br />
| Problem Owner || It was stated that the borders of Singapore are the boundaries of the assessment, so it could be considered that the problem owner are the entire population of Singapore.<br />
|----<br />
| Target || The assessment is especially useful for decision makers, who can use the information derived from this assessment for further development, improvement and implementation of climate change adaptation strategies.<br />
|----<br />
| Interaction || The participant of the assessment were identified (see scope of participation below). However, the way how they could interact was lacking.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Government of Singapore, Citizens of Singapore, and Different working groups.<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| The way and extent how different participants could contribute in the assessment were not well stated.<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| The number of stated participants in the assessment was overwhelming and the background where they come from was diverse. This properly might lead to a comprehensive assessment of good quality.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{|{{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 3. Evaluation of the assessment by category<br />
|-----<br />
! Category<br />
!<br />
! Evaluation (1-5)<br />
! Reasoning<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Quality of content'': Specificity, exactness, correctness of information.<br />
| 4<br />
| The aim of the assessment was clear and the offered information was varied by the solely used reference.<br />
|-----<br />
| rowspan="4"| ''Applicability''<br />
| ''Relevance'': Correspondence between output and its intended use<br />
|1<br />
| Results of the assessment are poorly stated in its right place under the subtitle '''Results'''. They rather briefly mentioned under '''Decisions and scenarios''' section.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Availability'': Accessibility of the output to users<br />
| 4<br />
| It seems that the results and outcomes of the assessment are available to everyone not exclusive to a specific group of the participants.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Usability'': Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s)<br />
| 4<br />
| Taking into account the overwhelming number of the participant, the assessment sounds to be comprehensive and potential to generate useful information to everyone.<br />
|-----<br />
| ''Acceptability'': Potential of the output being accepted by its users.<br />
| 5<br />
| The output should be accepted by the users when the broad scope of the participation is considered.<br />
|-----<br />
| colspan="2" | ''Efficiency'': Resource expenditure for assessment<br />
|1<br />
| The cost is seems to very high when considering all those participants to be brought on one table for performing the assessment.<br />
|}</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40942User:Ehab Mustafa2017-06-10T14:43:34Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 9 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Rotterdam and Dutch government.<br />
<br />
:::{{attack|# |This must be a typo, as you are looking at Rotterdam.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
::::{{defend|# |Mistake was revealed and corrected|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 06:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
:{{comment|# |The word 'structurally' is a bit ambiguous here. Does that mean city structure (urban planning) or administrative structures and policy processes? In addition, you mention uncertainties but you do not define how those should be taken into account. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 8''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 9''' =<br />
<br />
Evaluation of [[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 4|assessment draft]] by Tine and Tamara<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || The draft assessment is meant for evaluate the adaptation strategies to climate change in Singapore. Clear and specific questions about the reliability and sufficiency of the indented actions planned for in Singapore's climate change adaptation strategy.<br />
|----<br />
| Causes || Importance for assessing the adaptation strategy raised from the seriousness of the possible impacts brought by climate change in Singapore. This includes Sea level elevation and its impact on Singapore's urban sustainability, increase in rainfall and thread of flooding, and temperature elevation and its impact on public health and energy demand.<br />
|----<br />
| Problem Owner || It was stated that the borders of Singapore are the boundaries of the assessment, so it could be considered that the problem owner are the entire population of Singapore.<br />
|----<br />
| Target || The assessment is especially useful for decision makers, who can use the information derived from this assessment for further development, improvement and implementation of climate change adaptation strategies.<br />
|----<br />
| Interaction || The participant of the assessment were identified (see scope of participation below). However, the way how they could interact was lacking.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Table 2. Dimensions of openness<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Characterization<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Government of Singapore, Citizens of Singapore, and Different working groups.<br />
|-----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| Not identified.<br />
|-----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| The way and extent how different participants could contribute in the assessment were not well stated.<br />
|-----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| The number of stated participants in the assessment was overwhelming and the background where they come from was diverse. This properly might lead to a comprehensive assessment of good quality.</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40941User:Ehab Mustafa2017-06-10T14:26:44Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 9 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Rotterdam and Dutch government.<br />
<br />
:::{{attack|# |This must be a typo, as you are looking at Rotterdam.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
::::{{defend|# |Mistake was revealed and corrected|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 06:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
:{{comment|# |The word 'structurally' is a bit ambiguous here. Does that mean city structure (urban planning) or administrative structures and policy processes? In addition, you mention uncertainties but you do not define how those should be taken into account. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 8''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 9''' =<br />
<br />
Evaluation of [[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 4|assessment draft]] by Tine and Tamara<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || The draft assessment is meant for evaluate the adaptation strategies to climate change in Singapore. Clear and specific questions about the reliability and sufficiency of the indented actions planned for in Singapore's climate change adaptation strategy.<br />
|----<br />
| Causes || Importance for assessing the adaptation strategy raised from the seriousness of the possible impacts brought by climate change in Singapore. This includes Sea level elevation and its impact on Singapore's urban sustainability, increase in rainfall and thread of flooding, and temperature elevation and its impact on public health and energy demand.<br />
|----<br />
| Problem Owner || It was stated that the borders of Singapore are the boundaries of the assessment, so it could be considered that the problem owner are the entire population of Singapore.<br />
|----<br />
| Target || The assessment is especially useful for decision makers, who can use the information derived from this assessment for further development, improvement and implementation of climate change adaptation strategies.<br />
|----<br />
| Interaction || The participant of the assessment were identified (see scope of participation below). However, the way how they could interact was lacking.<br />
|}</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40940User:Ehab Mustafa2017-06-10T14:26:10Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 9 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Rotterdam and Dutch government.<br />
<br />
:::{{attack|# |This must be a typo, as you are looking at Rotterdam.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
::::{{defend|# |Mistake was revealed and corrected|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 06:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
:{{comment|# |The word 'structurally' is a bit ambiguous here. Does that mean city structure (urban planning) or administrative structures and policy processes? In addition, you mention uncertainties but you do not define how those should be taken into account. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 8''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 9''' =<br />
<br />
===Evaluation of Homework 4===<br />
Evaluation of [[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 4|assessment draft]] by Tine and Tamara<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || The draft assessment is meant for evaluate the adaptation strategies to climate change in Singapore. Clear and specific questions about the reliability and sufficiency of the indented actions planned for in Singapore's climate change adaptation strategy.<br />
|----<br />
| Causes || Importance for assessing the adaptation strategy raised from the seriousness of the possible impacts brought by climate change in Singapore. This includes Sea level elevation and its impact on Singapore's urban sustainability, increase in rainfall and thread of flooding, and temperature elevation and its impact on public health and energy demand.<br />
|----<br />
| Problem Owner || It was stated that the borders of Singapore are the boundaries of the assessment, so it could be considered that the problem owner are the entire population of Singapore.<br />
|----<br />
| Target || The assessment is especially useful for decision makers, who can use the information derived from this assessment for further development, improvement and implementation of climate change adaptation strategies.<br />
|----<br />
| Interaction || The participant of the assessment were identified (see scope of participation below). However, the way how they could interact was lacking.<br />
|}</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40939User:Ehab Mustafa2017-06-10T14:25:46Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 9 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Rotterdam and Dutch government.<br />
<br />
:::{{attack|# |This must be a typo, as you are looking at Rotterdam.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
::::{{defend|# |Mistake was revealed and corrected|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 06:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
:{{comment|# |The word 'structurally' is a bit ambiguous here. Does that mean city structure (urban planning) or administrative structures and policy processes? In addition, you mention uncertainties but you do not define how those should be taken into account. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 8''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 9''' =<br />
<br />
'''Evaluation of assessment'''<br />
<br />
===Evaluation of Homework 4===<br />
Evaluation of [[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 4|assessment draft]] by Tine and Tamara<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 1. Characterization of the assessment<br />
<br />
!Attribute || Characterization<br />
|----<br />
| Impacts || The draft assessment is meant for evaluate the adaptation strategies to climate change in Singapore. Clear and specific questions about the reliability and sufficiency of the indented actions planned for in Singapore's climate change adaptation strategy.<br />
|----<br />
| Causes || Importance for assessing the adaptation strategy raised from the seriousness of the possible impacts brought by climate change in Singapore. This includes Sea level elevation and its impact on Singapore's urban sustainability, increase in rainfall and thread of flooding, and temperature elevation and its impact on public health and energy demand.<br />
|----<br />
| Problem Owner || It was stated that the borders of Singapore are the boundaries of the assessment, so it could be considered that the problem owner are the entire population of Singapore.<br />
|----<br />
| Target || The assessment is especially useful for decision makers, who can use the information derived from this assessment for further development, improvement and implementation of climate change adaptation strategies.<br />
|----<br />
| Interaction || The participant of the assessment were identified (see scope of participation below). However, the way how they could interact was lacking.<br />
|}</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40938User:Ehab Mustafa2017-06-10T12:04:58Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: </p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Rotterdam and Dutch government.<br />
<br />
:::{{attack|# |This must be a typo, as you are looking at Rotterdam.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
::::{{defend|# |Mistake was revealed and corrected|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 06:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
:{{comment|# |The word 'structurally' is a bit ambiguous here. Does that mean city structure (urban planning) or administrative structures and policy processes? In addition, you mention uncertainties but you do not define how those should be taken into account. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 8''' =<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 9''' =</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=Decision_analysis_and_risk_management_2017/Homework&diff=40791Decision analysis and risk management 2017/Homework2017-05-29T07:58:49Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Seminar: Lessons learned */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{lecture|moderator=Jouni}}<br />
<br/><br />
<br/><br />
<br/><br />
<br/><br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Follow-up table of the homeworks'''. Green: work is acceptable. White: there is still work to do. Red: work is overdue. Deadline dates and maximum points available are mentioned in the column headings.<br />
|----<br />
! User <br />
! HW 1: Open assessment 16 Jun 1 (a) + 1 (b,c,d) points<br />
! HW 2: Basic skills of Opasnet 16 Jun 1 point<br />
! HW 3: Basic concepts of open assessment and co-creation 16 Jun 1 (a) + 1 (b) points<br />
! HW 4: Draft of an assessment plan 16 Jun 2 points<br />
! HW 5: Climate policy decisions and actions 16 Jun 2 points<br />
! HW 6: Collaboration in climate policy assessment 16 Jun 2 points<br />
! HW 7: Structured discussion 16 Jun 2 points<br />
! HW 8: Developing a variable page 16 Jun 2 points<br />
! HW 9: Evaluation of assessment 16 Jun 2 points<br />
! Seminars <br />
! Total points (max 17) and final score (max 5)<br />
|----<br />
| [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr Ebrahim]]<br />
| [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 1|HW1a OK]] Add comments about HW1b-d!<br />
| <br />
| {{yes|[[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 3|1+1]]}}<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Ehab Mustafa#Homework 4|2]]}}<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Ehab Mustafa#Homework 5|2]]}}<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|2]]}}<br />
| {{yes|[[Talk:Congestion charge|2]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Edem Agbenowu|Edem Agbenowu]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Edem Agbenowu#Homework 1|1+1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes|[[User:Edem Agbenowu#Homework 3|1+1]]}}<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Edem Agbenowu#Homework 4|1.5]]}}<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Edem Agbenowu#Homework 5|1.5]]}}<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Edem Agbenowu#Homework 6|1.5]]}}<br />
| {{yes|[[Talk:Congestion charge|2]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Ehab Mustafa#Homework 1|1+1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes|[[User:Ehab Mustafa#Homework 3|1+1]]}}<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Ehab Mustafa#Homework 4|2]]}}<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Ehab Mustafa#Homework 5|2]]}}<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|2]]}}<br />
| {{yes|[[Talk:Congestion charge|1.5]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Jin Qiwen|Jin Qiwen]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Jin Qiwen#Homework 1|1+1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| [[User:Jin Qiwen#Homework 3|not finished]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Kaisu Lukkarinen|Kaisu Lukkarinen]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Kaisu Lukkarinen#Homework 1|1+1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Kingsley Aliche|Kingsley Aliche]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Margaret Arogunyo|Margaret Arogunyo]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Margaret Arogunyo#Home Work 1|1+1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes|[[User:Margaret Arogunyo#Homework 3: Basic concepts of open assessment and co-creation|1+1]]}}<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Margaret Arogunyo#Homework 4: Draft of an assessment plan|1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{no|[[Talk:Congestion charge|add more arguments]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Nabin Subedi|Nabin Subedi]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Noora Rantanen|Noora Rantanen]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tamara Gajst|Tamara Gajst]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Tamara Gajst#Homework 1|1+1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes|[[User:Tamara Gajst#Homework 3|1]]}} + [[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 3: Basic concepts of open assessment and co-creation|1]]<br />
| <br />
| {{yes|[[User:Tamara Gajst#Homework 5|2]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes|[[Talk:Congestion charge|2]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tarikul Islam|Tarikul Islam]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tine Bizjak|Tine Bizjak]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 1|1+1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes|[[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 3: Basic concepts of open assessment and co-creation|1+1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes|[[User:Tamara Gajst#Homework 5|2]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes|[[Talk:Congestion charge|2]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Zahra Shirani|Zahra Shirani]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Zahra Shirani#Homework 1|1+1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes|[[User:Zahra Shirani#Homework 3|1+1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
|}<br />
<br />
'''Please read the homework assignments carefully and follow the instructions.''' If there is something unclear, please ask the course organizers (or fellow students) to explain and clarify! NOTE: Write all your homework answers on your own user page.<br />
<br />
Also add links to your homework answers in the table above. The evaluation of the homework exercises will be based on the answers found by following the links in the table. Students themselves are responsible for having the correct, complete and up-to-date links to homework answers. if you need help in adding the links to your homework answers to the table, please ask the course organizers (or fellow students) for advice. A convenient way to get help is to come to the exercise sessions.'''<br />
<br />
;Please note:<br />
* If your Homework says "OK" it means that the given homework is graded as "pass", i.e. at least 1 point. If you want to get better points, you should check and answer lecturers´ comments regarding that homework.<br />
* If there is no "OK" sign, you must revise your work according to the comments in order to make it acceptable.<br />
* You must write homework answers done in groups/pairs '''to only one''' place.<br />
* Add link to answers on your own user page if it is located on someone else's user page (do not copy the text on your own user page).<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 5 hours.<br />
<br />
'''Purpose: To familiarise yourself to the basic ideas of open policy practice.<br />
<br />
Read pages [[Open policy practice]], [[Knowledge crystal]], and [[Open assessment]] and browse [[Assessments are to change the world]] and [[Shared information objects in policy support]] and provide brief answers to three (3) questions from the following question list. You may also want to search from Opasnet. You are free to choose which questions to answer. '''Write your answers on your own Opasnet user page'''. Instructions on creating a user account and editing your own user page will be given on first lecture. '''In case of difficulties in wiki editing, write your answers on a separate document and copy them to your user page later'''. The questions and answers will be discussed on the second lecture (23 March). A sufficient length for each answers is a few sentences or bullet points. Please do not write lengthy essays, but instead try to identify and briefly describe the main points relevant in each question. The idea of this homework is not to find the right or correct answers, but instead to introduce the conceptual basis of this course to the students.<br />
<br />
'''Questions:<br />
# What is the main purpose of ''environmental health assessment''?<br />
# What is ''shared understanding''?<br />
# What are the main differences between ''regulatory'' and ''academic'' assessment approaches? Give examples of each.<br />
# What are ''co-creation skills''?<br />
# What are the main differences between ''open assessment'' and most other assessment approaches?<br />
# What is ''benefit-risk assessment''?<br />
# What is ''open assessment''?<br />
# What different ''purposes'' are there ''for participation'' in assessment and/or decision making?<br />
# What are the ''dimensions of openness''?<br />
# What ''relevant stakeholder roles'' are there in environmental health assessment and related decision making<br />
# What is ''effectiveness' in the context of environmental health assessment and related decision making?<br />
# What is the ''trialogical approach'' to knowledge creation and learning?<br />
# What is ''decision support''?<br />
# What is a ''pragmatic knowledge service''?<br />
# What is ''collaboration''?<br />
# What are the ''properties of good assessment?<br />
# What is the role of ''modelling'' in assessment and policy making?<br />
# What parts does the ''open policy practice'' consist of?<br />
# What does it mean that the results of assessments can be considered ''shared information objects''?<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 5 hours''<br />
<br />
'''Purpose: To learn the terms and concepts of open policy practice and see how they are related<br />
<br />
[https://quizlet.com/join/J43nT5Azy Join Quizlet] and practice with the sets of terms to learn the concepts:<br />
* [https://quizlet.com/196604415/principles-of-open-policy-practice-flash-cards/ Principles of open policy practice]<br />
* [https://quizlet.com/196602485/properties-of-good-assessment-flash-cards/ Properties of good assessment]<br />
* [https://quizlet.com/196600875/glossary-for-open-policy-practice-flash-cards/ Glossary for open policy practice], also the [https://quizlet.com/196599457/finnish-vocabulary-for-open-policy-practice-flash-cards/ Finnish terms] if you can Finnish.<br />
* [https://quizlet.com/196602931/categories-of-interaction-flash-cards/ Categories of interaction]<br />
* [https://quizlet.com/196602695/dimensions-of-openness-flash-cards/ Dimensions of openness]<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 5 hours''<br />
<br />
'''Purpose: To learn the basics of critical thinking and argumentation<br />
<br />
[https://www.khanacademy.org/ Join Khan Academy] and follow the course of [https://www.khanacademy.org/partner-content/wi-phi/wiphi-critical-thinking Critical thinking]. If you already know this topic well, just do the exercises.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 0.5 - 5 hours<br />
<br />
'''Purpose: To ensure that the basics of probability theory are clear <br />
(We assume that the basic statistics have been taught to students participating in this class.)<br />
<br />
Go through the contents of the Khan Academy courses [https://www.khanacademy.org/math/ap-statistics/probability-ap probability] and [https://www.khanacademy.org/math/statistics-probability/random-variables-stats-library random variables] and make sure that you refresh your memory on this. Do the exercises, and look at the videos if needed.<br />
<br />
There are also some other, more basic material that may be useful: [https://www.khanacademy.org/math/precalculus/prob-comb probabilities and combinatorics].<br />
<br />
== Homework 2: Basic skills of open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 5 hours''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Basic skills''': Mark "yes" when you know how to do this and put a link to the page where you have used the skill. Use these skills as parts of other homeworks.<br />
|----<br />
! User <br />
! [[Create article|Create a page and type]]<br />
! [[Help:Editing#Uploading|Upload]] a file and link it<br />
! [[Help:Editing#Text formatting|Use headings]], lists, bold, italic<br />
! Use internal and external [[Help:Editing#Linking|links]] and [[Help:Editing#Templates|templates]] <br />
! Use [[Help:Editing#Reference lists|references]]<br />
! Create a [[Help:Editing#Tables|prettytable]]<br />
! Upload data by [[help:Editing#Data table|t2b table]] and [[Uploading to Opasnet Base|Opasnet Base Uploader]]<br />
! Organise a [[discussion]]<br />
|----<br />
| [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr Ebrahim]]<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Edem Agbenowu|Edem Agbenowu]]<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]]<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| template missing<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Jin Qiwen|Jin Qiwen]]<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| template missing<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Kaisu Lukkarinen|Kaisu Lukkarinen]]<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Kingsley Aliche|Kingsley Aliche]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Margaret Arogunyo|Margaret Arogunyo]]<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Nabin Subedi|Nabin Subedi]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Noora Rantanen|Noora Rantanen]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tamara Gajst|Tamara Gajst]]<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tarikul Islam|Tarikul Islam]]<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tine Bizjak|Tine Bizjak]]<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Zahra Shirani|Zahra Shirani]]<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes}} <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
|}<br />
<br />
==Homework 3: Basic concepts of open assessment and co-creation==<br />
<br />
:'' Estimated working time: 2+5 hours.<br />
<br />
'''Task A:''' Read a) homeworks 1 and 2, b) [[Glossary#Terms in open policy practice]] and c) the introductory pages listed below. If you know Finnish, the [[:op_fi:Yhtäköyttä-hankkeen loppuraportti|Yhtäköyttä report]] contains a lot of the same material in a more organised way. After reading, write two questions that you think needs clarification. Write the questions on your own user page. The questions will be answered during the next lecture.<br />
<br />
{{Opasnet training}}<br />
<br />
'''Task B:''' Read the material in a {{#l:Darm reading co-creation.zip|zip file}} about co-creation, decision support models, and facilitation. It contains the following material (numbers refer to reference numbers in [[:op_fi:Yhtäköyttä-hankkeen loppuraportti|Yhtäköyttä report]].<br />
<br />
* 11: von Winterfeldt, D (2013). Bridging the gap between science and decision making. PNAS 110:3:14055-14061. [11]<br />
* 45: Aitamurto, T, Landemore, H. (2015) Five design principles for crowdsourced policymaking: Assessing the case of crowdsourced off-road traffic law in Finland. Journal of Social Media for Organizations. 2:1:1-19.<br />
* 46: Force11. FAIR data principles. [41] viitattu 22.2.2017.<br />
* 47: Prahalad, CK, Ramaswamy, V (2004). Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation. Journal of Interactive Marketing 18:3:5-14. doi:10.1002/dir.20015 [42]<br />
* 48: Mauser, W, Klepper, G, Rice, M, Schmalzbauer, BS, Hackmann, H, Leemans, R, Current, HM (2013). Transdisciplinary global change research: the co-creation of knowledge for sustainability. Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 5:3–4:420–431. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2013.07.001 <br />
* 49: Franco, LA, Montibeller, G (2010). Facilitated modelling in operational research. European Journal of Operational Research 205:3:489–500. [43]<br />
* 53: Kolbert, E. (2017) Why facts don't change our minds. The New Yorker, 27.2.2017. [47] viitattu 22.2.2017.<br />
<br />
Write a short assay on your user page about co-creation in decision support. What is co-creation? What advantage does it bring compared with more traditional decision support processes? What is the role of a facilitator, and what skills do they need?<br />
<br />
==Homework 4: Draft of an assessment plan==<br />
<br />
'''Note! Homework 4 answers will be used as materials in homework 10.'''<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 8 hours<br />
<br />
Task: With your pair, draft a plan of an assessment about the topic agreed on during the lecture. See the correct structure from [[Assessment]]. You may copy the structure directly from [[:Template:Assessment structure]]. Write the draft assessment on either your or your partner's user page (and put a link to it on the other's user page). Choose your specific topic within the broader area of '''climate change policies in a city'''. You can consider mitigation (how to reduce greenhouse gas emissions), adaptation (how to prepare for changes caused by climate change) or both. You may choose a specific city on your assessment, or look at some aspect in cities in general.<br />
<br />
You are expected to make plans about a good assessment related a topic of your choice (preferably related to climate change policies in cities). Fill in the subheadings in Scope and make plans about the Rationale: what variables or assessment parts you would need to be able to answer the question asked? However, you are NOT expected to come up with results or conclusions (although you can describe what kind of results you might get if the assessment was actually performed).<br />
<br />
== Homework 5: Climate policy decisions and actions ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 6 hours<br />
<br />
Consider that you are given an assignment to assess the ''direct or indirect health impacts caused by a climate (adaptation) strategy or program''. One of the first things in getting started with the assessment is to discuss, identify and explicate the decisions and options related to the assessment problem. In pairs choose one climate (adaptation) strategy/program from the material list below and identify and write out answers to the following questions based on the material. Use your own reasoning and knowledge or other sources (e.g. Google search) as complementary where the material is incomplete or inconclusive.<br />
<br />
'''Write your answers on either group member's user page (other member adds a link to the answers on his/her user page). <br />
<br />
Questions:<br />
* What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?<br />
** Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?<br />
* What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?<br />
** Who are those that actually realize these actions?<br />
* What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?<br />
** Who are the decision makers?<br />
* What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?<br />
** Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,<br />
** Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?<br />
** Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?<br />
* Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.<br />
* ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "[[shared understanding]]"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).<br />
<br />
Materials: <br />
<br />
* {{#l:Klimaprogramm-Bayern-2020.pdf}} {{#l:klimaprogramm2020_en_05_2009_ba.pdf}} [http://www.bayern.de/politik/initiativen/klimaprogramm-bayern-2020/ Bavarian Climate Programme 2020] [https://www.stmuv.bayern.de/umwelt/klimaschutz/klimaschutzpolitik/doc/klimaprogramm2020_en_05_2009_ba.pdf](margaret)<br />
* {{#l:Summary_Ludwigsburg_LEAP_Final_EN.pdf}} [http://www.sustainable-now.eu/fileadmin/template/projects/sustainable_now/files/Summary_Ludwigsburg_LEAP_Final_EN.pdf Integrated Climate Protection and Energy Strategy for Ludwigsburg]<br />
* {{#l:National_Climate_Change_Strategy_of_Hungary_2008.pdf}} [http://klima.kvvm.hu/documents/14/National_Climate_Change_Strategy_of_Hungary_2008.pdf National Climate Change Strategy of Hungary 2008] (mitigation, adaptation) <br />
* {{#l:YTV_climate_strategy_2030.pdf}} [http://www.planningclimatechange.org/joomla/0_upload/climate_strategy_2030.pdf Climate Strategy 2030 of Helsinki Metropolitan Area]<br />
* {{#l:11_2012_Helsinki_Metropolitan_Area_Climate_Change_Adaptation_Strategy.pdf}} [http://ilmastotyokalut.fi/files/2014/10/11_2012_Helsinki_Metropolitan_Area_Climate_Change_Adaptation_Strategy.pdf Climate Adaptation Strategy of Helsinki Metropolitan Area]<br />
* {{#l:NCCS-2012-Publication.pdf}} [https://www.nccs.gov.sg/nccs-2012/docs/NCCS-2012-Publication.pdf National Climate Change Strategy of Singapore 2012] (mitigation, adaptation) <br />
* {{#l:2011_09_06 KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN DEFINITIEF.pdf}} [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2011_09_06%20KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN%20DEFINITIEF.pdf Rotterdam Climate Initiative RCI] (Amr, Ehab)<br />
* {{#l:RCP_ENG_def.pdf}} [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/RCP/English/RCP_ENG_def.pdf Rotterdam Climate Proof Adaptation Programme 2010] (Amr, Ehab)<br />
* {{#l:Cover+Adaptation+to+climate+change+in+Switzerland.pdf}} [http://www.bafu.admin.ch/publikationen/publikation/01673/index.html?lang=en Adaptation to climate change in Switzerland] (Tamara, Tine)<br />
* {{#l:Ireland_at_Risk_2.pdf}} [http://www.iae.ie/site_media/pressroom/documents/2009/Nov/17/Ireland_at_Risk_2.pdf Ireland at Risk. Critical Infrastructure Adaptation for Climate Change]edem<br />
* {{#l:klimatilpasningsstrategi_uk_web.pdf}} [http://www.klimatilpasning.dk/media/5322/klimatilpasningsstrategi_uk_web.pdf Danish Strategy for Adaptation to a Changing Climate]<br />
* [http://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/web/guest/countries Climate adaptation materials in different European languages]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Helsingin ilmastonmuutos_-tiekartta]]<br />
<br />
== Homework 6: Collaboration in climate policy assessment ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 6 hours<br />
<br />
This exercise continues from homework 5. With the same pair, using the same material, and building on your homework 5 answers, identify and write out your answers to the following questions. Narrow your scrutiny down to e.g. one or two decisions/actions/goals if needed. Base your answers on the climate program/strategy paper you have chosen, but also apply your own reasoning, other DARM course materials etc., particularly on the second set of questions.<br />
<br />
'''Write your answers on either group member's user page (other member adds a link to the answers on his/her user page). <br />
<br />
'''Homework 6, part A:'''<br />
Questions about identifying roles and participation:<br />
* Who are the relevant participants of the assessment?<br />
* What roles the different participants (may) take in the assessment?<br />
* What kind of relevant knowledge they (may) have regarding the assessment?<br />
* What needs and aims do they represent in the assessment? <br />
<br />
'''Homework 6, part B:'''<br />
Consider also the following questions about facilitating collaboration:<br />
* How could the relevant participants be involved in the assessment in an effective way?<br />
* How can the quality of an assessment be assured if anyone can participate?<br />
* How can you prevent malevolent contributions where the purpose is to vandalise the process?<br />
* How can you make the outcome converge to a conclusion, because all issues are uncertain and controversial?<br />
* How can you ensure that the outcomes are useful for the users?<br />
<br />
== Homework 7: Structured discussion ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 20 hours<br />
<br />
{{summary box<br />
| question = What are the evaluation criteria for structured discussion (homework 7)?<br />
| answer = Evaluation of arguments:<br />
* Each argument is evaluated either A (very good), B (good), or C (irrelevant).<br />
* When you have written at least one A argument and at least three B arguments, you get grade 2.<br />
* When you have written at least four B arguments you get grade 1.5.<br />
* If you have written at least two B arguments you get grade 1.<br />
* Argument with C is a slight dis-merit and may affect borderline situations.<br />
* B argument is the default. A arguments differ from B arguments by having<br />
** an important, unique aspect,<br />
** good referencing, and/or<br />
** clever use of hierarchy.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
The objective of this homework is to learn to organise existing written material into a [[discussion|structured discussion]] with a main statement and related arguments. In addition, students should learn to develop and use own arguments within a structured discussion. For examples, see<br />
* [[Talk:Environmental impact assessment directive]]<br />
* [[Talk:Assessment of the health impacts of H1N1 vaccination]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Keskustelu:Pneumokokkirokotteen turvallisuus]]<br />
* [[Talk:Climate change policies in Helsinki]]<br />
<br />
Your task is to initiate and participate in structured discussions on page [[Talk:Congestion charge]] according to the instructions on page [[Discussion]]. Come up with one original statement for a discussion based your own ideas, by talking to Helsinki city representatives (jari.viinanen(at)hel.fi, mira.jarkko(at)hel.fi) or the material below.<br />
<br />
'''Articles in Wikipedia<br />
* [[:en:Congestion pricing|Congestion pricing]]<br />
* [[:en:London congestion charge|London congestion charge]]<br />
* [[:fi:Ruuhkamaksu|Ruuhkamaksu]]<br />
<br />
'''Studies about congestion charges in Helsinki<br />
(and related discussion) {{comment|# |If you know Finnish, you should first look at these texts to make their arguments available to others in English.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:43, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
* Helsingin kaupunki. Ruuhkamaksut tehokkain keino parantaa Helsingin ilmanlaatua nopeasti. (12.01.2017) [http://www.hel.fi/www/uutiset/fi/ymparistokeskus/ruuhkamaksut-12012017]<br />
* HSL (11.2.2016): Tiemaksut varmistaisivat Helsingin seudun kestävän kasvun [https://www.hsl.fi/uutiset/2016/tiemaksut-varmistaisivat-helsingin-seudun-kestavan-kasvun-7995]<br />
** Helsingin Sanomat [http://www.hs.fi/kaupunki/art-2000002885425.html]<br />
** Helsingin Uutiset [http://www.helsinginuutiset.fi/artikkeli/363860-ruuhkamaksut-kayttoon-ehka-jo-2020-kartta-nain-ne-vaikuttavat-sinuun]<br />
** Kauppalehti-blogi [http://blog.kauppalehti.fi/metrossanukkuja/ruuhkamaksu-voi-olla-maailman-tyhmin-idea]<br />
* LVM. (2011) Helsingin seudun ruuhkamaksu. Jatkoselvitys. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 5/2011. [http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-243-214-8]<br />
* LVM. (2007). Joukkoliikenteen houkuttelevuuden ja käytön lisääminen eri liikkujaryhmissä. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 63/2007. [http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-201-954-7]<br />
** Talouselämä-uutiskommentti [http://www.talouselama.fi/uutiset/ruuhkamaksu-rankaisee-koyhaa-3388061]<br />
* LVM. Tienkäyttömaksujärjestelmät. Esiselvitys. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 17/2006. [http://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/78730/Julkaisuja_17_2006.pdf?sequence=1]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Scientific articles about congestion charge and health<br />
*{{doi|10.1126/science.aaf3420}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.jth.2015.08.002}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1080/09640568.2014.912615}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.tra.2015.03.004}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.01.002}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.09.015}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1080/13547500902965252}}<br />
*{{doi|10.5172/impp.453.10.2-3.269}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.amepre.2006.03.030}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1136/jech.2003.012385}}<br />
<br />
Build the content to your discussion based on different materials you can find from the climate reports in homework 5, from the Internet, and from the city representatives. Note that you can and should also participate in discussions launched by other students.<br />
<br />
As facilitators, you should pay attention to get as many different opinions documented as possible. So, jump into a role of a stakeholder and try to think what he/she would say. Possible roles include:<br />
* A national authority giving environmental permissions.<br />
* A taxi company.<br />
* A department store inside or outside a planned congestion charge zone.<br />
* A nature conservationist.<br />
* A local politician interested in both nature and local economy.<br />
* A citizen.<br />
<br />
Note that you are allowed to:<br />
* Contradict your own arguments.<br />
* Update and improve statements if they are too vague or poorly written. However, be careful not to push the existing argumentation out of context. Instead of making large changes to a statement, start a new discussion with your new statement.<br />
* Add your signature to other people's arguments if you agree with them. Note that the first name is assumed to be the original author, so don't put your name first.<br />
* Clarify other people's arguments, if you do it carefully and do not change the meaning.<br />
* Copy arguments from one discussion to another, if they are relevant. But instead of copying large blocks, make references to the other discussion instead.<br />
<br />
== Homework 8: Participate in an assessment ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: '''44 hours'''<br />
<br />
* Everyone participates in making an open assessment. The topic is [[Congestion charge]] to reduce car traffic. This relates to a larger topic [[Climate change policies in Helsinki]]. The topic shares some similarities with [[Climate change policies and health in Kuopio]] and [[Climate change policies in Basel]], although congestion charge was not discussed in those assessments.<br />
* Based on structured discussions in Homework 7, every pair selects a sub-topic (or research question) and develops at least one variable page that asks that question and answers it. Before starting a variable page, suggestionss about relevant questions should be discussed on the assessment page ([[Congestion charge]]). This is because the relevance of a specific question depends on other questions asked, and some issues link causally together nicely when the questions are formulated in a coherent manner.<br />
* The task is to produce a shared understanding of the assessment topic, i.e. congestion charges in Helsinki. The shared understanding is produced using the [[structure of shared understanding]]. In practice:<br />
** Each main subtopic is described on its own page in Opasnet.<br />
** Find enough relevant information for a plausible answer, synthesise the information on the page, and quantitate it.<br />
** The connections of the pages and other items are described on three tables: a) Items, b) Relations, and c) Evaluations. Page [[Voting age]] has an example about how to use the tables.<br />
* The data should be documented well enough to convince a critical reader that this is a good answer to the question.<br />
* Other examples of [[shared understanding]] ([[:op_fi:Jaetun ymmärryksen menetelmä]]) in Finnish:<br />
** [[:op_fi:Keskipitkän aikavälin ilmastopolitiikan suunnitelma]],<br />
** [[:op_fi:Energiarenessanssi]],<br />
** [[:op_fi:Pietarsaaren rokotuskeskustelu]]<br />
<br />
== Homework 9: Evaluation of assessment ==<br />
<br />
:'' Estimated working time: 8 hours.<br />
<br />
In this exercise you are asked to look into and evaluate one homework 4 draft assessment (other than your own) and one real-life assessment performed in Opasnet (listed below). <br />
* [[Helsinki energy decision 2015]]<br />
* [[Climate change policies and health in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Climate change policies in Basel]]<br />
* [[Pneumococcal vaccine]]<br />
* [[Water guide]]<br />
* [[Fukushima nuclear accident]]<br />
* [[Risk assessment on Hämeenkyrö municipal solid waste incinerator]]<br />
* [[Comparative risk assessment of dioxin and fine particles]]<br />
* [[Benefit-risk assessment of fish consumption for Beneris]]<br />
* [[Emission assessment of small-scale energy production in the Helsinki metropolitan area]]<br />
* [[Assessment of building policies' effect on dampness and asthma in Europe]]<br />
* [[Assessment of the health impacts of H1N1 vaccination]]<br />
* [[Benefit-risk assessment of cinnamon]]<br />
* [[INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF WASTE MANAGEMENT IN LAZIO (ITALY)]]<br />
* [[The health risks and benefits of cycling in urban environments compared with car use: health impact assessment study]]<br />
* [[Environmental impact assessment directive]]<br />
* [[Assessment on impacts of emission trading on city-level (ET-CL)]]<br />
* [[Gasbus - health impacts of Helsinki bus traffic]]<br />
* [[Biofuel assessments]]<br />
* Assessments in Finnish:<br />
** [[:op_fi:Pahtavaaran kaivos]]<br />
** [[:op_fi:Silakan hyöty-riskiarvio]]<br />
** [[:op_fi:Rauman sataman laajennuksen vaikutus terveyteen]]<br />
** [[:op_fi:Talvivaaran kaivoksen terveysvaikutukset]]<br />
<br />
<br />
The work is based on instructions and tables on page [[Open policy practice#Evaluation and management]]. Find the assessments by the two users below you on the user/homework list on top of this page (the last on the list shall pick the first two users on the list and the second last on the list shall pick the last and the first user).<br />
<br />
'''This exercise is intended to be done individually.''' However, co-operation between students is recommended.<br />
<br />
'''First characterize the draft assessments''' according to the ''Knowledge-policy interaction'' and ''Dimensions of openness'' frameworks. The things to consider in the characterization are listed and explained in the tables in [[Open policy practice#Evaluation and management]].<br />
<br />
In order to identify the last point in framework for characterising settings (Table 3.), mode of interaction that the draft assessment builds on, characterize the dimensions of openness in the assessment explained in Table 4. ([[Open policy practice#Dimensions of openness]]). The example categories for interaction mentioned in Table 3 are explained in Table 5 ([[Open policy practice#Categories of interaction]]).<br />
<br />
'''Second, evaluate the assessment drafts''' according to the (slightly modified) ''[[Open policy practice#Properties of good decision support]]'' framework. Base your evaluation on the characterization you have made. The things to consider in the evaluation are listed and explained in Table 2. For each attribute (i.e. an aspect to consider) give a numerical evaluation on a 1-5 scale (1 = poor, 5 = excellent). Also briefly write down your reasoning for each numerical evaluation. If something seems completely missing or not possible to evaluate, the numerical evaluation is 0 (also write down your reasoning why the particular aspect of the draft assessment deserves an evaluation of 0).<br />
<br />
Evaluation of assessments is not only something to be done after an assessment has been completed. Instead, evaluation should be seen as a means to guide the making of assessments towards their aims while they are still happening. Therefore, '''the third task of this exercise is to formulate suggestions for developing/improving the draft assessment'''. Write your suggestions as comments/arguments to the user pages where the draft assessment descriptions are. Also point out where the information in the draft assessment is/was missing or insufficient for characterization or evaluation.<br />
<br />
'''Homework 4 answers will be used as materials in this exercise.''' It is recommended that you attempt to do this exercise only starting on the deadline of Homework 4.<br />
<br />
Links to some examples of using the above mentioned evaluation frameworks:<br />
* [[Openness in participation, assessment, and policy making upon issues of environment and environmental health: a review of literature and recent project results]] (Dimensions of openness)<br />
* [[Assessment of impacts to environment and health in influencing manufacturing and public policy]] (Knowledge-policy interaction.)<br />
* [[Evaluating effectiveness of open assessments on alternative biofuel sources]] (Dimensions of openness and Properties of good assessment.)<br />
* [[:op_fi:Puijon metsien käyttösuunnitelman päätöksenteko]] (All methods. In Finnish)<br />
<br />
== Extra homework (not evaluated): Structure of pages and objects and R code==<br />
<br />
{{comment|# |In the next course, we need a homework where there is one variable and some related (pre-known) data. The task is to go through the data, evaluate its applicability, transform it into a format that better answers the question, and discuss different interpretations. The purpose is to produce a probability distribution as an answer to the question. This variable might be a part of the [[training assessment]]. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 14:47, 19 May 2015 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 8 hours<br />
<br />
The objective of this homework is that you learn to see what different parts of a page are and how they are related to each other and to other pages. Especially, an objective is to understand the role of R code in this system. You should learn to identify key things from a code and understand their use and connections to other parts of an assessment. These skill are then needed in Homework 9 when we actually perform an assessment.<br />
<br />
With your pair, select and '''reserve three pages''' (by adding your usernames beside the page link) from the list below. At least two of them have to contain t2b tables and R code. Go through the content by doing all of the key tasks below, if possible. Also look at the additional questions and answer at least some of them. Write your answers to the page by using the comment, defend (when things are OK), and attack (when things are not OK) buttons. If you can, improve the content or suggest tasks for improvement.<br />
<br />
In addition, select three other pages from the list such that another pair has already done the work. Read the content and their comments, and agree or disagree with them. Try to improve the content further.<br />
<br />
; Key tasks<br />
* Check that the page has a correct page type and change when needed. Check that the page has all subheadings that belong to the page type. Add, if missing.<br />
* Categorise the page to relevant categories.<br />
* Organise the content into the right subheadings. Especially, look what is Data and what is Answer.<br />
* Check and update the Dependencies. Also check that the Answers in dependency pages are coherent with this page.<br />
* Make rcodes that a) creates the ovariable (under Calculations) and b) gets the latest ovariable and prints basic results (under Answer).<br />
* Test any existing code and report its functionalities on the page.<br />
* Write or update a summary (one paragraph in the very beginning explaining the main points of the text) on the page. If the content is too unclear to write a good summary, write down clarification questions to the moderator of that page.<br />
* If you have problems with any previous steps, describe them on the relevant point on the page.<br />
<br />
<br />
; Additional questions<br />
* Does the page have a correct page type?<br />
* Does the page have a question? Is it clear and unambiguous?<br />
* Does the page have an answer to the question? Does it actually give an answer to what is asked?<br />
* With variables, is the answer given as a link to a model run with calculated results? If yes,<br />
** Does the model run have a clear result table?<br />
** Does the model run have a clear result graph?<br />
** Is it clear where the code that was used to run the results is?<br />
* In method pages: based on the guidance in the answer, is it possible to actually use the method in an assessment?<br />
* In method pages: What data is required to be able to use the method? Are the requirements listed under "Inputs"?<br />
* Are there data on the page that is needed to answer the question? Are it in machine-readable format (i.e., in t2b table or directly stored in the database)?<br />
** Are the data under Rationale/Data subheading, (or in methods under Rationale/Inputs)?<br />
* Is there data or text that is NOT needed to justify the answer? Would that data be in better place on another page with a different question? What would that question be?<br />
* If the data is needed but is not used in the Answer, update it or suggest tasks to update it.<br />
* Are there external variables whose values need to be known to be able to estimate this object? If yes, <br />
** Are these listed under Rationale/Dependencies?<br />
** Are there equations (as text) for calculating this object based on the dependencies under Rationale/Formula (or Rationale/Calculations)<br />
* Is there an R code that implements the object? <br />
** With variables, is the code under Rationale/Calculations?<br />
** With methods, is there a code under Rationale/Calculations that defines the method object?<br />
** With methods, is there a code under Answer that describes how the method object is used??<br />
** If there are dependencies and formula, does the code take them in to produce an ovariable?<br />
** If there are data, does the code take them in to produce an ovariable?<br />
** When you run the code, does it crash (i.e. produce an error message) before completion? When and why (use ''show code'' and ''show messages and errors'' to understand what's going on)?<br />
** Are there several different codes on the page? Are their purposes clear?<br />
** Does the page use other pages (objects) in calculations? Are these connections listed explicitly as links under the R code?<br />
* Does the page have an evaluation (edistymisluokitus) in either a separate box in the beginning, or in the metadata box?<br />
* Does the page have other subheadings (See also, References, Related files, Keywords)? <br />
** Are there links to other related pages? Are relevant links missing?<br />
* Is the page categorised to relevant categories?<br />
* With encyclopedia pages: is the content detailed enough so that one or more variables or methods could be made based on it? Does such page(s) exist? Are these pages linked to each other?<br />
* Does the page explain its links to other pages? Is it clear how the page could be used as a part of an assessment?<br />
* Do you find other pages that actually have duplicate content? Is some content outdated (based on e.g. version history?)? Suggest how pages should be updated, deleted, or merged.<br />
* Do you find errors or mistakes on the page?<br />
* Is the text clear? <br />
* Write or update a summary (one paragraph in the very beginning explaining the main points of the text) on the page. If the content is too unclear to write a good summary, write down clarification questions to the moderator of that page.<br />
* Is the text properly referenced?<br />
* Are there discussions on the Talk page? If yes, <br />
** Have they been linked to from the main page? <br />
** Have the current resolutions been incorporated in the main page?<br />
<br />
; Pages with R code<br />
<br />
* [[Buildings in Basel]]<br />
* [[Exposure to PM2.5 in Finland]]<br />
* [[OpasnetUtils/Drafts]]<br />
* [[Energy use of buildings]] <br />
* [[Emission factors for burning processes]]<br />
* [[Building model]] <br />
* [[Health impact assessment]]<br />
* [[Disease risk]]<br />
* [[ERFs of environmental pollutants]]<br />
* [[Burden of disease in Finland]]<br />
* [[Climate change policies and health in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Building stock in Kuopio]] <br />
* [[Exposure to PM2.5 in Finland]]<br />
* [[Population of Kuopio]]<br />
* [[ERF of indoor dampness on respiratory health effects]] <br />
* [[Concentration-response to PM2.5]]<br />
* [[Climate change policies in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Energy balance]]<br />
* [[Energy balance in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Energy balance in Stuttgart]]<br />
* [[Energy balance in Suzhou]]<br />
* [[Energy transformations]]<br />
* [[Greenhouse gas emissions in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Emission factors for burning processes]]<br />
* [[Energy consumption of heating of buildings in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Fuels used by Haapaniemi energy plant]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Luikonlahden rikastamon ympäristöterveysriskien arviointi]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Väestön kohdekohtainen ympäristöperäisen haitta-ainealtistumisen ja terveysriskin arviointi]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Kuljetuksen päästöt]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Kaivoksen kuljetusten pölypäästö]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Metallimalmin murskausprosessin pölypäästöt]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Rikastekuljetukset]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Metallimalmin hihnakuljetuksen pölypäästöt]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Kohdekohtaisen Minera-arvioinnin mallisivu]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Järvisedimenttien metallipitoisuudet]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Energiantuotannon päästökertoimet/Sähköntuotanto]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Talvivaaran kaivoksen terveysvaikutukset]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Väestön kohdekohtainen ympäristöperäisen haitta-ainealtistumisen arviointi]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Pneumokokki]]<br />
<br />
; Pages without R code<br />
* [[Haapaniemi energy plant in Kuopio]] <br />
* [[Energy consumption of heating of buildings in Kuopio]] <br />
* [[Energy consumption and GHG emissions in Kuopio by sector]]<br />
* [[Effect of urban land use change on ambient air temperature]]<br />
* [[HI:Residential floorspace in Europe]] <br />
* [[Climate change policies in Thessaloniki]]<br />
* [[Greenhouse gas emissions in Rotterdam]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Ympäristöterveydelliset viite- ja raja-arvot]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Haitta-aineiden imeytyminen iholta elimistöön]]<br />
<br />
== Seminar: Lessons learned ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated preparing time: 9 hours for the three topics.<br />
<br />
'''Workshop seminars 16th May<br />
<br />
For the first presentations on Tuesday 16th, all topics will be about the group works that have been done during 15th and 16th May. Each presenting group will take a slightly different angle to the [[Congestion charge]] case. The topics and groups are described in the table. For each topic, consider two different points of view:<br />
* Substantive: What were the key pieces of information related to our topic? Where did we find them? What was left out and why?<br />
* Operative: How did our method work? Did it actually help us synthesise necessary information? Could other people understand our information product, i.e. did the method produce good information objects (compare to [[OPP|properties of good assessment]])? <br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Times and topics for the seminar presentations<br />
! Time|| Presenter|| Topic|| Presentation<br />
|----<br />
||14.00-14.20 ||Amr, Ehab || Variables in the causal chain of the assessment. || If you have presentation slides, put a link to them here.<br />
|----<br />
||14.20-14.40 ||Tamara, Tine || Organising text and discussion into structured arguments.||<br />
|----<br />
||14.40-15.00 || Edem, Margaret|| Describing variables and statements in tables of Items, Relations, and Evaluations. ||<br />
|----<br />
||15.00-15.20 || Jin, Kaisu?|| Shared understanding and open assessment as a method for understanding a complex policy topic||<br />
|----<br />
||15.20-15.40 || || Linking discussions into variables in the causal diagram|| <br />
|----<br />
||15.40-16.00 || Jouni|| General discussion||<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
'''Final seminar 29th May<br />
<br />
Each group has a slot of 30 min to present their topic and discuss it. A recommendation is to aim at 20 min of presentation and 10 min of discussion. Each group has a different topic, but each topic is about one of the homeworks. Note that each group may have different presentations related to the work the group has done: about presenting an assessment (HW4-6), structured discussion or evaluation (HW7, 9) and assessment (HW8). Remember that the audience has not read the report or assessment of your topic. So, in the presentation first describe the main purpose and content of your topic/material.<br />
<br />
When preparing your presentation, focus on three things:<br />
# Describe the '''substantive content''' of your topic. What did you learn about it, what conclusions were made based on the material and the work?<br />
# Describe '''how the content relates to a wider perspective''', namely an assessment or a decision process. What additional value did this topic bring? Did it change conclusions? Was it important in increasing understanding, or some other way?<br />
# '''How was it incorporated into the bigger picture?''' What methods were used to incorporate it? How were the methods used, and did the methods work for their purpose?<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Times and topics for the seminar presentations<br />
! Time|| Presenter|| Topic|| Presentation<br />
|----<br />
||times to be confirmed, each ca 30 min || Amr, Ehab|| HW4|||{{#l:City of Rotterdam.pptx}}<br />
|----<br />
|| || Tamara, Tine|| HW5||{{#l:DARM HW5 Lessons learned.pdf}}<br />
|----<br />
|| || Edem, Margaret|| HW6||<br />
|----<br />
|| || Jin, Kaisu|| HW9||<br />
|----<br />
|| || Jouni|| General discussion, Course evaluation||<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
'''Course evaluation<br />
<br />
During the last lecture, course feedback will be collected and discussed. Please answer to the following questions (based on [[properties of good assessment]]).<br />
<br />
* Quality of content<br />
** Informativeness: Was the course informative? Did you learn new things, and things that you would not have (easily) learned from other courses?<br />
** Calibration: Was the information given truthful and scientifically correct? Were there topics that were not covered with enough rigour?<br />
** Coherence: Did the course content reflect the course description? Were some parts over- or underemphasises? Was everything addressed? Was something unnecessary?<br />
* Applicability<br />
** Relevance: Correspondence between output and its intended use. Did the course teach you things that are useful in decision support work? Did the course teach you things that you are likely to use in your future job? What would you add to or leave out of the course?<br />
** Availability: Is the information provided by the course available to you when and where you need it in the future? Can you use the web tools in your future work?<br />
** Usability: Potential of the information of the course to trigger understanding in its user(s). Can you perceive and internalize the information provided, i.e. can you use this information? Did your understanding increase about the course topics?<br />
** Acceptability: Potential of the course being accepted by its users. Fundamentally a matter of its making and delivery, not its information content. How was the course organised? Is the course, and the way it is obtained and delivered for use, acceptable?<br />
* Efficiency<br />
** Intra-course efficiency: Resource expenditure of participating in the course. How much effort is spent in the participation? Could some parts be learned with less effort? Would some parts have needed more effort? How much did you spend time on each homework?<br />
** Inter-course efficiency: Resource expenditure of the course as a part of your studies as a whole. Did the course help you learn more easily topics of the same area?</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=File:City_of_Rotterdam.pptx&diff=40790File:City of Rotterdam.pptx2017-05-29T07:54:23Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: </p>
<hr />
<div>MsUpload<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Ehab_Mustafa]]</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=File:City_of_Rotterdam.pptx&diff=40789File:City of Rotterdam.pptx2017-05-29T07:54:22Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: MsUpload</p>
<hr />
<div>MsUpload</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40785User:Ehab Mustafa2017-05-29T06:06:03Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 5 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Rotterdam and Dutch government.<br />
<br />
:::{{attack|# |This must be a typo, as you are looking at Rotterdam.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
::::{{defend|# |Mistake was revealed and corrected|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 06:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
:{{comment|# |The word 'structurally' is a bit ambiguous here. Does that mean city structure (urban planning) or administrative structures and policy processes? In addition, you mention uncertainties but you do not define how those should be taken into account. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=Talk:Congestion_charge&diff=40709Talk:Congestion charge2017-05-15T19:38:41Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Individual choice */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Health effects, air quality and climate change ==<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Congestion charge scheme doesn't significantly affect air quality in cities.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{attack|# |Carbon footprint caused by stationary traffic or ‘vehicle idling’ resulting<br />
from gridlock across urbanized advanced economies. The fuel that is consumed while stationary in traffic<br />
results in higher emission of greenhouse gases and pollutants, which leads to poorer air quality,<br />
particularly in urban areas. <ref> [http://ibtta.org/sites/default/files/documents/MAF/Costs-of-Congestion-INRIX-Cebr-Report%20(3).pdf]</ref>|--[[User:Amr Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Amr Ebrahim|talk]]) 11:40, 28.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{defend|# | I support the noted argument that congestion charge could have a positive impact on quality. For instance, the congestion charge trial in Stockholm in 2006, based on measurements, it was estimated that this system resulted in a 15% reduction in total road use within the charged cordon. Total traffic emissions in this area of NOx and PM10 fell by 8.5% and 13%, respectively. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231008008091] </ref>|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk: Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 12:18, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
::{{attack|# | While Congestion pricing in Stockholm did reduce traffic emissions the reduction (especially along the most densely trafficked streets) was not sufficient for compliance with air quality standards. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231008008091] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:20, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{defend|# | I support the noted argument that congestion charge could have a positive impact on quality of air because a study of congestion pricing in Stockholm between 2006-2010 found that in the absence of congestion pricing that Stockholm's "air would have been five to ten percent more polluted between 2006 and 2010, and young children would have suffered 45 percent more asthma attacks . <ref> [https://www.insidescience.org/news/driving-fee-rolls-back-asthma-attacks-stockholm] </ref>|--[[User:edem agbenowu]] ([[User talk: edem agbenowu|talk]]) 12:18, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{defend|# | London Congestion pricing scheme brought significant reduction in the emissions of NOx and PM10 due to increased vehicle speed. Reduction in CO2 emissions was almost 20%. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231005007259] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 13:29, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# |By reduction of traffic flows, the release of several pollutant emissions also reduce over time. For example, Daniel and Bekka (2000) <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094119099921356?via%3Dihub]</ref> have showed that the emissions can decrease for 30% in highly congested parts of Delaware, US. |--[[User:Tamara Gajst]] ([[User talk:Tamara Gajst|talk]]) 13:36, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | While Congestion charge scheme initially reduced the number of vehicles entering central London, the congestion levels since 2012 were back at pre-2002 (pre-Congestion charge) levels. <ref> [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27199415] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:02, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# | Congestion charge scheme to a significant extend affect the reduction of of air pollution and promote air aquality according to Transport for London (TfL) Levels of nitrogen oxides (NOX), fell by 13.4% between 2002 & 2003, and carbon dioxide, as well as the levels of airborne particulates (PM10) within and alongside the congestion charge zone. According to the report from TfL since 2002, the nitrogen dioxide (NO2) produced by diesel exhaust has become a serious problem, reporting that the annual mean NO2 objective (of 40 μgm-3 or 21 ppb) was exceeded at all kerbside and roadside monitoring sites across central and greater London during 12 months between 2005 and 2006 and no areas within the Congestion Charge Zone reported NO2 levels above an upper limit of 200 μgm-3 (105 ppb). If this practice continue and also extended to other parts there will be great reduction in air pollution <ref> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge</ref>|--[[User:Margaret Arogunyo]] ([[User talk:Margaret Arogunyo|talk]]) 14:35, 15.5.2017}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | I think the discussion got out of context. When I wrote this statement I was referencing to the case of Helsinki. According to the summary of the environmental impact assessment of congestion charge in Helsinki, the decrease in the traffic carbon dioxide emission will range from 3% to 5%. The significance and the worthlessness of congestion charge implementation in Helsinki are questionable in environmental aspect especially if compared to other alternative, for instance: use of environment-friendly types of fuel. <ref> [https://www.hsl.fi/sites/default/files/uploads/ajoneuvoliikenteen_hinnoitteluselvitys_2016_en.pdf] </ref>|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk: Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 21:22, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Congestion charge scheme will improve the populations’ health. <br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Congestion scheme can encourage walking, cycling and using public transport, and may thereby reduce individual’s sedentary habits leading to an increase in populations physical activity that might affect the growing burden of obesity. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214140515006738] </ref>|--[[User:Tamara Gajst]] ([[User talk:Tamara Gajst|talk]]) 14:23, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{attack|# | Evidence for potential positive physical activity related health effects due to congestion pricing schemes is weak. <ref> [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16829328] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:28, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | Congestion charge can lead to reduction in road traffic related casualties and injuries.<ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856415000464] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:03, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{attack|# | Building roads with the intent of speeding up traffic usually generates extra traffic <ref> [http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.5172/impp.453.10.2-3.269] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:23, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}} <br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== Individual choice ==<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Congestion charge scheme constrains individual choice and behavior.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{attack|# |Urban dwellers are more geared towards behavioral adjustment, since they are aware of the dynamic of distributions of the costs of congestion on house hold and their societal sense of belonging. Therefore, the incidence of such costs and benefits affects the preferences and in turn the willingness to build coping strategies will emerge by acceptance. Hence this can only apply to urban dwellers the case with suburbia and rural surrounding still needs more attention.<ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361920997000035]</ref>|--[[User:Amr Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Amr Ebrahim|talk]]) 12:04, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# |Congestion scheme can promote sustainable mobility if the revenue is invested in public transportation infrastructure <ref> [http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09640568.2014.912615]</ref>.|--[[User:Tamara Gajst]] ([[User talk:Tamara Gajst|talk]]) 14:01, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{comment|# | In London Congestion charge scheme lead to increased use of public transport (50-60%), avoiding the areas (20-30%), car sharing (15-25%), reduced number of journeys, increased use of motorbikes and bicycles. <ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:11, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | Constitutional laws interpret the congestion charge as a tax. Taking into account its possible advantage and drawbacks, It is questionable how to socially promote the idea of congestion charge in a society already committed to a high level of taxation. <ref> [https://www.hsl.fi/sites/default/files/uploads/ajoneuvoliikenteen_hinnoitteluselvitys_2016_en.pdf] </ref>|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk: Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 22:00, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{defend|# | Finland is sparely populated country, this applies to the city of Helsinki. By restricting access and mobility in the only livable region in the whole country, you kill the idea of having a city. <ref> [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fhannuoskala.fi%2F2012%2F04%2Fautoliitto-ja-ruuhkamaksut%2F] </ref>|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk: Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 22:38, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}} <br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== Economy ==<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = The economic viability of tariffs and transformation of urban space will encourage more use of roads and cars.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{defend|#| Most economic decision in urbanized economical cities needs to overcome elements such as cost and convenience of toll collection, especially on down town streets. Nevertheless the regressive distributional impact, since lower income people spend a larger proportion of their income on commuting and have less work schedule flexibility, lack of trust in government to dispose of toll revenues wisely, and benefits that in some cases are so small as to be insignificant. These all can contribute for increased mileage attempting to look for either alternatives of escape the cost.<ref> [https://econ.ucsb.edu/~tedb/Courses/Ec1F07/traffic.pdf]</ref>|--[[User:Amr Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Amr Ebrahim|talk]]) 12:49, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# | 10 years after Congestion charge was implemented in London 10% reduction of traffic volumes was observed. <ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:28, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = congestion charge schemes can restrict urban mobility and human capital growth.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{defend|#|The tension between the demand side of transformation and the supply side of governance of cities with out a clear vision on urban transit can be problematic. The mobility towards more economic prosperous location is needed for economical growth, hence the increased living expense of commuting for a younger population can contribute to framing the city as economically hostile or expensive. more effort should be aimed toward different tariffs to different categories rather generalized schemes.<ref>[http://www.theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/congestion_apr10.pdf]</ref>|--[[User:Amr Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Amr Ebrahim|talk]]) 01:07, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# |In as much as mobility towards more economic prosperous location is needed for economic growth the delay associated with traffic could as well serve as disincentive for people to move into these locations.The faster someone can transact business in a location the more likely the individual will tend to conduct business in that location.Hence it might be difficult for younger population to see such places as economically hostile.Moreover as non-productive activity for most people, congestion reduces regional economic healt.<ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_congestion</ref>|--[[User:edem agbenowu]] ([[User talk:edem agbenowu|talk]]) 12:04, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# | 300 new buses and new or changed bus routes were introduced at the launch of London congestion charge scheme – showing that introduction of Congestion charge can increase the mobility and human capital growth. <ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:59, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{defend|# | Journey times in London reduced by 14% - indicating potential for increased mobility<ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:08, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{comment|# | Accessibility and economic performance are closely related. Good accessibility can facilitate economic growth. <ref> [http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.5172/impp.453.10.2-3.269] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:05, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Toxicity charge as a form of congestion charge is unfair.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{defend|# |Older cars that do not meet Euro 4 standard paying an extra £10 charge on top of the congestion charge to drive in central London, within the Congestion Charge Zone is unfair because the fact that a car is old does not necessarily indicate that the emission levels are high <ref> [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/green-motoring/11187483/New-or-old-which-is-greener.html]</ref>|--[[User:Edem Agbenowu|Edem Agbenowu]]}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | People living within the congestion charge area shouldn’t pay the same amount as people driving there from outside. (i.e. In Milano residents have 40 free entries and after that discounted cost of 2 instead of 5 euros). <ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congestion_pricing] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:10, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | Only 10% of PM10 is due to exhaust emissions. Depending on the road the increase of driving speed may both increase or decrease the overall PM10 emissions. <ref> [http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10661-006-9296-4] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 13:45, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# | The ones responsible for the pollution should bear its price according to the “Polluter pays principle” <ref> [http://ec.europa.eu/environment/legal/law/pdf/principles/2%20Polluter%20Pays%20Principle_revised.pdf] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:14, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{comment|# |The purpose of congestion charge is to discourage traffic in the city centers but some mobile equipment do not have any emmission standard and by extension might not pay any congestion charge attributed with emissions in London examples are vehicles with less than 4 wheels, those with 2-stroke engines,hybrid vehicles,quadricycles but these means of transport could as well cause congestion in the city center <ref> [https://www.gov.uk/emissions-testing]</ref>|--[[User:Edem Agbenowu|Edem Agbenowu]] ([[User talk:Edem Agbenowu|talk]]) 04:42, 9 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = congestion charge prevents the occurrence of tragedy of the commons.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{defend|#|In any situation within a shared-resource system such as roads individual users acting independently according to their own self-interest behave contrary to the common good of all users by depleting or spoiling that resource through their collective action.The introduction of effective congestion charges will serve as a measures that may reduce congestion through economic incentives and disincentives <ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons]</ref>|--[[User:edem agbenowu]] ([[User talk:edem agbenowu|talk]]) 01:07, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = To ensure air quality standards, the congestion charge scheme needs to be dynamic.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
<br />
{{comment|# |Congestion charge should cover all seasons and hours of the day and should dynamically adapt according to meteorological conditions for pollution dispersion and contributions from different pollution sources. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856415000464] </ref>|--[[User:Tamara Gajst]] ([[User talk:Tamara Gajst|talk]]) 14:23, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== Materials that can be used ==<br />
<br />
These are Finnish (focusing on Helsinki) discussions or proposals about congestion charge. The web pages are linked through Google translator so that the text shown is automatically translated text from Finnish to English. Mostly it works fine, but be aware of mistakes.<br />
* The environmental council of the city of Helsinki suggests (9th May 2017) that regional congestion charges should be available for cities and the cities also should get the money collected. [https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fi&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hel.fi%2Fstatic%2Fpublic%2Fhela%2FYmparistolautakunta%2FSuomi%2FEsitys%2F2017%2FYmk_2017-05-09_Ylk_8_El%2FF4C8DD44-AC2B-CD53-90B4-5BB46AD00000%2FAloite_valtiolle_lakimuutoksen_puolesta_joka_salli.html&edit-text=&act=url]<br />
* Osmo Soininvaara, a member of Helsinki City Council, suppports congestion charges. These are his arguments:<br />
** 3rd April 2017: congestion charges are effective in reducing traffic jams, they reduce emissions, and they collect money for the city. [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.soininvaara.fi%2F2017%2F04%2F03%2Fkaupunkirakentamisen-aika-35-ruuhkamaksut%2F]<br />
** 4th April 2017: even if a congestion charge punishes poor people (who can afford to sit in the current traffic jams but cannot afford the charges), the benefits (see previous point) spread to the whole community. [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.soininvaara.fi%2F2017%2F04%2F04%2Fkaupunkirakentamisen-aika-38-kuka-hyotyy-ruuhkamaksusta-koyhat-pois-rikkaiden-tielta%2F]<br />
* The Helsinki Regional Transport Agency HSL is planning congestion charges. News from February 2016.<br />
** Yle [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fyle.fi%2Fuutiset%2F3-8662824]<br />
** HSL:s own news [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.hsl.fi%2Fuutiset%2F2016%2Ftiemaksut-varmistaisivat-helsingin-seudun-kestavan-kasvun-7995]<br />
** Helsingin uutiset (a local newspaper) [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.helsinginuutiset.fi%2Fartikkeli%2F363860-ruuhkamaksut-kayttoon-ehka-jo-2020-kartta-nain-ne-vaikuttavat-sinuun]<br />
* Report on congestion charges in Helsinki, 2016 [https://www.hsl.fi/sites/default/files/uploads/ajoneuvoliikenteen_hinnoitteluselvitys_2016_en.pdf]<br />
* Background report on congestion charges, 2015 (in Finnish with English summary) [https://www.hsl.fi/sites/default/files/uploads/hsl_julkaisu_4_2016_ajoneuvoliikenteen_hinnoitteluselvitys_teknistoiminnallinen.pdf]<br />
* Autoliitto (Car Drivers' Association) opposes congestion charge in Helsinki (2009) [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fyle.fi%2Fuutiset%2F3-5911660], (2011) [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.autoliitto.fi%2Fen%2Ftiedote%2Fsuurimpia-karsijoita-olisivat-alueen-omat-veronmaksajat-ja-elinkeinoelama-ruuhkamaksut]<br />
** Hannu Oskala argues against Autoliitto's statements (2012) [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fhannuoskala.fi%2F2012%2F04%2Fautoliitto-ja-ruuhkamaksut%2F]<br />
* Summary page of HSL material about congestion charge (mostly Finnish only) [https://www.hsl.fi/tiemaksut]<br />
* Helsingin kaupunki. Ruuhkamaksut tehokkain keino parantaa Helsingin ilmanlaatua nopeasti. (12.01.2017) [http://www.hel.fi/www/uutiset/fi/ymparistokeskus/ruuhkamaksut-12012017]<br />
* HSL (11.2.2016): Tiemaksut varmistaisivat Helsingin seudun kestävän kasvun [https://www.hsl.fi/uutiset/2016/tiemaksut-varmistaisivat-helsingin-seudun-kestavan-kasvun-7995]<br />
** Helsingin Sanomat [http://www.hs.fi/kaupunki/art-2000002885425.html]<br />
** Helsingin Uutiset [http://www.helsinginuutiset.fi/artikkeli/363860-ruuhkamaksut-kayttoon-ehka-jo-2020-kartta-nain-ne-vaikuttavat-sinuun]<br />
** Kauppalehti-blogi [http://blog.kauppalehti.fi/metrossanukkuja/ruuhkamaksu-voi-olla-maailman-tyhmin-idea]<br />
* LVM. (2011) Helsingin seudun ruuhkamaksu. Jatkoselvitys. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 5/2011. [http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-243-214-8]<br />
* LVM. (2007). Joukkoliikenteen houkuttelevuuden ja käytön lisääminen eri liikkujaryhmissä. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 63/2007. [http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-201-954-7]<br />
** Talouselämä-uutiskommentti [http://www.talouselama.fi/uutiset/ruuhkamaksu-rankaisee-koyhaa-3388061]<br />
* LVM. Tienkäyttömaksujärjestelmät. Esiselvitys. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 17/2006. [http://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/78730/Julkaisuja_17_2006.pdf?sequence=1]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Scientific articles about congestion charge and health<br />
*{{doi|10.1126/science.aaf3420}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.jth.2015.08.002}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1080/09640568.2014.912615}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.tra.2015.03.004}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.01.002}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.09.015}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1080/13547500902965252}}<br />
*{{doi|10.5172/impp.453.10.2-3.269}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.amepre.2006.03.030}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1136/jech.2003.012385}}<br />
<br />
=== Translations from the Finnish assessment report [https://www.hsl.fi/sites/default/files/uploads/hsl_julkaisu_4_2016_ajoneuvoliikenteen_hinnoitteluselvitys_teknistoiminnallinen.pdf]===<br />
<br />
====2.4 Eligibility of pricing====<br />
<br />
Economics theories, designing measures, and impact assessments are usually normative analyzes that answer the question of what should be done. An alternative, positive approach alternative describes institutional (situations based on habitual systems and organizational structures) where only certain things can be done, that is, acceptable. Decision-making systems are combinations of normative and positive operating environments.<br />
<br />
For example, in London, the main parties objected to setting a congestion charge. However, in 2003, a Mayor-independent candidate, Ken Livingstone, who had promised to implement congestion charges, was elected as mayor. The mayor of London has executive powers in such matters, where the views of the main parties were irrelevant. Before the mayoral elections, the Labor Party had separated Livingstone and set a formal candidate, but it did not end in the election. London congestion charges proved to be a success, and in the subsequent mayoral elections, Livingstone was again the Labor Party's official candidate and won the election.<br />
<br />
The political backdrop of the Stockholm congestion charge test, on the other hand, was based on the fact that the Swedish Green Party promised support for the Social Democrats' government if a congestion levy test was launched in Stockholm. In this case too, wider political and regional decision-making was largely ignored. The government that made the payments was lost in elections, but despite this, the new Swedish government decided to stabilize Stockholm's congestion charges because the benefits of the scheme were clear and the public opinion had turned to the side of the payments.<br />
<br />
London and Stockholm congestion charges are good examples of pricing-related decision-making and policy specificities. Göteborg's decision-making has progressed through a wider process. London and Stockholm congestion charges are also good examples of how fast the resistance to congestion charges can turn out to be accepted when the positive effects of the payment start to appear.<br />
<br />
Economics theory, studies and practical experience show that road tolls are a useful tool for transport policy. However, road user charges and congestion charges have not yet reached a well-established position in politics. The main reason is that they have no widespread support from citizens and politicians. The admissibility of road user fees is a challenge. In the 2007 study "Effects of Land Use Fees in Finland. Preliminary study "(LVM publications 35/2007), the subject matter was widely considered.<br />
<br />
Congestion as a phenomenon and vehicle pricing as a measure are complicated things to understand. For example, car makers do not always consider pricing as a particularly effective means of reducing congestion as they misjudge the volume of traffic that needs to be reduced in order for traffic to flow without congestion. The formation of congestion is a complex phenomenon and it is difficult to estimate the total number of traffic and disadvantages. Generally, it is estimated that the reduction target would be about 50%, even if the congestion would be eliminated by a 15% reduction. This is because the congestion increases steeply when the bus reaches its capacity.<br />
<br />
Congestion charges also tend to be strong opposition, as motorists feel that they are the victims of congestion and are not the cause of the congestion, and therefore the management of demand through payments is seen to be unfair. Even if one extra minute does not seem like a lot, 1500 more people in the same band feel the same. Every new car driver who travels to the crowd will, in addition to the slowdown in the journey they are experiencing, also have an additional extra delay.<br />
<br />
It is easier to accept individual access fees for bridge, tunnel or new lanes, as it is easy for people to experience the benefits of a new connection or service that is cost-effective. The admissibility of congestion charges increases, if the implementation of the payment involves improving the quality of the transport system, for example in the form of bottleneck investments. Generally, in the ex-post evaluation, approval will be greatly enhanced when it is seen that demand control works and mobility is more smooth even through concrete investments financed through pricing.<br />
<br />
Opinion polls show that the use of premium revenue is a very important factor for the acceptability of road user charges. Support for payment systems will increase considerably if it is decided beforehand that the premium revenue will be redirected to traffic. Usually, people consider it important to allocate premium revenue to the development of public transport, traffic routes and environmental damage reduction. It has also been found that improving the living environment and increasing road safety will greatly increase acceptance of payments. Instead, allocating funds to lowering other taxes or filling the state budget is not considered acceptable.<br />
<br />
People must also have options for using a newly priced car. This is why, for example, congestion charges usually involve improving public transport, which must take place at the latest at the same time as congestion charges are introduced. Equality and fairness issues are important to people, and they must be told how these things are resolved.<br />
<br />
The acceptability of pricing is also often undermined by the fact that citizens often see new payments as a new tax in addition to the existing ones. Taxes on transport are largely based on fiscal criteria, but because the level of taxes also affects mobility, it would be good to look at their welfare effects critically while deciding on pricing. It should be noted, however, that as a source of funding, the fuel tax is efficient due to its small collection costs and operates in the same way as pricing, especially in relation to performance-based external costs, especially outside congested urban areas. Effective control effects can be obtained by targeting pricing correctly in relation to the existing disadvantages and the potential benefits of potential mobility. For example, the fuel tax on steadily consuming every liter of fuel consumed is not an effective control in this respect.<br />
<br />
The key objective for business life is that the logistics costs can be lowered. In delivery chains, timing has a particularly high weight. In Stockholm, for example, the congestion fee reduced the logistical costs of business life and the distribution of deliveries went more efficiently. If road transport charges increase the cost of transport, they should significantly increase the service level.<br />
<br />
One argument against congestion charges is regional competition. Centers' shops are already competing with out-of-town shopping centers and, therefore, retailers in the city are afraid that congestion charges for city centers will strengthen the competitive position of external shopping centers. In practice, such effects have not been observed, for example, in Stockholm (Daunfelt et al., 2009), but the effects of the London congestion charge zone were noticeable (Quddus et al., 2007). However, it should be remembered that the attractiveness of commercial services in central cities is also negatively affected by the congested transport system.<br />
<br />
Growth in trade can ultimately lead to a more self-reliant community structure. However, the situation may also be the opposite. Better smooth traffic and improved public transport can bring more customers to the malls. For example, in Stockholm, sales of the downtown shopping center increased by 6 percent during the congestion charge test.<br />
<br />
One of the basic issues related to road charges is justice, which is defined in different ways, often based on personal circumstances and experience. Often, the fear is that congestion charges reduce the number of trips that are deemed necessary. These include trips to nearby shops, schools and the hospital. Tolls are seen to increase inequality and low-income mobility. However, these disadvantages may be reduced by means of timing of payments or by various compensation methods (eg limiting the number of payments or developing the supply and quality of alternative means of payment).<br />
<br />
New technologies raises doubts about functionality issues, complexity, and cost. Endangering privacy is a particularly sensitive issue in connection with new technologies. As stated in Chapter 4.3.5, security and privacy can, however, be managed in an acceptable manner, which is of paramount importance in the case of a mandatory tax or charge imposed by an authority.<br />
<br />
====3. Methods and premises ====<br />
'''3.1 Assessment frame<br />
<br />
The criteria for selecting the technical pricing model in Chapter 4 and the price levels were as follows:<br />
*Impact on goals.<br />
*Impact on social economy.<br />
*The amount of revenue required for investments in the HLJ strategy.<br />
*The feasibility of the system (including the ratio between system revenue and depreciation / operating costs) and risks.<br />
*Understandability and acceptability of the system, impact and price level (including the breakdown).<br />
<br />
The whole transport system options defined by the working group were compared on the basis of an even larger scale of frameworks, where the objectives of the HLJ Plan and of the more general MAL process were compiled into the framework of Table 1.<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Evaluation framework for Helsinki transport strategy<br />
|----<br />
! Focus areas|| Announced HJL/MAL target|| Criteria<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Functionality of the transport system|| Congestion is under control<br />
|rowspan="19"|<br />
* Socio-economic cost-effectiveness of the region/transport system<br />
* Direction of influence, significance and focus on different user groups and regions.<br />
|----<br />
|| Travel times predictable<br />
|----<br />
|| Travel and transportation chains smooth near and far<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Significant environmental impacts|| The disadvantages and loads of traffic will be reduced<br />
|----<br />
|| Exposure to noise and emissions is reduced<br />
|----<br />
|| Climate targets are achieved<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| The development of sustainable mobility|| The competitiveness of public transport is improving<br />
|----<br />
|| Cycling is tempting and smooth<br />
|----<br />
|| Moving safe in all modes<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Growth direction and accessibility|| The need for mobility decreases<br />
|----<br />
|| Accessibility of sustainable modes<br />
|----<br />
|| Accessibility of car traffic is improved<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| HS competitiveness and economic impact|| An attractive, versatile and functional region<br />
|----<br />
|| Business conditions are safeguarded<br />
|----<br />
|| Job Mobility and Customer Accessibility Improves<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Social endurance|| Transport costs remain reasonable<br />
|----<br />
|| Everyday travel options for different needs<br />
|----<br />
|| Dependence on cars is reduced<br />
|----<br />
|colspan="2"| The investment and operating costs of the system, feasibility and risks as well as the financial aspect<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
====9 Conclusions====<br />
'''Pricing of vehicle traffic is based on the challenge posed by the growth of the transport system<br />
<br />
As stated in chapters 3 and 4, for the functioning of the transport system, there is a congestion in the current state of the road network which would be good to remove for the functionality and competitiveness of the region, as the efficiency of the transport system is weakened by congestion by<br />
* travel times increasing,<br />
* the predictability of travel times deteriorating,<br />
* the need for equipment increasing and<br />
* accidents and emissions increasing.<br />
<br />
The traffic congestion now focuses on all radial routes, Ring Road I and the city center.<br />
Growth in the region is aggravated by the congestion of the road network, which is not managed by the means currently in use. It is important to note that, according to the analysis, the structure and demand of the road network capacity are imbalanced; Part of the network runs smoothly and the capacity is not necessarily effective, and on the other hand some of the network has clear operational problems.<br />
<br />
However, the congestion caused by the growth of the region has to be controlled by the functionality and competitiveness of the region. Congestion will only ease in the future for cycles for which the HLJ 2015 Plan has targeted capacity-building measures, for example on Tuusulanväylä between Ring Road III and Ring Road I and in the middle of Ring Road I, but at the whole network level, the congestion will not ease in the 2025 situation but worsens compared to the current situation. A significant increase in the capacity of the entire car traffic network is costly and would further increase car traffic, for example, from public transport.<br />
<br />
'''Financial control is proof that it is an effective way of balancing the demand for transport to take advantage of the service level offered by the entire transport system<br />
<br />
The functionality of pricing guidance is based on a number of Nordic, European and international examples, which are presented in Chapter 2. Pricing of vehicle traffic is an effective means of managing congestion as:<br />
* The journey moves to sustainable modes of transport. Particularly for longer journeys to public transport, the average length of journeys increases especially for public transport journeys, and the structure of the region is compressed into rampways.<br />
* Car traffic is redirected as cars are shorter and out of the highest priced areas. In the long term, land use based on accessibility of the car in the region also adapts to steering, concentrating the regional structure closer to the workplace concentrations and efficient rail transport.<br />
* Pricing drives motorists out of congested lanes, causing congestion to diminish, fluency improves. Some drivers can take advantage of improved fluency to meet their mobility needs more effectively.<br />
* In addition, the bottleneck investments made possible by pricing benefits make it possible for the entire network to be smoother and more efficient loading and to keep the need for pricing control reasonably priced.<br />
<br />
'''There are several technical options for tolls and their functionality is linked to the whole transport system and land use<br />
<br />
Pricing is a key component of the HJL 2015 strategy, which was not investigated at the time of the plan but by way of example by relying on a functional model of the LVM congestion charge (2009), based on satellite-based technology. This study covered a number of active road toll models for transport (Chapter 4).<br />
<br />
According to the study, the working group decided to evaluate the effects of a single pricing model based on the gate zones, which according to the study team was the most economical, clear and efficient model from the different perspectives studied. The lines formed by payment cards follow, for example, the boundaries of the new public transport ticketing and taxation systems, and payments are staggered so that the traffic orientation is in balance with the transportability of the transport system.<br />
<br />
However, during the evaluation process, it was noted that if the level of pricing is matched to the social economy correctly and bottleneck investments are planned based on this demand, the road network will utilize more users with more naturally mobile mobility needs. In this case, the disadvantages of pricing (additional cost) and benefits (time savings) are better balanced.<br />
<br />
From the point of view of control, it is also worthwhile collecting charges where the external costs occur and its level and the disadvantages disappear. The model included in the impact assessment was also studied as a sensitivity review for larger versions that were found to have positive effects. At the same time, it is also worthwhile to make road network bottlenecks in order to provide useful traffic to the road network without jeopardizing the flow of traffic, without requiring pricing guidance as much as the entire network is in effective use. Public transport projects, on the other hand, will safeguard the level of service of those who move from the road network by means of guidance (otherwise the congestion).<br />
<br />
The best performance of vehicle pricing is ultimately linked to its role in the development of the entire transport system and land use, which should be balanced as a whole. The key conclusion of the technical review is that although the study has examined various primitive port models and their implications, it will be possible to plan and evaluate almost unlimitedly different combinations of gate positions and pay levels for which a more complete overall solution can be found than it was now. In any further planning, it is important to thoroughly analyze the pricing system at its best as part of the entire transport system plan and also the land use planning.<br />
<br />
'''The effects of the area level impact of the investigated functional pricing model clearly support the achievement of the regional development objectives as part of the HLJ 2015 Plan and its MAL Framework<br />
<br />
The effects of the package of measures, which are examined in Chapter 5, are summarized in Table 5. As has been noted in previous national road toll surveys and international follow-up studies, the analyzes carried out show that vehicle pricing is a viable solution to future problems and set targets. It is particularly effective in safeguarding the functionality and sustainability of the regional transport system. The general improvement in traffic flow caused by passenger car bidding also benefits transport activities. This report does not assume or estimate the impact of payments for goods and distribution traffic. The whole set of measures is economically viable. In other respects, the situation is more complex.<br />
<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 5. Summary of Impact of the Pricing Procedure (VE1).<br />
|----<br />
! Focus areas<br />
| <br />
! A summary of the implications for the region's objectives<br />
! General additional criteria <br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Functionality of the transport system<br />
| +<br />
| Congestion in the fully used road network is controlled by control and bottleneck investments.<br />
|rowspan="24"|<br />
* An explored package of measures that includes a variety of measures in addition to pricing guidance is also economically viable (+ 20M € / yr)<br />
* The direction, significance and direction of impacts on different user groups and regions require further development of the functional model and compensation mechanisms.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| The travel times of the main freeways are about 10% shorter and are much more predictable thanks to guidance.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Transport chains are smoother, freight traffic does not pay. The level of bus service increases as quality corridors are not crowded.<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Significant environmental impacts<br />
| +<br />
| Traffic disadvantages and environmental loads are reduced by about 5%.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Vehicle noise reduction and emission sources are reduced by 5 or 8%.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Reduction of vehicle speeds reduces carbon dioxide emissions by 3 or 5%, making the achievement of climate targets more likely.<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| The development of sustainable mobility<br />
| +<br />
| The competitiveness of public transport improves, 100,000 more<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| The attractiveness of walking and cycling is increasing, as evidenced by a 2 percentage point increase in the share.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Mobility is safer since vehicle accidents are reduced by 4 or 8%.<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="4"| Growth direction and accessibility<br />
| +<br />
| The need for mobility decreases, as the region is compacted and the trips are reduced by 1 or 3%.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| SAVU accessibility for sustainable modes will be greatly improved thanks to the investment made possible by road tolls.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Car travel time gains are improved as speeds increase and average travel times are reduced by 5 or 8%.<br />
|----<br />
| -<br />
| Total accessibility decreases as tolls are experienced as a travel disadvantage.<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="6"| HS competitiveness and economic impact<br />
| +<br />
| The region remains attractive, functional and therefore competitive as the public transport service level, road network quality, congestion management and international connections improve.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Impact on Business / Logistics: The operating conditions of City Logistics will improve and there will be no significant changes to national logistics.<br />
|----<br />
| +/-<br />
| Impact on business / trade: The parent city and the districts of KUUMA municipalities will be strengthened as service centers. The attractiveness of the shopping districts of Ring Road I-III is weakened.<br />
|----<br />
| +/-<br />
| Impact on business life / jobs: The attractiveness of the capital city is improving and the attractiveness of the work centers in southern Espoo and Kehä I-III is weakened.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Mobility and customer satisfaction is improving.<br />
|----<br />
| -<br />
| Costs lower the reachability.<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="4"| Social endurance<br />
| +/-<br />
| Transport costs remain reasonable.<br />
|----<br />
| -<br />
| Low-cost mobility costs are increasing in some areas.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| There are alternatives for different travel needs<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Dependence on cars decreases<br />
|----<br />
|colspan="3"| The investment and operating costs of the zone port system are 20 - 25 M € / yr. The tested functional model is good for feasibility and risk management. The use of toll income as a new financial asset (net of € 150 million / year or € 80 million / year) is an essential part of profitability from a regional point of view.<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<br />
Although the need for mobility in the direction of the growth of the entire region decreases and the travel time gains of SAVU and car traffic in sustainable modes improve, the monetary growth of the toll charges is necessarily felt as a decrease in overall accessibility, which is a disadvantage. Pricing and transport system development measures also affect the growth directions of the region, as the relative accessibility of the regions will inevitably change. It is still likely that further development of a functional model and compensation mechanisms will be required in order to have the direction, significance and targeting desired.<br />
<br />
Comparing the alternative to VE0 60% of the population in the Helsinki region lives in regions where the effect of pricing is neutral, ie the difference between alternatives is small. In regions with attractive pricing disadvantages, one fifth of residents live and the same share lives in areas of healing power.<br />
<br />
One fifth of the jobs are located in regions whose pricing behavior has a detrimental effect on the comparison option and a quarter of them are in the areas of healing attractiveness. The differences are very large between regions in the metropolitan area. One third of Helsinki's jobs are in areas of improving attractiveness, while in Espoo the figure is one tenth, and in Vantaa none. Nearly 60% in Vantaa and 45% of jobs in the Espoo and Kauniainen districts are located in regions whose attraction decreases; In Helsinki, there are a dozen jobs in these areas. In the area of the Railway-KUUMA, the jobs are divided into half between the neutral and improving areas of attraction. Bus-KUUMA's jobs are located in almost completely neutral areas.<br />
<br />
Shopping and business trips are made mostly off peak hours on weekdays, so the toll rate for the pricing model is lower, as well as at weekends when no toll is charged. For this reason, pricing affects less fluency in mobility and on the other hand, payload is lower than on commuting. According to the results, however, the impact of pricing on the attractiveness of trading and service areas is strongly biased. Households direct their trips to neighboring areas as well as to the best accessible public transport concentrations at the expense of car-based mergers. The center of gravity of the Nuclear Power Center is increasing, but tolls in other parts of the city do not have a significant impact. Pricing does not undermine the conditions for new service concentrations in the city center. The impact is positive for the attractiveness of the service centers and local services of KUUMA municipalities.<br />
<br />
Competitiveness criteria that are commonly used in international competitiveness and well-being in cities are the public transport service level, road network quality, congestion management and international connections. A pricing package is a prerequisite for a Competitiveness Comprehensive Plan. The problem is the increase in traffic costs, which is not necessarily a big problem in the whole, as toll revenue can be directed as desired. However, it is clear that if returns are not returned to the region and are properly targeted, pricing is a risk to the region's competitiveness.<br />
<br />
Although pricing increases the cost of motoring, they are not expected to grow unreasonably in terms of social sustainability. Improved accessibility supports the attractiveness of residential areas and a balanced demographic structure. The accessibility of services and jobs through sustainable forms of travel will be improved. The development of centers and nodes supports the maintenance of services. Choices for car non-moving are improving. The accessibility of the transport system will be improved.<br />
<br />
The investigated functional gateway model is better than new types of mileage models for repayment, feasibility and risk management.<br />
<br />
'''The focus of the impacts on different groups and regions requires a functional model and its price levels to be adjusted, supported or compensated mechanisms<br />
<br />
Factors that may have an impact on the growth of the region's growth orientation and the potential for competitiveness are related to targeting effects. For example, the deterioration of the tractive power of the Ring Road / Ring Road III and the rise in commuting costs for workers in low-income workers in the service and production sectors.<br />
<br />
In particular, the relationship between pricing on land use and the potential to eliminate or mitigate relative regional handicaps to business life should also be clarified. In the future, the number of payment points, ie the number of frames and cross lines, and the amount of payments should be studied for the vitality and tax revenue of the municipality. Even though the premium income would be lost, employment and other tax revenue in the larger sense, for example in Vantaa, would be the road or the effects of financing road projects.<br />
<br />
In this regard, it is worth considering first reducing the target level of pricing financing. Raising the level of funding typically leads to pricing being not optimal for the steering effect and social economy. The pricing option, where tolls are half of the VE1 option, mitigates the deteriorating effect of pricing habitation in areas where the effect on relative accessibility is negative with the tested alternative. The lower pay level also has fewer and fewer areas of accessibility than the areas of weakened workplace accessibility.<br />
<br />
Relatively weakening regions can be supported by adjusting the form of pricing zones and the level of payments across the payment system and also by investments. The comparison option VE0 is, on the one hand, only one possible growth orientation growth scenario from many potential. Particularly, the regional development emphasis is reflected in the measures already taken, particularly in the areas of the Länsimetro and Ring Roads, where the accessibility of sustainable forms of transport is developing significantly from the situation in 2012. The relative accessibility impact of pricing is then reflected in comparison with option VE0, so that the accessibility and growth potential of some regions will deteriorate, even if compared to the current situation, they are more in favor of other regions in the region.<br />
<br />
'''The pricing model examined as part of the HLJ 2015 plan is economically viable<br />
<br />
According to the calculation in Chapter 6, the result of VE1 is EUR 19.5 million per year compared to the 0 + comparison option, which only executes projects that are running and (by 1.12.2015). However, in the case of pricing, the social economy net result is largely dependent on balancing the growth of motorists' costs and other objectives. The perceived disadvantage of the payment rises rapidly as fees and hence prices rise. When pricing is too strong, users' disadvantages and dissatisfaction grow faster than pricing revenue. Environmental and safety impacts and changes in operating costs and taxes are also included in the calculation.<br />
<br />
For this reason, chapter 5 also showed the variation of the model studied (VE3) where payments were halved. Alternative VE3's economic performance is EUR 32.4 million, or EUR 12.9 million more profitable than VE1. According to the socioeconomic calculation in Chapter 6, it is more efficient, as revenues fall less than the net disadvantages faced by users (payload and time and cost savings of congestion).<br />
<br />
Profitability and fairness of the model's end-to-end model can be further developed. Sensitivity reviews give this a look. For example, pricing guidance and bottleneck investments are an entity in which they affect each other's needs. If investment is carried out without pricing, bottlenecks can be dismantled, but the region's growth is still causing new congestion problems across the road network. If a mere pricing action is made, the road network may be under-utilized.<br />
<br />
Sensitivity assessments also show that the socio-economic cost-effectiveness of vehicle pricing and the need to secure the functioning of the road network will grow significantly if vehicle traffic is growing faster than expected in the forecasts of the calculations. This is also the case if funding for the development of the transport system is unsuccessful as planned, public transport ticket prices will have to increase or economic growth will accelerate, increasing the mobility of residents. The financing levels of the HLJ 2015 Plan and also the Comparative Option are fairly goal-oriented compared to the project-specific so-called " 0+ compared to the benchmarking principles. On the other hand, the need for pricing is reduced if the use of the car becomes more expensive or otherwise decreases.<br />
<br />
Time-sensitivity assessments of the differences in efficiency between vehicle traffic and the current 2025 and 2040 demand situation in the current situation (2012) also showed that the need for pricing is constantly increasing. The social cost of the pricing model studied in 2040 was many times higher than in 2025. However, because of the roughness of the calculations, the "right moment" is difficult to determine accurately.<br />
<br />
The conclusions drawn from the relative differences between the investigated comparative scenarios are clear, but the net results of the socioeconomic calculations have to be taken into account in the reserve since the calculations still involve a number of uncertainties and development needs, which are dealt with in Chapter 3.<br />
<br />
'''The financial impact of tolls is significant<br />
<br />
Payment levels also determine the revenue of the pricing, which is also part of the HLJ strategy in terms of funding. The impact of the question on the comparison of alternatives depends, of course, on the extent of the investment program and other measures, their financial need and how the costs of financing are taken into account in decision-making.<br />
<br />
The set return target includes a provision of 55 million to cover the higher cost of demand for public transport that may result in pricing and a general increase in service levels. For example, in Stockholm pricing has led to a drop in the number of trips and the impact on public transport was less than predicted. Investment levels also depend on both the profitability of the projects and the more general consideration of the financial level of the sensible region. If possible further studies lead to similar conclusions, it may be taken into account in the future definition of the yield level.<br />
<br />
'''The technical feasibility of pricing is good with the tested model<br />
<br />
The study did not detect any technical feasibility problems that would prevent the implementation of the investigated zone report system if it were decided to take action. Systems have been in use elsewhere for many years. The charging system is a combination of IT technology (computers, software and connection devices) and physical devices in the roadside and in cars. The average life span of technology is 5-8 years.<br />
<br />
On the other hand, the feasibility of a mileage system would be a question mark as there is no experience in passenger transport. With regard to technology, decision-making should be guided by operational needs, predictability of implementation costs and sufficiency of the payment system. Ideal system may have to wait a long time.<br />
<br />
The technical solutions described in this report can be considered to represent traditional or near-known solutions for the coming years. If you are looking for performance-based satellite positioning charges for passenger cars (which are nowhere), then a traditional vehicle solution solution is unlikely to be likely for many reasons. A separate retrofit vehicle device is quite expensive and can only be used in the form of a single service, ie tolls. The current implementations are all for heavy traffic. In this case, the vehicles to be equipped are much less and the resulting costs can be included in the freight rates and thus transferred to customers.<br />
<br />
On the one hand, technology development can be the doorstep, where new technologies will soon be possible. Different contexts have been considered for example. The potential of smartphones or navigators with regard to the pay-per-view. Already today, a passenger car with a few people may be able to ride several GPS devices: one smartphone per passenger, a navigator used by the driver, and several other devices, such as PCs or tablets. However, these can not yet be used to pay tolls that have their own requirements for safety and reliability. The road toll solution also includes a credible surveillance solution. It is therefore necessary to develop a new overall concept, taking into account the specific requirements of road tolls. From the point of view of the implementer, the situation is ultimately the following: a) Better solutions are expected, ie time when new, yet unknown solutions are viable, b) Do the risk of the developer or first-ever developer in the highly global application-oriented sector, or c) Whether it is available at decision-making, Is reasonably priced, fairly risk-free and stays on schedule.<br />
<br />
In connection with the toll road system in the Helsinki region, A possible nationwide system, whereby the role of mileage may change because the system is highly scalable. In this situation, the size of the Helsinki region's scale of systemic cost savings will change significantly in relation to the collection fees.<br />
<br />
It is still important to note that even though the recovery technology will later be "better", almost everything else remains intact, such as the basis for the payment and the use of revenues, legislation, organizational solutions (payer and system operator), sales network, surveillance technology, May pose new requirements. Technology choice is therefore not virtually bound by the solution in a very long time, and the pricing model examined in the study is likely to be implemented with both conventional technology and GNSS-based gravity technology. It is also important to note that a possible solution based on a license plate interpretation can be utilized in the control system if you switch to a satellite positioning system, for example.<br />
<br />
'''The introduction requires further action<br />
<br />
As noted above, the technical features of the priced pricing model can be further developed in many ways. Decision-making may also require the development of socio-economic evaluation methods. This should be done in the HLJ / MAL context, because optimal control depends naturally on what else in the region is decided to do. Not all of the technical specifications set out in Chapter 4 have been sensible at this stage, such as<br />
* Increase in peak hourly payouts according to the development of traffic jams,<br />
* Validity periods,<br />
* Daytime shears,<br />
* Vehicle categories subject to payment,<br />
* Handling occasional car drivers,<br />
* Security and security<br />
* Potential value-added services.<br />
<br />
You should only return to these if you decide to proceed with the planning of the action. Only then will you be able to design technical details.<br />
<br />
Some of the questions are those that require more detailed assessment methods because the evaluation method used to investigate the impact of strategic regional investment (HELMET) is virtually impossible as a traffic analysis of the two hourly and hourly hourly conversations, and much of the impact assessment is based on various extensions of these results. The modeling method does not allow for a more accurate analysis of these periods or sufficient analysis of other periods, rather than linking time groups to people, so that the targeting effects can not be reliably investigated. In this respect, only the simulation of direct impacts was based on a separate method.<br />
<br />
Implementation path requires its own discretion and impact assessment. The zone gate system can be constructed, for example, in stages, starting from the inner frames, so that the alternative models in Chapter 4 will work in the "series".<br />
<br />
'''Alternative means do not replace the pricing guidance presented in HLJ 2015<br />
<br />
The analysis of Chapter 8 shows that alternative, sufficiently impressive package solutions in the light of the growth of the region is difficult to elaborate and analyze using existing methods. Investments did not prove to be effective measures to compensate for vehicle traffic control and the calculation of public transport ticket prices was considered unrealistic without any idea of its financing. Parking policy has the same type of control and also financial impact as pricing, but it would require such comprehensive measures or policies as this can not be proposed by an expert in this study.<br />
<br />
The promotion of walking and cycling promoted by expert analysis could in itself be alternatives to vehicle pricing but would require more empirical information on the effectiveness of the measures and also the further development of methods for assessing the impact on transport system level so that their impact could be explored as part of the overall transport system.<br />
<br />
In the future, the effectiveness of interference management, movement control, services and intelligence will require more extensive and model-demanding reviews, which will only give a better idea of whether it can be used. Policies are further intensified so that pricing guidance is no longer needed as part of the HLJ strategy.<br />
<br />
The methods found in Chapter 8 have been mainly used by the HLJ 2015 process and no pricing has been found to be unnecessary at that stage, indicating the need for a measure. The resources of this study have not been able to make the overall program corresponding to the HLJ plan again, so the effects of the alternative strategy could not be estimated at the same level as in Chapter 5.<br />
<br />
It is also important to note that the impact of pricing does not contradict other development objectives of the transport system. Therefore, other measures should not be put in conflict with economic guidance, but the transport system and the whole community structure are a whole. All measures promoting the objectives support this whole and usually reinforce their synergy. This is also due to the fact that the effects of different measures are directed to the mechanisms of a different community structure, so their combinations can be designed so that the negative effects of a single action can be effectively mitigated. Half of the pricing can also be calculated by the fact that different compensation mechanisms are also possible, as net returns can be restored in the desired way back to society.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
<references/></div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=Talk:Congestion_charge&diff=40708Talk:Congestion charge2017-05-15T18:59:27Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Individual choice */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Health effects, air quality and climate change ==<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Congestion charge scheme doesn't significantly affect air quality in cities.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{attack|# |Carbon footprint caused by stationary traffic or ‘vehicle idling’ resulting<br />
from gridlock across urbanized advanced economies. The fuel that is consumed while stationary in traffic<br />
results in higher emission of greenhouse gases and pollutants, which leads to poorer air quality,<br />
particularly in urban areas. <ref> [http://ibtta.org/sites/default/files/documents/MAF/Costs-of-Congestion-INRIX-Cebr-Report%20(3).pdf]</ref>|--[[User:Amr Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Amr Ebrahim|talk]]) 11:40, 28.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{defend|# | I support the noted argument that congestion charge could have a positive impact on quality. For instance, the congestion charge trial in Stockholm in 2006, based on measurements, it was estimated that this system resulted in a 15% reduction in total road use within the charged cordon. Total traffic emissions in this area of NOx and PM10 fell by 8.5% and 13%, respectively. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231008008091] </ref>|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk: Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 12:18, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
::{{attack|# | While Congestion pricing in Stockholm did reduce traffic emissions the reduction (especially along the most densely trafficked streets) was not sufficient for compliance with air quality standards. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231008008091] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:20, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{defend|# | I support the noted argument that congestion charge could have a positive impact on quality of air because a study of congestion pricing in Stockholm between 2006-2010 found that in the absence of congestion pricing that Stockholm's "air would have been five to ten percent more polluted between 2006 and 2010, and young children would have suffered 45 percent more asthma attacks . <ref> [https://www.insidescience.org/news/driving-fee-rolls-back-asthma-attacks-stockholm] </ref>|--[[User:edem agbenowu]] ([[User talk: edem agbenowu|talk]]) 12:18, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{defend|# | London Congestion pricing scheme brought significant reduction in the emissions of NOx and PM10 due to increased vehicle speed. Reduction in CO2 emissions was almost 20%. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231005007259] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 13:29, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# |By reduction of traffic flows, the release of several pollutant emissions also reduce over time. For example, Daniel and Bekka (2000) <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094119099921356?via%3Dihub]</ref> have showed that the emissions can decrease for 30% in highly congested parts of Delaware, US. |--[[User:Tamara Gajst]] ([[User talk:Tamara Gajst|talk]]) 13:36, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | While Congestion charge scheme initially reduced the number of vehicles entering central London, the congestion levels since 2012 were back at pre-2002 (pre-Congestion charge) levels. <ref> [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27199415] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:02, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# | Congestion charge scheme to a significant extend affect the reduction of of air pollution and promote air aquality according to Transport for London (TfL) Levels of nitrogen oxides (NOX), fell by 13.4% between 2002 & 2003, and carbon dioxide, as well as the levels of airborne particulates (PM10) within and alongside the congestion charge zone. According to the report from TfL since 2002, the nitrogen dioxide (NO2) produced by diesel exhaust has become a serious problem, reporting that the annual mean NO2 objective (of 40 μgm-3 or 21 ppb) was exceeded at all kerbside and roadside monitoring sites across central and greater London during 12 months between 2005 and 2006 and no areas within the Congestion Charge Zone reported NO2 levels above an upper limit of 200 μgm-3 (105 ppb). If this practice continue and also extended to other parts there will be great reduction in air pollution <ref> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge</ref>|--[[User:Margaret Arogunyo]] ([[User talk:Margaret Arogunyo|talk]]) 14:35, 15.5.2017}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | I think the discussion got out of context. When I wrote this statement I was referencing to the case of Helsinki. According to the summary of the environmental impact assessment of congestion charge in Helsinki, the decrease in the traffic carbon dioxide emission will range from 3% to 5%. The significance and the worthlessness of congestion charge implementation in Helsinki are questionable in environmental aspect especially if compared to other alternative, for instance: use of environment-friendly types of fuel. <ref> [https://www.hsl.fi/sites/default/files/uploads/ajoneuvoliikenteen_hinnoitteluselvitys_2016_en.pdf] </ref>|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk: Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 21:22, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Congestion charge scheme will improve the populations’ health. <br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Congestion scheme can encourage walking, cycling and using public transport, and may thereby reduce individual’s sedentary habits leading to an increase in populations physical activity that might affect the growing burden of obesity. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214140515006738] </ref>|--[[User:Tamara Gajst]] ([[User talk:Tamara Gajst|talk]]) 14:23, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{attack|# | Evidence for potential positive physical activity related health effects due to congestion pricing schemes is weak. <ref> [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16829328] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:28, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | Congestion charge can lead to reduction in road traffic related casualties and injuries.<ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856415000464] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:03, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{attack|# | Building roads with the intent of speeding up traffic usually generates extra traffic <ref> [http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.5172/impp.453.10.2-3.269] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:23, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}} <br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== Individual choice ==<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Congestion charge scheme constrains individual choice and behavior.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{attack|# |Urban dwellers are more geared towards behavioral adjustment, since they are aware of the dynamic of distributions of the costs of congestion on house hold and their societal sense of belonging. Therefore, the incidence of such costs and benefits affects the preferences and in turn the willingness to build coping strategies will emerge by acceptance. Hence this can only apply to urban dwellers the case with suburbia and rural surrounding still needs more attention.<ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361920997000035]</ref>|--[[User:Amr Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Amr Ebrahim|talk]]) 12:04, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# |Congestion scheme can promote sustainable mobility if the revenue is invested in public transportation infrastructure <ref> [http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09640568.2014.912615]</ref>.|--[[User:Tamara Gajst]] ([[User talk:Tamara Gajst|talk]]) 14:01, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{comment|# | In London Congestion charge scheme lead to increased use of public transport (50-60%), avoiding the areas (20-30%), car sharing (15-25%), reduced number of journeys, increased use of motorbikes and bicycles. <ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:11, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | Constitutional laws interpret the congestion charge as a tax. Taking into account its possible advantage and drawbacks, It is questionable how to socially promote the idea of congestion charge in a society already committed to a high level of taxation. <ref> [https://www.hsl.fi/sites/default/files/uploads/ajoneuvoliikenteen_hinnoitteluselvitys_2016_en.pdf] </ref>|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk: Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 22:00, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== Economy ==<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = The economic viability of tariffs and transformation of urban space will encourage more use of roads and cars.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{defend|#| Most economic decision in urbanized economical cities needs to overcome elements such as cost and convenience of toll collection, especially on down town streets. Nevertheless the regressive distributional impact, since lower income people spend a larger proportion of their income on commuting and have less work schedule flexibility, lack of trust in government to dispose of toll revenues wisely, and benefits that in some cases are so small as to be insignificant. These all can contribute for increased mileage attempting to look for either alternatives of escape the cost.<ref> [https://econ.ucsb.edu/~tedb/Courses/Ec1F07/traffic.pdf]</ref>|--[[User:Amr Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Amr Ebrahim|talk]]) 12:49, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# | 10 years after Congestion charge was implemented in London 10% reduction of traffic volumes was observed. <ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:28, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = congestion charge schemes can restrict urban mobility and human capital growth.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{defend|#|The tension between the demand side of transformation and the supply side of governance of cities with out a clear vision on urban transit can be problematic. The mobility towards more economic prosperous location is needed for economical growth, hence the increased living expense of commuting for a younger population can contribute to framing the city as economically hostile or expensive. more effort should be aimed toward different tariffs to different categories rather generalized schemes.<ref>[http://www.theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/congestion_apr10.pdf]</ref>|--[[User:Amr Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Amr Ebrahim|talk]]) 01:07, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# |In as much as mobility towards more economic prosperous location is needed for economic growth the delay associated with traffic could as well serve as disincentive for people to move into these locations.The faster someone can transact business in a location the more likely the individual will tend to conduct business in that location.Hence it might be difficult for younger population to see such places as economically hostile.Moreover as non-productive activity for most people, congestion reduces regional economic healt.<ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_congestion</ref>|--[[User:edem agbenowu]] ([[User talk:edem agbenowu|talk]]) 12:04, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# | 300 new buses and new or changed bus routes were introduced at the launch of London congestion charge scheme – showing that introduction of Congestion charge can increase the mobility and human capital growth. <ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:59, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{defend|# | Journey times in London reduced by 14% - indicating potential for increased mobility<ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:08, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{comment|# | Accessibility and economic performance are closely related. Good accessibility can facilitate economic growth. <ref> [http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.5172/impp.453.10.2-3.269] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:05, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Toxicity charge as a form of congestion charge is unfair.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{defend|# |Older cars that do not meet Euro 4 standard paying an extra £10 charge on top of the congestion charge to drive in central London, within the Congestion Charge Zone is unfair because the fact that a car is old does not necessarily indicate that the emission levels are high <ref> [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/green-motoring/11187483/New-or-old-which-is-greener.html]</ref>|--[[User:Edem Agbenowu|Edem Agbenowu]]}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | People living within the congestion charge area shouldn’t pay the same amount as people driving there from outside. (i.e. In Milano residents have 40 free entries and after that discounted cost of 2 instead of 5 euros). <ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congestion_pricing] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:10, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | Only 10% of PM10 is due to exhaust emissions. Depending on the road the increase of driving speed may both increase or decrease the overall PM10 emissions. <ref> [http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10661-006-9296-4] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 13:45, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# | The ones responsible for the pollution should bear its price according to the “Polluter pays principle” <ref> [http://ec.europa.eu/environment/legal/law/pdf/principles/2%20Polluter%20Pays%20Principle_revised.pdf] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:14, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{comment|# |The purpose of congestion charge is to discourage traffic in the city centers but some mobile equipment do not have any emmission standard and by extension might not pay any congestion charge attributed with emissions in London examples are vehicles with less than 4 wheels, those with 2-stroke engines,hybrid vehicles,quadricycles but these means of transport could as well cause congestion in the city center <ref> [https://www.gov.uk/emissions-testing]</ref>|--[[User:Edem Agbenowu|Edem Agbenowu]] ([[User talk:Edem Agbenowu|talk]]) 04:42, 9 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = congestion charge prevents the occurrence of tragedy of the commons.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{defend|#|In any situation within a shared-resource system such as roads individual users acting independently according to their own self-interest behave contrary to the common good of all users by depleting or spoiling that resource through their collective action.The introduction of effective congestion charges will serve as a measures that may reduce congestion through economic incentives and disincentives <ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons]</ref>|--[[User:edem agbenowu]] ([[User talk:edem agbenowu|talk]]) 01:07, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = To ensure air quality standards, the congestion charge scheme needs to be dynamic.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
<br />
{{comment|# |Congestion charge should cover all seasons and hours of the day and should dynamically adapt according to meteorological conditions for pollution dispersion and contributions from different pollution sources. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856415000464] </ref>|--[[User:Tamara Gajst]] ([[User talk:Tamara Gajst|talk]]) 14:23, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== Materials that can be used ==<br />
<br />
These are Finnish (focusing on Helsinki) discussions or proposals about congestion charge. The web pages are linked through Google translator so that the text shown is automatically translated text from Finnish to English. Mostly it works fine, but be aware of mistakes.<br />
* The environmental council of the city of Helsinki suggests (9th May 2017) that regional congestion charges should be available for cities and the cities also should get the money collected. [https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fi&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hel.fi%2Fstatic%2Fpublic%2Fhela%2FYmparistolautakunta%2FSuomi%2FEsitys%2F2017%2FYmk_2017-05-09_Ylk_8_El%2FF4C8DD44-AC2B-CD53-90B4-5BB46AD00000%2FAloite_valtiolle_lakimuutoksen_puolesta_joka_salli.html&edit-text=&act=url]<br />
* Osmo Soininvaara, a member of Helsinki City Council, suppports congestion charges. These are his arguments:<br />
** 3rd April 2017: congestion charges are effective in reducing traffic jams, they reduce emissions, and they collect money for the city. [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.soininvaara.fi%2F2017%2F04%2F03%2Fkaupunkirakentamisen-aika-35-ruuhkamaksut%2F]<br />
** 4th April 2017: even if a congestion charge punishes poor people (who can afford to sit in the current traffic jams but cannot afford the charges), the benefits (see previous point) spread to the whole community. [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.soininvaara.fi%2F2017%2F04%2F04%2Fkaupunkirakentamisen-aika-38-kuka-hyotyy-ruuhkamaksusta-koyhat-pois-rikkaiden-tielta%2F]<br />
* The Helsinki Regional Transport Agency HSL is planning congestion charges. News from February 2016.<br />
** Yle [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fyle.fi%2Fuutiset%2F3-8662824]<br />
** HSL:s own news [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.hsl.fi%2Fuutiset%2F2016%2Ftiemaksut-varmistaisivat-helsingin-seudun-kestavan-kasvun-7995]<br />
** Helsingin uutiset (a local newspaper) [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.helsinginuutiset.fi%2Fartikkeli%2F363860-ruuhkamaksut-kayttoon-ehka-jo-2020-kartta-nain-ne-vaikuttavat-sinuun]<br />
* Report on congestion charges in Helsinki, 2016 [https://www.hsl.fi/sites/default/files/uploads/ajoneuvoliikenteen_hinnoitteluselvitys_2016_en.pdf]<br />
* Background report on congestion charges, 2015 (in Finnish with English summary) [https://www.hsl.fi/sites/default/files/uploads/hsl_julkaisu_4_2016_ajoneuvoliikenteen_hinnoitteluselvitys_teknistoiminnallinen.pdf]<br />
* Autoliitto (Car Drivers' Association) opposes congestion charge in Helsinki (2009) [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fyle.fi%2Fuutiset%2F3-5911660], (2011) [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.autoliitto.fi%2Fen%2Ftiedote%2Fsuurimpia-karsijoita-olisivat-alueen-omat-veronmaksajat-ja-elinkeinoelama-ruuhkamaksut]<br />
** Hannu Oskala argues against Autoliitto's statements (2012) [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fhannuoskala.fi%2F2012%2F04%2Fautoliitto-ja-ruuhkamaksut%2F]<br />
* Summary page of HSL material about congestion charge (mostly Finnish only) [https://www.hsl.fi/tiemaksut]<br />
* Helsingin kaupunki. Ruuhkamaksut tehokkain keino parantaa Helsingin ilmanlaatua nopeasti. (12.01.2017) [http://www.hel.fi/www/uutiset/fi/ymparistokeskus/ruuhkamaksut-12012017]<br />
* HSL (11.2.2016): Tiemaksut varmistaisivat Helsingin seudun kestävän kasvun [https://www.hsl.fi/uutiset/2016/tiemaksut-varmistaisivat-helsingin-seudun-kestavan-kasvun-7995]<br />
** Helsingin Sanomat [http://www.hs.fi/kaupunki/art-2000002885425.html]<br />
** Helsingin Uutiset [http://www.helsinginuutiset.fi/artikkeli/363860-ruuhkamaksut-kayttoon-ehka-jo-2020-kartta-nain-ne-vaikuttavat-sinuun]<br />
** Kauppalehti-blogi [http://blog.kauppalehti.fi/metrossanukkuja/ruuhkamaksu-voi-olla-maailman-tyhmin-idea]<br />
* LVM. (2011) Helsingin seudun ruuhkamaksu. Jatkoselvitys. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 5/2011. [http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-243-214-8]<br />
* LVM. (2007). Joukkoliikenteen houkuttelevuuden ja käytön lisääminen eri liikkujaryhmissä. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 63/2007. [http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-201-954-7]<br />
** Talouselämä-uutiskommentti [http://www.talouselama.fi/uutiset/ruuhkamaksu-rankaisee-koyhaa-3388061]<br />
* LVM. Tienkäyttömaksujärjestelmät. Esiselvitys. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 17/2006. [http://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/78730/Julkaisuja_17_2006.pdf?sequence=1]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Scientific articles about congestion charge and health<br />
*{{doi|10.1126/science.aaf3420}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.jth.2015.08.002}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1080/09640568.2014.912615}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.tra.2015.03.004}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.01.002}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.09.015}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1080/13547500902965252}}<br />
*{{doi|10.5172/impp.453.10.2-3.269}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.amepre.2006.03.030}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1136/jech.2003.012385}}<br />
<br />
=== Translations from the Finnish assessment report [https://www.hsl.fi/sites/default/files/uploads/hsl_julkaisu_4_2016_ajoneuvoliikenteen_hinnoitteluselvitys_teknistoiminnallinen.pdf]===<br />
<br />
====2.4 Eligibility of pricing====<br />
<br />
Economics theories, designing measures, and impact assessments are usually normative analyzes that answer the question of what should be done. An alternative, positive approach alternative describes institutional (situations based on habitual systems and organizational structures) where only certain things can be done, that is, acceptable. Decision-making systems are combinations of normative and positive operating environments.<br />
<br />
For example, in London, the main parties objected to setting a congestion charge. However, in 2003, a Mayor-independent candidate, Ken Livingstone, who had promised to implement congestion charges, was elected as mayor. The mayor of London has executive powers in such matters, where the views of the main parties were irrelevant. Before the mayoral elections, the Labor Party had separated Livingstone and set a formal candidate, but it did not end in the election. London congestion charges proved to be a success, and in the subsequent mayoral elections, Livingstone was again the Labor Party's official candidate and won the election.<br />
<br />
The political backdrop of the Stockholm congestion charge test, on the other hand, was based on the fact that the Swedish Green Party promised support for the Social Democrats' government if a congestion levy test was launched in Stockholm. In this case too, wider political and regional decision-making was largely ignored. The government that made the payments was lost in elections, but despite this, the new Swedish government decided to stabilize Stockholm's congestion charges because the benefits of the scheme were clear and the public opinion had turned to the side of the payments.<br />
<br />
London and Stockholm congestion charges are good examples of pricing-related decision-making and policy specificities. Göteborg's decision-making has progressed through a wider process. London and Stockholm congestion charges are also good examples of how fast the resistance to congestion charges can turn out to be accepted when the positive effects of the payment start to appear.<br />
<br />
Economics theory, studies and practical experience show that road tolls are a useful tool for transport policy. However, road user charges and congestion charges have not yet reached a well-established position in politics. The main reason is that they have no widespread support from citizens and politicians. The admissibility of road user fees is a challenge. In the 2007 study "Effects of Land Use Fees in Finland. Preliminary study "(LVM publications 35/2007), the subject matter was widely considered.<br />
<br />
Congestion as a phenomenon and vehicle pricing as a measure are complicated things to understand. For example, car makers do not always consider pricing as a particularly effective means of reducing congestion as they misjudge the volume of traffic that needs to be reduced in order for traffic to flow without congestion. The formation of congestion is a complex phenomenon and it is difficult to estimate the total number of traffic and disadvantages. Generally, it is estimated that the reduction target would be about 50%, even if the congestion would be eliminated by a 15% reduction. This is because the congestion increases steeply when the bus reaches its capacity.<br />
<br />
Congestion charges also tend to be strong opposition, as motorists feel that they are the victims of congestion and are not the cause of the congestion, and therefore the management of demand through payments is seen to be unfair. Even if one extra minute does not seem like a lot, 1500 more people in the same band feel the same. Every new car driver who travels to the crowd will, in addition to the slowdown in the journey they are experiencing, also have an additional extra delay.<br />
<br />
It is easier to accept individual access fees for bridge, tunnel or new lanes, as it is easy for people to experience the benefits of a new connection or service that is cost-effective. The admissibility of congestion charges increases, if the implementation of the payment involves improving the quality of the transport system, for example in the form of bottleneck investments. Generally, in the ex-post evaluation, approval will be greatly enhanced when it is seen that demand control works and mobility is more smooth even through concrete investments financed through pricing.<br />
<br />
Opinion polls show that the use of premium revenue is a very important factor for the acceptability of road user charges. Support for payment systems will increase considerably if it is decided beforehand that the premium revenue will be redirected to traffic. Usually, people consider it important to allocate premium revenue to the development of public transport, traffic routes and environmental damage reduction. It has also been found that improving the living environment and increasing road safety will greatly increase acceptance of payments. Instead, allocating funds to lowering other taxes or filling the state budget is not considered acceptable.<br />
<br />
People must also have options for using a newly priced car. This is why, for example, congestion charges usually involve improving public transport, which must take place at the latest at the same time as congestion charges are introduced. Equality and fairness issues are important to people, and they must be told how these things are resolved.<br />
<br />
The acceptability of pricing is also often undermined by the fact that citizens often see new payments as a new tax in addition to the existing ones. Taxes on transport are largely based on fiscal criteria, but because the level of taxes also affects mobility, it would be good to look at their welfare effects critically while deciding on pricing. It should be noted, however, that as a source of funding, the fuel tax is efficient due to its small collection costs and operates in the same way as pricing, especially in relation to performance-based external costs, especially outside congested urban areas. Effective control effects can be obtained by targeting pricing correctly in relation to the existing disadvantages and the potential benefits of potential mobility. For example, the fuel tax on steadily consuming every liter of fuel consumed is not an effective control in this respect.<br />
<br />
The key objective for business life is that the logistics costs can be lowered. In delivery chains, timing has a particularly high weight. In Stockholm, for example, the congestion fee reduced the logistical costs of business life and the distribution of deliveries went more efficiently. If road transport charges increase the cost of transport, they should significantly increase the service level.<br />
<br />
One argument against congestion charges is regional competition. Centers' shops are already competing with out-of-town shopping centers and, therefore, retailers in the city are afraid that congestion charges for city centers will strengthen the competitive position of external shopping centers. In practice, such effects have not been observed, for example, in Stockholm (Daunfelt et al., 2009), but the effects of the London congestion charge zone were noticeable (Quddus et al., 2007). However, it should be remembered that the attractiveness of commercial services in central cities is also negatively affected by the congested transport system.<br />
<br />
Growth in trade can ultimately lead to a more self-reliant community structure. However, the situation may also be the opposite. Better smooth traffic and improved public transport can bring more customers to the malls. For example, in Stockholm, sales of the downtown shopping center increased by 6 percent during the congestion charge test.<br />
<br />
One of the basic issues related to road charges is justice, which is defined in different ways, often based on personal circumstances and experience. Often, the fear is that congestion charges reduce the number of trips that are deemed necessary. These include trips to nearby shops, schools and the hospital. Tolls are seen to increase inequality and low-income mobility. However, these disadvantages may be reduced by means of timing of payments or by various compensation methods (eg limiting the number of payments or developing the supply and quality of alternative means of payment).<br />
<br />
New technologies raises doubts about functionality issues, complexity, and cost. Endangering privacy is a particularly sensitive issue in connection with new technologies. As stated in Chapter 4.3.5, security and privacy can, however, be managed in an acceptable manner, which is of paramount importance in the case of a mandatory tax or charge imposed by an authority.<br />
<br />
====3. Methods and premises ====<br />
'''3.1 Assessment frame<br />
<br />
The criteria for selecting the technical pricing model in Chapter 4 and the price levels were as follows:<br />
*Impact on goals.<br />
*Impact on social economy.<br />
*The amount of revenue required for investments in the HLJ strategy.<br />
*The feasibility of the system (including the ratio between system revenue and depreciation / operating costs) and risks.<br />
*Understandability and acceptability of the system, impact and price level (including the breakdown).<br />
<br />
The whole transport system options defined by the working group were compared on the basis of an even larger scale of frameworks, where the objectives of the HLJ Plan and of the more general MAL process were compiled into the framework of Table 1.<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Evaluation framework for Helsinki transport strategy<br />
|----<br />
! Focus areas|| Announced HJL/MAL target|| Criteria<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Functionality of the transport system|| Congestion is under control<br />
|rowspan="19"|<br />
* Socio-economic cost-effectiveness of the region/transport system<br />
* Direction of influence, significance and focus on different user groups and regions.<br />
|----<br />
|| Travel times predictable<br />
|----<br />
|| Travel and transportation chains smooth near and far<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Significant environmental impacts|| The disadvantages and loads of traffic will be reduced<br />
|----<br />
|| Exposure to noise and emissions is reduced<br />
|----<br />
|| Climate targets are achieved<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| The development of sustainable mobility|| The competitiveness of public transport is improving<br />
|----<br />
|| Cycling is tempting and smooth<br />
|----<br />
|| Moving safe in all modes<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Growth direction and accessibility|| The need for mobility decreases<br />
|----<br />
|| Accessibility of sustainable modes<br />
|----<br />
|| Accessibility of car traffic is improved<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| HS competitiveness and economic impact|| An attractive, versatile and functional region<br />
|----<br />
|| Business conditions are safeguarded<br />
|----<br />
|| Job Mobility and Customer Accessibility Improves<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Social endurance|| Transport costs remain reasonable<br />
|----<br />
|| Everyday travel options for different needs<br />
|----<br />
|| Dependence on cars is reduced<br />
|----<br />
|colspan="2"| The investment and operating costs of the system, feasibility and risks as well as the financial aspect<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
====9 Conclusions====<br />
'''Pricing of vehicle traffic is based on the challenge posed by the growth of the transport system<br />
<br />
As stated in chapters 3 and 4, for the functioning of the transport system, there is a congestion in the current state of the road network which would be good to remove for the functionality and competitiveness of the region, as the efficiency of the transport system is weakened by congestion by<br />
* travel times increasing,<br />
* the predictability of travel times deteriorating,<br />
* the need for equipment increasing and<br />
* accidents and emissions increasing.<br />
<br />
The traffic congestion now focuses on all radial routes, Ring Road I and the city center.<br />
Growth in the region is aggravated by the congestion of the road network, which is not managed by the means currently in use. It is important to note that, according to the analysis, the structure and demand of the road network capacity are imbalanced; Part of the network runs smoothly and the capacity is not necessarily effective, and on the other hand some of the network has clear operational problems.<br />
<br />
However, the congestion caused by the growth of the region has to be controlled by the functionality and competitiveness of the region. Congestion will only ease in the future for cycles for which the HLJ 2015 Plan has targeted capacity-building measures, for example on Tuusulanväylä between Ring Road III and Ring Road I and in the middle of Ring Road I, but at the whole network level, the congestion will not ease in the 2025 situation but worsens compared to the current situation. A significant increase in the capacity of the entire car traffic network is costly and would further increase car traffic, for example, from public transport.<br />
<br />
'''Financial control is proof that it is an effective way of balancing the demand for transport to take advantage of the service level offered by the entire transport system<br />
<br />
The functionality of pricing guidance is based on a number of Nordic, European and international examples, which are presented in Chapter 2. Pricing of vehicle traffic is an effective means of managing congestion as:<br />
* The journey moves to sustainable modes of transport. Particularly for longer journeys to public transport, the average length of journeys increases especially for public transport journeys, and the structure of the region is compressed into rampways.<br />
* Car traffic is redirected as cars are shorter and out of the highest priced areas. In the long term, land use based on accessibility of the car in the region also adapts to steering, concentrating the regional structure closer to the workplace concentrations and efficient rail transport.<br />
* Pricing drives motorists out of congested lanes, causing congestion to diminish, fluency improves. Some drivers can take advantage of improved fluency to meet their mobility needs more effectively.<br />
* In addition, the bottleneck investments made possible by pricing benefits make it possible for the entire network to be smoother and more efficient loading and to keep the need for pricing control reasonably priced.<br />
<br />
'''There are several technical options for tolls and their functionality is linked to the whole transport system and land use<br />
<br />
Pricing is a key component of the HJL 2015 strategy, which was not investigated at the time of the plan but by way of example by relying on a functional model of the LVM congestion charge (2009), based on satellite-based technology. This study covered a number of active road toll models for transport (Chapter 4).<br />
<br />
According to the study, the working group decided to evaluate the effects of a single pricing model based on the gate zones, which according to the study team was the most economical, clear and efficient model from the different perspectives studied. The lines formed by payment cards follow, for example, the boundaries of the new public transport ticketing and taxation systems, and payments are staggered so that the traffic orientation is in balance with the transportability of the transport system.<br />
<br />
However, during the evaluation process, it was noted that if the level of pricing is matched to the social economy correctly and bottleneck investments are planned based on this demand, the road network will utilize more users with more naturally mobile mobility needs. In this case, the disadvantages of pricing (additional cost) and benefits (time savings) are better balanced.<br />
<br />
From the point of view of control, it is also worthwhile collecting charges where the external costs occur and its level and the disadvantages disappear. The model included in the impact assessment was also studied as a sensitivity review for larger versions that were found to have positive effects. At the same time, it is also worthwhile to make road network bottlenecks in order to provide useful traffic to the road network without jeopardizing the flow of traffic, without requiring pricing guidance as much as the entire network is in effective use. Public transport projects, on the other hand, will safeguard the level of service of those who move from the road network by means of guidance (otherwise the congestion).<br />
<br />
The best performance of vehicle pricing is ultimately linked to its role in the development of the entire transport system and land use, which should be balanced as a whole. The key conclusion of the technical review is that although the study has examined various primitive port models and their implications, it will be possible to plan and evaluate almost unlimitedly different combinations of gate positions and pay levels for which a more complete overall solution can be found than it was now. In any further planning, it is important to thoroughly analyze the pricing system at its best as part of the entire transport system plan and also the land use planning.<br />
<br />
'''The effects of the area level impact of the investigated functional pricing model clearly support the achievement of the regional development objectives as part of the HLJ 2015 Plan and its MAL Framework<br />
<br />
The effects of the package of measures, which are examined in Chapter 5, are summarized in Table 5. As has been noted in previous national road toll surveys and international follow-up studies, the analyzes carried out show that vehicle pricing is a viable solution to future problems and set targets. It is particularly effective in safeguarding the functionality and sustainability of the regional transport system. The general improvement in traffic flow caused by passenger car bidding also benefits transport activities. This report does not assume or estimate the impact of payments for goods and distribution traffic. The whole set of measures is economically viable. In other respects, the situation is more complex.<br />
<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 5. Summary of Impact of the Pricing Procedure (VE1).<br />
|----<br />
! Focus areas<br />
| <br />
! A summary of the implications for the region's objectives<br />
! General additional criteria <br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Functionality of the transport system<br />
| +<br />
| Congestion in the fully used road network is controlled by control and bottleneck investments.<br />
|rowspan="24"|<br />
* An explored package of measures that includes a variety of measures in addition to pricing guidance is also economically viable (+ 20M € / yr)<br />
* The direction, significance and direction of impacts on different user groups and regions require further development of the functional model and compensation mechanisms.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| The travel times of the main freeways are about 10% shorter and are much more predictable thanks to guidance.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Transport chains are smoother, freight traffic does not pay. The level of bus service increases as quality corridors are not crowded.<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Significant environmental impacts<br />
| +<br />
| Traffic disadvantages and environmental loads are reduced by about 5%.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Vehicle noise reduction and emission sources are reduced by 5 or 8%.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Reduction of vehicle speeds reduces carbon dioxide emissions by 3 or 5%, making the achievement of climate targets more likely.<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| The development of sustainable mobility<br />
| +<br />
| The competitiveness of public transport improves, 100,000 more<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| The attractiveness of walking and cycling is increasing, as evidenced by a 2 percentage point increase in the share.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Mobility is safer since vehicle accidents are reduced by 4 or 8%.<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="4"| Growth direction and accessibility<br />
| +<br />
| The need for mobility decreases, as the region is compacted and the trips are reduced by 1 or 3%.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| SAVU accessibility for sustainable modes will be greatly improved thanks to the investment made possible by road tolls.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Car travel time gains are improved as speeds increase and average travel times are reduced by 5 or 8%.<br />
|----<br />
| -<br />
| Total accessibility decreases as tolls are experienced as a travel disadvantage.<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="6"| HS competitiveness and economic impact<br />
| +<br />
| The region remains attractive, functional and therefore competitive as the public transport service level, road network quality, congestion management and international connections improve.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Impact on Business / Logistics: The operating conditions of City Logistics will improve and there will be no significant changes to national logistics.<br />
|----<br />
| +/-<br />
| Impact on business / trade: The parent city and the districts of KUUMA municipalities will be strengthened as service centers. The attractiveness of the shopping districts of Ring Road I-III is weakened.<br />
|----<br />
| +/-<br />
| Impact on business life / jobs: The attractiveness of the capital city is improving and the attractiveness of the work centers in southern Espoo and Kehä I-III is weakened.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Mobility and customer satisfaction is improving.<br />
|----<br />
| -<br />
| Costs lower the reachability.<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="4"| Social endurance<br />
| +/-<br />
| Transport costs remain reasonable.<br />
|----<br />
| -<br />
| Low-cost mobility costs are increasing in some areas.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| There are alternatives for different travel needs<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Dependence on cars decreases<br />
|----<br />
|colspan="3"| The investment and operating costs of the zone port system are 20 - 25 M € / yr. The tested functional model is good for feasibility and risk management. The use of toll income as a new financial asset (net of € 150 million / year or € 80 million / year) is an essential part of profitability from a regional point of view.<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<br />
Although the need for mobility in the direction of the growth of the entire region decreases and the travel time gains of SAVU and car traffic in sustainable modes improve, the monetary growth of the toll charges is necessarily felt as a decrease in overall accessibility, which is a disadvantage. Pricing and transport system development measures also affect the growth directions of the region, as the relative accessibility of the regions will inevitably change. It is still likely that further development of a functional model and compensation mechanisms will be required in order to have the direction, significance and targeting desired.<br />
<br />
Comparing the alternative to VE0 60% of the population in the Helsinki region lives in regions where the effect of pricing is neutral, ie the difference between alternatives is small. In regions with attractive pricing disadvantages, one fifth of residents live and the same share lives in areas of healing power.<br />
<br />
One fifth of the jobs are located in regions whose pricing behavior has a detrimental effect on the comparison option and a quarter of them are in the areas of healing attractiveness. The differences are very large between regions in the metropolitan area. One third of Helsinki's jobs are in areas of improving attractiveness, while in Espoo the figure is one tenth, and in Vantaa none. Nearly 60% in Vantaa and 45% of jobs in the Espoo and Kauniainen districts are located in regions whose attraction decreases; In Helsinki, there are a dozen jobs in these areas. In the area of the Railway-KUUMA, the jobs are divided into half between the neutral and improving areas of attraction. Bus-KUUMA's jobs are located in almost completely neutral areas.<br />
<br />
Shopping and business trips are made mostly off peak hours on weekdays, so the toll rate for the pricing model is lower, as well as at weekends when no toll is charged. For this reason, pricing affects less fluency in mobility and on the other hand, payload is lower than on commuting. According to the results, however, the impact of pricing on the attractiveness of trading and service areas is strongly biased. Households direct their trips to neighboring areas as well as to the best accessible public transport concentrations at the expense of car-based mergers. The center of gravity of the Nuclear Power Center is increasing, but tolls in other parts of the city do not have a significant impact. Pricing does not undermine the conditions for new service concentrations in the city center. The impact is positive for the attractiveness of the service centers and local services of KUUMA municipalities.<br />
<br />
Competitiveness criteria that are commonly used in international competitiveness and well-being in cities are the public transport service level, road network quality, congestion management and international connections. A pricing package is a prerequisite for a Competitiveness Comprehensive Plan. The problem is the increase in traffic costs, which is not necessarily a big problem in the whole, as toll revenue can be directed as desired. However, it is clear that if returns are not returned to the region and are properly targeted, pricing is a risk to the region's competitiveness.<br />
<br />
Although pricing increases the cost of motoring, they are not expected to grow unreasonably in terms of social sustainability. Improved accessibility supports the attractiveness of residential areas and a balanced demographic structure. The accessibility of services and jobs through sustainable forms of travel will be improved. The development of centers and nodes supports the maintenance of services. Choices for car non-moving are improving. The accessibility of the transport system will be improved.<br />
<br />
The investigated functional gateway model is better than new types of mileage models for repayment, feasibility and risk management.<br />
<br />
'''The focus of the impacts on different groups and regions requires a functional model and its price levels to be adjusted, supported or compensated mechanisms<br />
<br />
Factors that may have an impact on the growth of the region's growth orientation and the potential for competitiveness are related to targeting effects. For example, the deterioration of the tractive power of the Ring Road / Ring Road III and the rise in commuting costs for workers in low-income workers in the service and production sectors.<br />
<br />
In particular, the relationship between pricing on land use and the potential to eliminate or mitigate relative regional handicaps to business life should also be clarified. In the future, the number of payment points, ie the number of frames and cross lines, and the amount of payments should be studied for the vitality and tax revenue of the municipality. Even though the premium income would be lost, employment and other tax revenue in the larger sense, for example in Vantaa, would be the road or the effects of financing road projects.<br />
<br />
In this regard, it is worth considering first reducing the target level of pricing financing. Raising the level of funding typically leads to pricing being not optimal for the steering effect and social economy. The pricing option, where tolls are half of the VE1 option, mitigates the deteriorating effect of pricing habitation in areas where the effect on relative accessibility is negative with the tested alternative. The lower pay level also has fewer and fewer areas of accessibility than the areas of weakened workplace accessibility.<br />
<br />
Relatively weakening regions can be supported by adjusting the form of pricing zones and the level of payments across the payment system and also by investments. The comparison option VE0 is, on the one hand, only one possible growth orientation growth scenario from many potential. Particularly, the regional development emphasis is reflected in the measures already taken, particularly in the areas of the Länsimetro and Ring Roads, where the accessibility of sustainable forms of transport is developing significantly from the situation in 2012. The relative accessibility impact of pricing is then reflected in comparison with option VE0, so that the accessibility and growth potential of some regions will deteriorate, even if compared to the current situation, they are more in favor of other regions in the region.<br />
<br />
'''The pricing model examined as part of the HLJ 2015 plan is economically viable<br />
<br />
According to the calculation in Chapter 6, the result of VE1 is EUR 19.5 million per year compared to the 0 + comparison option, which only executes projects that are running and (by 1.12.2015). However, in the case of pricing, the social economy net result is largely dependent on balancing the growth of motorists' costs and other objectives. The perceived disadvantage of the payment rises rapidly as fees and hence prices rise. When pricing is too strong, users' disadvantages and dissatisfaction grow faster than pricing revenue. Environmental and safety impacts and changes in operating costs and taxes are also included in the calculation.<br />
<br />
For this reason, chapter 5 also showed the variation of the model studied (VE3) where payments were halved. Alternative VE3's economic performance is EUR 32.4 million, or EUR 12.9 million more profitable than VE1. According to the socioeconomic calculation in Chapter 6, it is more efficient, as revenues fall less than the net disadvantages faced by users (payload and time and cost savings of congestion).<br />
<br />
Profitability and fairness of the model's end-to-end model can be further developed. Sensitivity reviews give this a look. For example, pricing guidance and bottleneck investments are an entity in which they affect each other's needs. If investment is carried out without pricing, bottlenecks can be dismantled, but the region's growth is still causing new congestion problems across the road network. If a mere pricing action is made, the road network may be under-utilized.<br />
<br />
Sensitivity assessments also show that the socio-economic cost-effectiveness of vehicle pricing and the need to secure the functioning of the road network will grow significantly if vehicle traffic is growing faster than expected in the forecasts of the calculations. This is also the case if funding for the development of the transport system is unsuccessful as planned, public transport ticket prices will have to increase or economic growth will accelerate, increasing the mobility of residents. The financing levels of the HLJ 2015 Plan and also the Comparative Option are fairly goal-oriented compared to the project-specific so-called " 0+ compared to the benchmarking principles. On the other hand, the need for pricing is reduced if the use of the car becomes more expensive or otherwise decreases.<br />
<br />
Time-sensitivity assessments of the differences in efficiency between vehicle traffic and the current 2025 and 2040 demand situation in the current situation (2012) also showed that the need for pricing is constantly increasing. The social cost of the pricing model studied in 2040 was many times higher than in 2025. However, because of the roughness of the calculations, the "right moment" is difficult to determine accurately.<br />
<br />
The conclusions drawn from the relative differences between the investigated comparative scenarios are clear, but the net results of the socioeconomic calculations have to be taken into account in the reserve since the calculations still involve a number of uncertainties and development needs, which are dealt with in Chapter 3.<br />
<br />
'''The financial impact of tolls is significant<br />
<br />
Payment levels also determine the revenue of the pricing, which is also part of the HLJ strategy in terms of funding. The impact of the question on the comparison of alternatives depends, of course, on the extent of the investment program and other measures, their financial need and how the costs of financing are taken into account in decision-making.<br />
<br />
The set return target includes a provision of 55 million to cover the higher cost of demand for public transport that may result in pricing and a general increase in service levels. For example, in Stockholm pricing has led to a drop in the number of trips and the impact on public transport was less than predicted. Investment levels also depend on both the profitability of the projects and the more general consideration of the financial level of the sensible region. If possible further studies lead to similar conclusions, it may be taken into account in the future definition of the yield level.<br />
<br />
'''The technical feasibility of pricing is good with the tested model<br />
<br />
The study did not detect any technical feasibility problems that would prevent the implementation of the investigated zone report system if it were decided to take action. Systems have been in use elsewhere for many years. The charging system is a combination of IT technology (computers, software and connection devices) and physical devices in the roadside and in cars. The average life span of technology is 5-8 years.<br />
<br />
On the other hand, the feasibility of a mileage system would be a question mark as there is no experience in passenger transport. With regard to technology, decision-making should be guided by operational needs, predictability of implementation costs and sufficiency of the payment system. Ideal system may have to wait a long time.<br />
<br />
The technical solutions described in this report can be considered to represent traditional or near-known solutions for the coming years. If you are looking for performance-based satellite positioning charges for passenger cars (which are nowhere), then a traditional vehicle solution solution is unlikely to be likely for many reasons. A separate retrofit vehicle device is quite expensive and can only be used in the form of a single service, ie tolls. The current implementations are all for heavy traffic. In this case, the vehicles to be equipped are much less and the resulting costs can be included in the freight rates and thus transferred to customers.<br />
<br />
On the one hand, technology development can be the doorstep, where new technologies will soon be possible. Different contexts have been considered for example. The potential of smartphones or navigators with regard to the pay-per-view. Already today, a passenger car with a few people may be able to ride several GPS devices: one smartphone per passenger, a navigator used by the driver, and several other devices, such as PCs or tablets. However, these can not yet be used to pay tolls that have their own requirements for safety and reliability. The road toll solution also includes a credible surveillance solution. It is therefore necessary to develop a new overall concept, taking into account the specific requirements of road tolls. From the point of view of the implementer, the situation is ultimately the following: a) Better solutions are expected, ie time when new, yet unknown solutions are viable, b) Do the risk of the developer or first-ever developer in the highly global application-oriented sector, or c) Whether it is available at decision-making, Is reasonably priced, fairly risk-free and stays on schedule.<br />
<br />
In connection with the toll road system in the Helsinki region, A possible nationwide system, whereby the role of mileage may change because the system is highly scalable. In this situation, the size of the Helsinki region's scale of systemic cost savings will change significantly in relation to the collection fees.<br />
<br />
It is still important to note that even though the recovery technology will later be "better", almost everything else remains intact, such as the basis for the payment and the use of revenues, legislation, organizational solutions (payer and system operator), sales network, surveillance technology, May pose new requirements. Technology choice is therefore not virtually bound by the solution in a very long time, and the pricing model examined in the study is likely to be implemented with both conventional technology and GNSS-based gravity technology. It is also important to note that a possible solution based on a license plate interpretation can be utilized in the control system if you switch to a satellite positioning system, for example.<br />
<br />
'''The introduction requires further action<br />
<br />
As noted above, the technical features of the priced pricing model can be further developed in many ways. Decision-making may also require the development of socio-economic evaluation methods. This should be done in the HLJ / MAL context, because optimal control depends naturally on what else in the region is decided to do. Not all of the technical specifications set out in Chapter 4 have been sensible at this stage, such as<br />
* Increase in peak hourly payouts according to the development of traffic jams,<br />
* Validity periods,<br />
* Daytime shears,<br />
* Vehicle categories subject to payment,<br />
* Handling occasional car drivers,<br />
* Security and security<br />
* Potential value-added services.<br />
<br />
You should only return to these if you decide to proceed with the planning of the action. Only then will you be able to design technical details.<br />
<br />
Some of the questions are those that require more detailed assessment methods because the evaluation method used to investigate the impact of strategic regional investment (HELMET) is virtually impossible as a traffic analysis of the two hourly and hourly hourly conversations, and much of the impact assessment is based on various extensions of these results. The modeling method does not allow for a more accurate analysis of these periods or sufficient analysis of other periods, rather than linking time groups to people, so that the targeting effects can not be reliably investigated. In this respect, only the simulation of direct impacts was based on a separate method.<br />
<br />
Implementation path requires its own discretion and impact assessment. The zone gate system can be constructed, for example, in stages, starting from the inner frames, so that the alternative models in Chapter 4 will work in the "series".<br />
<br />
'''Alternative means do not replace the pricing guidance presented in HLJ 2015<br />
<br />
The analysis of Chapter 8 shows that alternative, sufficiently impressive package solutions in the light of the growth of the region is difficult to elaborate and analyze using existing methods. Investments did not prove to be effective measures to compensate for vehicle traffic control and the calculation of public transport ticket prices was considered unrealistic without any idea of its financing. Parking policy has the same type of control and also financial impact as pricing, but it would require such comprehensive measures or policies as this can not be proposed by an expert in this study.<br />
<br />
The promotion of walking and cycling promoted by expert analysis could in itself be alternatives to vehicle pricing but would require more empirical information on the effectiveness of the measures and also the further development of methods for assessing the impact on transport system level so that their impact could be explored as part of the overall transport system.<br />
<br />
In the future, the effectiveness of interference management, movement control, services and intelligence will require more extensive and model-demanding reviews, which will only give a better idea of whether it can be used. Policies are further intensified so that pricing guidance is no longer needed as part of the HLJ strategy.<br />
<br />
The methods found in Chapter 8 have been mainly used by the HLJ 2015 process and no pricing has been found to be unnecessary at that stage, indicating the need for a measure. The resources of this study have not been able to make the overall program corresponding to the HLJ plan again, so the effects of the alternative strategy could not be estimated at the same level as in Chapter 5.<br />
<br />
It is also important to note that the impact of pricing does not contradict other development objectives of the transport system. Therefore, other measures should not be put in conflict with economic guidance, but the transport system and the whole community structure are a whole. All measures promoting the objectives support this whole and usually reinforce their synergy. This is also due to the fact that the effects of different measures are directed to the mechanisms of a different community structure, so their combinations can be designed so that the negative effects of a single action can be effectively mitigated. Half of the pricing can also be calculated by the fact that different compensation mechanisms are also possible, as net returns can be restored in the desired way back to society.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
<references/></div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=Talk:Congestion_charge&diff=40707Talk:Congestion charge2017-05-15T18:26:35Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Health effects, air quality and climate change */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Health effects, air quality and climate change ==<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Congestion charge scheme doesn't significantly affect air quality in cities.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{attack|# |Carbon footprint caused by stationary traffic or ‘vehicle idling’ resulting<br />
from gridlock across urbanized advanced economies. The fuel that is consumed while stationary in traffic<br />
results in higher emission of greenhouse gases and pollutants, which leads to poorer air quality,<br />
particularly in urban areas. <ref> [http://ibtta.org/sites/default/files/documents/MAF/Costs-of-Congestion-INRIX-Cebr-Report%20(3).pdf]</ref>|--[[User:Amr Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Amr Ebrahim|talk]]) 11:40, 28.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{defend|# | I support the noted argument that congestion charge could have a positive impact on quality. For instance, the congestion charge trial in Stockholm in 2006, based on measurements, it was estimated that this system resulted in a 15% reduction in total road use within the charged cordon. Total traffic emissions in this area of NOx and PM10 fell by 8.5% and 13%, respectively. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231008008091] </ref>|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk: Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 12:18, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
::{{attack|# | While Congestion pricing in Stockholm did reduce traffic emissions the reduction (especially along the most densely trafficked streets) was not sufficient for compliance with air quality standards. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231008008091] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:20, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{defend|# | I support the noted argument that congestion charge could have a positive impact on quality of air because a study of congestion pricing in Stockholm between 2006-2010 found that in the absence of congestion pricing that Stockholm's "air would have been five to ten percent more polluted between 2006 and 2010, and young children would have suffered 45 percent more asthma attacks . <ref> [https://www.insidescience.org/news/driving-fee-rolls-back-asthma-attacks-stockholm] </ref>|--[[User:edem agbenowu]] ([[User talk: edem agbenowu|talk]]) 12:18, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{defend|# | London Congestion pricing scheme brought significant reduction in the emissions of NOx and PM10 due to increased vehicle speed. Reduction in CO2 emissions was almost 20%. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231005007259] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 13:29, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# |By reduction of traffic flows, the release of several pollutant emissions also reduce over time. For example, Daniel and Bekka (2000) <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094119099921356?via%3Dihub]</ref> have showed that the emissions can decrease for 30% in highly congested parts of Delaware, US. |--[[User:Tamara Gajst]] ([[User talk:Tamara Gajst|talk]]) 13:36, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | While Congestion charge scheme initially reduced the number of vehicles entering central London, the congestion levels since 2012 were back at pre-2002 (pre-Congestion charge) levels. <ref> [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27199415] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:02, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# | Congestion charge scheme to a significant extend affect the reduction of of air pollution and promote air aquality according to Transport for London (TfL) Levels of nitrogen oxides (NOX), fell by 13.4% between 2002 & 2003, and carbon dioxide, as well as the levels of airborne particulates (PM10) within and alongside the congestion charge zone. According to the report from TfL since 2002, the nitrogen dioxide (NO2) produced by diesel exhaust has become a serious problem, reporting that the annual mean NO2 objective (of 40 μgm-3 or 21 ppb) was exceeded at all kerbside and roadside monitoring sites across central and greater London during 12 months between 2005 and 2006 and no areas within the Congestion Charge Zone reported NO2 levels above an upper limit of 200 μgm-3 (105 ppb). If this practice continue and also extended to other parts there will be great reduction in air pollution <ref> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge</ref>|--[[User:Margaret Arogunyo]] ([[User talk:Margaret Arogunyo|talk]]) 14:35, 15.5.2017}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | I think the discussion got out of context. When I wrote this statement I was referencing to the case of Helsinki. According to the summary of the environmental impact assessment of congestion charge in Helsinki, the decrease in the traffic carbon dioxide emission will range from 3% to 5%. The significance and the worthlessness of congestion charge implementation in Helsinki are questionable in environmental aspect especially if compared to other alternative, for instance: use of environment-friendly types of fuel. <ref> [https://www.hsl.fi/sites/default/files/uploads/ajoneuvoliikenteen_hinnoitteluselvitys_2016_en.pdf] </ref>|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk: Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 21:22, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Congestion charge scheme will improve the populations’ health. <br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Congestion scheme can encourage walking, cycling and using public transport, and may thereby reduce individual’s sedentary habits leading to an increase in populations physical activity that might affect the growing burden of obesity. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214140515006738] </ref>|--[[User:Tamara Gajst]] ([[User talk:Tamara Gajst|talk]]) 14:23, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{attack|# | Evidence for potential positive physical activity related health effects due to congestion pricing schemes is weak. <ref> [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16829328] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:28, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | Congestion charge can lead to reduction in road traffic related casualties and injuries.<ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856415000464] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:03, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{attack|# | Building roads with the intent of speeding up traffic usually generates extra traffic <ref> [http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.5172/impp.453.10.2-3.269] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:23, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}} <br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== Individual choice ==<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Congestion charge scheme constrains individual choice and behavior.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{attack|# |Urban dwellers are more geared towards behavioral adjustment, since they are aware of the dynamic of distributions of the costs of congestion on house hold and their societal sense of belonging. Therefore, the incidence of such costs and benefits affects the preferences and in turn the willingness to build coping strategies will emerge by acceptance. Hence this can only apply to urban dwellers the case with suburbia and rural surrounding still needs more attention.<ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361920997000035]</ref>|--[[User:Amr Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Amr Ebrahim|talk]]) 12:04, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# |Congestion scheme can promote sustainable mobility if the revenue is invested in public transportation infrastructure <ref> [http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09640568.2014.912615]</ref>.|--[[User:Tamara Gajst]] ([[User talk:Tamara Gajst|talk]]) 14:01, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{comment|# | In London Congestion charge scheme lead to increased use of public transport (50-60%), avoiding the areas (20-30%), car sharing (15-25%), reduced number of journeys, increased use of motorbikes and bicycles. <ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:11, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== Economy ==<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = The economic viability of tariffs and transformation of urban space will encourage more use of roads and cars.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{defend|#| Most economic decision in urbanized economical cities needs to overcome elements such as cost and convenience of toll collection, especially on down town streets. Nevertheless the regressive distributional impact, since lower income people spend a larger proportion of their income on commuting and have less work schedule flexibility, lack of trust in government to dispose of toll revenues wisely, and benefits that in some cases are so small as to be insignificant. These all can contribute for increased mileage attempting to look for either alternatives of escape the cost.<ref> [https://econ.ucsb.edu/~tedb/Courses/Ec1F07/traffic.pdf]</ref>|--[[User:Amr Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Amr Ebrahim|talk]]) 12:49, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# | 10 years after Congestion charge was implemented in London 10% reduction of traffic volumes was observed. <ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:28, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = congestion charge schemes can restrict urban mobility and human capital growth.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{defend|#|The tension between the demand side of transformation and the supply side of governance of cities with out a clear vision on urban transit can be problematic. The mobility towards more economic prosperous location is needed for economical growth, hence the increased living expense of commuting for a younger population can contribute to framing the city as economically hostile or expensive. more effort should be aimed toward different tariffs to different categories rather generalized schemes.<ref>[http://www.theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/congestion_apr10.pdf]</ref>|--[[User:Amr Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Amr Ebrahim|talk]]) 01:07, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# |In as much as mobility towards more economic prosperous location is needed for economic growth the delay associated with traffic could as well serve as disincentive for people to move into these locations.The faster someone can transact business in a location the more likely the individual will tend to conduct business in that location.Hence it might be difficult for younger population to see such places as economically hostile.Moreover as non-productive activity for most people, congestion reduces regional economic healt.<ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_congestion</ref>|--[[User:edem agbenowu]] ([[User talk:edem agbenowu|talk]]) 12:04, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# | 300 new buses and new or changed bus routes were introduced at the launch of London congestion charge scheme – showing that introduction of Congestion charge can increase the mobility and human capital growth. <ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:59, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{defend|# | Journey times in London reduced by 14% - indicating potential for increased mobility<ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:08, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{comment|# | Accessibility and economic performance are closely related. Good accessibility can facilitate economic growth. <ref> [http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.5172/impp.453.10.2-3.269] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:05, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Toxicity charge as a form of congestion charge is unfair.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{defend|# |Older cars that do not meet Euro 4 standard paying an extra £10 charge on top of the congestion charge to drive in central London, within the Congestion Charge Zone is unfair because the fact that a car is old does not necessarily indicate that the emission levels are high <ref> [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/green-motoring/11187483/New-or-old-which-is-greener.html]</ref>|--[[User:Edem Agbenowu|Edem Agbenowu]]}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | People living within the congestion charge area shouldn’t pay the same amount as people driving there from outside. (i.e. In Milano residents have 40 free entries and after that discounted cost of 2 instead of 5 euros). <ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congestion_pricing] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:10, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | Only 10% of PM10 is due to exhaust emissions. Depending on the road the increase of driving speed may both increase or decrease the overall PM10 emissions. <ref> [http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10661-006-9296-4] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 13:45, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# | The ones responsible for the pollution should bear its price according to the “Polluter pays principle” <ref> [http://ec.europa.eu/environment/legal/law/pdf/principles/2%20Polluter%20Pays%20Principle_revised.pdf] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:14, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{comment|# |The purpose of congestion charge is to discourage traffic in the city centers but some mobile equipment do not have any emmission standard and by extension might not pay any congestion charge attributed with emissions in London examples are vehicles with less than 4 wheels, those with 2-stroke engines,hybrid vehicles,quadricycles but these means of transport could as well cause congestion in the city center <ref> [https://www.gov.uk/emissions-testing]</ref>|--[[User:Edem Agbenowu|Edem Agbenowu]] ([[User talk:Edem Agbenowu|talk]]) 04:42, 9 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = congestion charge prevents the occurrence of tragedy of the commons.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{defend|#|In any situation within a shared-resource system such as roads individual users acting independently according to their own self-interest behave contrary to the common good of all users by depleting or spoiling that resource through their collective action.The introduction of effective congestion charges will serve as a measures that may reduce congestion through economic incentives and disincentives <ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons]</ref>|--[[User:edem agbenowu]] ([[User talk:edem agbenowu|talk]]) 01:07, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = To ensure air quality standards, the congestion charge scheme needs to be dynamic.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
<br />
{{comment|# |Congestion charge should cover all seasons and hours of the day and should dynamically adapt according to meteorological conditions for pollution dispersion and contributions from different pollution sources. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856415000464] </ref>|--[[User:Tamara Gajst]] ([[User talk:Tamara Gajst|talk]]) 14:23, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== Materials that can be used ==<br />
<br />
These are Finnish (focusing on Helsinki) discussions or proposals about congestion charge. The web pages are linked through Google translator so that the text shown is automatically translated text from Finnish to English. Mostly it works fine, but be aware of mistakes.<br />
* The environmental council of the city of Helsinki suggests (9th May 2017) that regional congestion charges should be available for cities and the cities also should get the money collected. [https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fi&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hel.fi%2Fstatic%2Fpublic%2Fhela%2FYmparistolautakunta%2FSuomi%2FEsitys%2F2017%2FYmk_2017-05-09_Ylk_8_El%2FF4C8DD44-AC2B-CD53-90B4-5BB46AD00000%2FAloite_valtiolle_lakimuutoksen_puolesta_joka_salli.html&edit-text=&act=url]<br />
* Osmo Soininvaara, a member of Helsinki City Council, suppports congestion charges. These are his arguments:<br />
** 3rd April 2017: congestion charges are effective in reducing traffic jams, they reduce emissions, and they collect money for the city. [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.soininvaara.fi%2F2017%2F04%2F03%2Fkaupunkirakentamisen-aika-35-ruuhkamaksut%2F]<br />
** 4th April 2017: even if a congestion charge punishes poor people (who can afford to sit in the current traffic jams but cannot afford the charges), the benefits (see previous point) spread to the whole community. [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.soininvaara.fi%2F2017%2F04%2F04%2Fkaupunkirakentamisen-aika-38-kuka-hyotyy-ruuhkamaksusta-koyhat-pois-rikkaiden-tielta%2F]<br />
* The Helsinki Regional Transport Agency HSL is planning congestion charges. News from February 2016.<br />
** Yle [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fyle.fi%2Fuutiset%2F3-8662824]<br />
** HSL:s own news [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.hsl.fi%2Fuutiset%2F2016%2Ftiemaksut-varmistaisivat-helsingin-seudun-kestavan-kasvun-7995]<br />
** Helsingin uutiset (a local newspaper) [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.helsinginuutiset.fi%2Fartikkeli%2F363860-ruuhkamaksut-kayttoon-ehka-jo-2020-kartta-nain-ne-vaikuttavat-sinuun]<br />
* Report on congestion charges in Helsinki, 2016 [https://www.hsl.fi/sites/default/files/uploads/ajoneuvoliikenteen_hinnoitteluselvitys_2016_en.pdf]<br />
* Background report on congestion charges, 2015 (in Finnish with English summary) [https://www.hsl.fi/sites/default/files/uploads/hsl_julkaisu_4_2016_ajoneuvoliikenteen_hinnoitteluselvitys_teknistoiminnallinen.pdf]<br />
* Autoliitto (Car Drivers' Association) opposes congestion charge in Helsinki (2009) [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fyle.fi%2Fuutiset%2F3-5911660], (2011) [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.autoliitto.fi%2Fen%2Ftiedote%2Fsuurimpia-karsijoita-olisivat-alueen-omat-veronmaksajat-ja-elinkeinoelama-ruuhkamaksut]<br />
** Hannu Oskala argues against Autoliitto's statements (2012) [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fhannuoskala.fi%2F2012%2F04%2Fautoliitto-ja-ruuhkamaksut%2F]<br />
* Summary page of HSL material about congestion charge (mostly Finnish only) [https://www.hsl.fi/tiemaksut]<br />
* Helsingin kaupunki. Ruuhkamaksut tehokkain keino parantaa Helsingin ilmanlaatua nopeasti. (12.01.2017) [http://www.hel.fi/www/uutiset/fi/ymparistokeskus/ruuhkamaksut-12012017]<br />
* HSL (11.2.2016): Tiemaksut varmistaisivat Helsingin seudun kestävän kasvun [https://www.hsl.fi/uutiset/2016/tiemaksut-varmistaisivat-helsingin-seudun-kestavan-kasvun-7995]<br />
** Helsingin Sanomat [http://www.hs.fi/kaupunki/art-2000002885425.html]<br />
** Helsingin Uutiset [http://www.helsinginuutiset.fi/artikkeli/363860-ruuhkamaksut-kayttoon-ehka-jo-2020-kartta-nain-ne-vaikuttavat-sinuun]<br />
** Kauppalehti-blogi [http://blog.kauppalehti.fi/metrossanukkuja/ruuhkamaksu-voi-olla-maailman-tyhmin-idea]<br />
* LVM. (2011) Helsingin seudun ruuhkamaksu. Jatkoselvitys. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 5/2011. [http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-243-214-8]<br />
* LVM. (2007). Joukkoliikenteen houkuttelevuuden ja käytön lisääminen eri liikkujaryhmissä. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 63/2007. [http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-201-954-7]<br />
** Talouselämä-uutiskommentti [http://www.talouselama.fi/uutiset/ruuhkamaksu-rankaisee-koyhaa-3388061]<br />
* LVM. Tienkäyttömaksujärjestelmät. Esiselvitys. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 17/2006. [http://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/78730/Julkaisuja_17_2006.pdf?sequence=1]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Scientific articles about congestion charge and health<br />
*{{doi|10.1126/science.aaf3420}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.jth.2015.08.002}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1080/09640568.2014.912615}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.tra.2015.03.004}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.01.002}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.09.015}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1080/13547500902965252}}<br />
*{{doi|10.5172/impp.453.10.2-3.269}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.amepre.2006.03.030}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1136/jech.2003.012385}}<br />
<br />
=== Translations from the Finnish assessment report [https://www.hsl.fi/sites/default/files/uploads/hsl_julkaisu_4_2016_ajoneuvoliikenteen_hinnoitteluselvitys_teknistoiminnallinen.pdf]===<br />
<br />
====2.4 Eligibility of pricing====<br />
<br />
Economics theories, designing measures, and impact assessments are usually normative analyzes that answer the question of what should be done. An alternative, positive approach alternative describes institutional (situations based on habitual systems and organizational structures) where only certain things can be done, that is, acceptable. Decision-making systems are combinations of normative and positive operating environments.<br />
<br />
For example, in London, the main parties objected to setting a congestion charge. However, in 2003, a Mayor-independent candidate, Ken Livingstone, who had promised to implement congestion charges, was elected as mayor. The mayor of London has executive powers in such matters, where the views of the main parties were irrelevant. Before the mayoral elections, the Labor Party had separated Livingstone and set a formal candidate, but it did not end in the election. London congestion charges proved to be a success, and in the subsequent mayoral elections, Livingstone was again the Labor Party's official candidate and won the election.<br />
<br />
The political backdrop of the Stockholm congestion charge test, on the other hand, was based on the fact that the Swedish Green Party promised support for the Social Democrats' government if a congestion levy test was launched in Stockholm. In this case too, wider political and regional decision-making was largely ignored. The government that made the payments was lost in elections, but despite this, the new Swedish government decided to stabilize Stockholm's congestion charges because the benefits of the scheme were clear and the public opinion had turned to the side of the payments.<br />
<br />
London and Stockholm congestion charges are good examples of pricing-related decision-making and policy specificities. Göteborg's decision-making has progressed through a wider process. London and Stockholm congestion charges are also good examples of how fast the resistance to congestion charges can turn out to be accepted when the positive effects of the payment start to appear.<br />
<br />
Economics theory, studies and practical experience show that road tolls are a useful tool for transport policy. However, road user charges and congestion charges have not yet reached a well-established position in politics. The main reason is that they have no widespread support from citizens and politicians. The admissibility of road user fees is a challenge. In the 2007 study "Effects of Land Use Fees in Finland. Preliminary study "(LVM publications 35/2007), the subject matter was widely considered.<br />
<br />
Congestion as a phenomenon and vehicle pricing as a measure are complicated things to understand. For example, car makers do not always consider pricing as a particularly effective means of reducing congestion as they misjudge the volume of traffic that needs to be reduced in order for traffic to flow without congestion. The formation of congestion is a complex phenomenon and it is difficult to estimate the total number of traffic and disadvantages. Generally, it is estimated that the reduction target would be about 50%, even if the congestion would be eliminated by a 15% reduction. This is because the congestion increases steeply when the bus reaches its capacity.<br />
<br />
Congestion charges also tend to be strong opposition, as motorists feel that they are the victims of congestion and are not the cause of the congestion, and therefore the management of demand through payments is seen to be unfair. Even if one extra minute does not seem like a lot, 1500 more people in the same band feel the same. Every new car driver who travels to the crowd will, in addition to the slowdown in the journey they are experiencing, also have an additional extra delay.<br />
<br />
It is easier to accept individual access fees for bridge, tunnel or new lanes, as it is easy for people to experience the benefits of a new connection or service that is cost-effective. The admissibility of congestion charges increases, if the implementation of the payment involves improving the quality of the transport system, for example in the form of bottleneck investments. Generally, in the ex-post evaluation, approval will be greatly enhanced when it is seen that demand control works and mobility is more smooth even through concrete investments financed through pricing.<br />
<br />
Opinion polls show that the use of premium revenue is a very important factor for the acceptability of road user charges. Support for payment systems will increase considerably if it is decided beforehand that the premium revenue will be redirected to traffic. Usually, people consider it important to allocate premium revenue to the development of public transport, traffic routes and environmental damage reduction. It has also been found that improving the living environment and increasing road safety will greatly increase acceptance of payments. Instead, allocating funds to lowering other taxes or filling the state budget is not considered acceptable.<br />
<br />
People must also have options for using a newly priced car. This is why, for example, congestion charges usually involve improving public transport, which must take place at the latest at the same time as congestion charges are introduced. Equality and fairness issues are important to people, and they must be told how these things are resolved.<br />
<br />
The acceptability of pricing is also often undermined by the fact that citizens often see new payments as a new tax in addition to the existing ones. Taxes on transport are largely based on fiscal criteria, but because the level of taxes also affects mobility, it would be good to look at their welfare effects critically while deciding on pricing. It should be noted, however, that as a source of funding, the fuel tax is efficient due to its small collection costs and operates in the same way as pricing, especially in relation to performance-based external costs, especially outside congested urban areas. Effective control effects can be obtained by targeting pricing correctly in relation to the existing disadvantages and the potential benefits of potential mobility. For example, the fuel tax on steadily consuming every liter of fuel consumed is not an effective control in this respect.<br />
<br />
The key objective for business life is that the logistics costs can be lowered. In delivery chains, timing has a particularly high weight. In Stockholm, for example, the congestion fee reduced the logistical costs of business life and the distribution of deliveries went more efficiently. If road transport charges increase the cost of transport, they should significantly increase the service level.<br />
<br />
One argument against congestion charges is regional competition. Centers' shops are already competing with out-of-town shopping centers and, therefore, retailers in the city are afraid that congestion charges for city centers will strengthen the competitive position of external shopping centers. In practice, such effects have not been observed, for example, in Stockholm (Daunfelt et al., 2009), but the effects of the London congestion charge zone were noticeable (Quddus et al., 2007). However, it should be remembered that the attractiveness of commercial services in central cities is also negatively affected by the congested transport system.<br />
<br />
Growth in trade can ultimately lead to a more self-reliant community structure. However, the situation may also be the opposite. Better smooth traffic and improved public transport can bring more customers to the malls. For example, in Stockholm, sales of the downtown shopping center increased by 6 percent during the congestion charge test.<br />
<br />
One of the basic issues related to road charges is justice, which is defined in different ways, often based on personal circumstances and experience. Often, the fear is that congestion charges reduce the number of trips that are deemed necessary. These include trips to nearby shops, schools and the hospital. Tolls are seen to increase inequality and low-income mobility. However, these disadvantages may be reduced by means of timing of payments or by various compensation methods (eg limiting the number of payments or developing the supply and quality of alternative means of payment).<br />
<br />
New technologies raises doubts about functionality issues, complexity, and cost. Endangering privacy is a particularly sensitive issue in connection with new technologies. As stated in Chapter 4.3.5, security and privacy can, however, be managed in an acceptable manner, which is of paramount importance in the case of a mandatory tax or charge imposed by an authority.<br />
<br />
====3. Methods and premises ====<br />
'''3.1 Assessment frame<br />
<br />
The criteria for selecting the technical pricing model in Chapter 4 and the price levels were as follows:<br />
*Impact on goals.<br />
*Impact on social economy.<br />
*The amount of revenue required for investments in the HLJ strategy.<br />
*The feasibility of the system (including the ratio between system revenue and depreciation / operating costs) and risks.<br />
*Understandability and acceptability of the system, impact and price level (including the breakdown).<br />
<br />
The whole transport system options defined by the working group were compared on the basis of an even larger scale of frameworks, where the objectives of the HLJ Plan and of the more general MAL process were compiled into the framework of Table 1.<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Evaluation framework for Helsinki transport strategy<br />
|----<br />
! Focus areas|| Announced HJL/MAL target|| Criteria<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Functionality of the transport system|| Congestion is under control<br />
|rowspan="19"|<br />
* Socio-economic cost-effectiveness of the region/transport system<br />
* Direction of influence, significance and focus on different user groups and regions.<br />
|----<br />
|| Travel times predictable<br />
|----<br />
|| Travel and transportation chains smooth near and far<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Significant environmental impacts|| The disadvantages and loads of traffic will be reduced<br />
|----<br />
|| Exposure to noise and emissions is reduced<br />
|----<br />
|| Climate targets are achieved<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| The development of sustainable mobility|| The competitiveness of public transport is improving<br />
|----<br />
|| Cycling is tempting and smooth<br />
|----<br />
|| Moving safe in all modes<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Growth direction and accessibility|| The need for mobility decreases<br />
|----<br />
|| Accessibility of sustainable modes<br />
|----<br />
|| Accessibility of car traffic is improved<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| HS competitiveness and economic impact|| An attractive, versatile and functional region<br />
|----<br />
|| Business conditions are safeguarded<br />
|----<br />
|| Job Mobility and Customer Accessibility Improves<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Social endurance|| Transport costs remain reasonable<br />
|----<br />
|| Everyday travel options for different needs<br />
|----<br />
|| Dependence on cars is reduced<br />
|----<br />
|colspan="2"| The investment and operating costs of the system, feasibility and risks as well as the financial aspect<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
====9 Conclusions====<br />
'''Pricing of vehicle traffic is based on the challenge posed by the growth of the transport system<br />
<br />
As stated in chapters 3 and 4, for the functioning of the transport system, there is a congestion in the current state of the road network which would be good to remove for the functionality and competitiveness of the region, as the efficiency of the transport system is weakened by congestion by<br />
* travel times increasing,<br />
* the predictability of travel times deteriorating,<br />
* the need for equipment increasing and<br />
* accidents and emissions increasing.<br />
<br />
The traffic congestion now focuses on all radial routes, Ring Road I and the city center.<br />
Growth in the region is aggravated by the congestion of the road network, which is not managed by the means currently in use. It is important to note that, according to the analysis, the structure and demand of the road network capacity are imbalanced; Part of the network runs smoothly and the capacity is not necessarily effective, and on the other hand some of the network has clear operational problems.<br />
<br />
However, the congestion caused by the growth of the region has to be controlled by the functionality and competitiveness of the region. Congestion will only ease in the future for cycles for which the HLJ 2015 Plan has targeted capacity-building measures, for example on Tuusulanväylä between Ring Road III and Ring Road I and in the middle of Ring Road I, but at the whole network level, the congestion will not ease in the 2025 situation but worsens compared to the current situation. A significant increase in the capacity of the entire car traffic network is costly and would further increase car traffic, for example, from public transport.<br />
<br />
'''Financial control is proof that it is an effective way of balancing the demand for transport to take advantage of the service level offered by the entire transport system<br />
<br />
The functionality of pricing guidance is based on a number of Nordic, European and international examples, which are presented in Chapter 2. Pricing of vehicle traffic is an effective means of managing congestion as:<br />
* The journey moves to sustainable modes of transport. Particularly for longer journeys to public transport, the average length of journeys increases especially for public transport journeys, and the structure of the region is compressed into rampways.<br />
* Car traffic is redirected as cars are shorter and out of the highest priced areas. In the long term, land use based on accessibility of the car in the region also adapts to steering, concentrating the regional structure closer to the workplace concentrations and efficient rail transport.<br />
* Pricing drives motorists out of congested lanes, causing congestion to diminish, fluency improves. Some drivers can take advantage of improved fluency to meet their mobility needs more effectively.<br />
* In addition, the bottleneck investments made possible by pricing benefits make it possible for the entire network to be smoother and more efficient loading and to keep the need for pricing control reasonably priced.<br />
<br />
'''There are several technical options for tolls and their functionality is linked to the whole transport system and land use<br />
<br />
Pricing is a key component of the HJL 2015 strategy, which was not investigated at the time of the plan but by way of example by relying on a functional model of the LVM congestion charge (2009), based on satellite-based technology. This study covered a number of active road toll models for transport (Chapter 4).<br />
<br />
According to the study, the working group decided to evaluate the effects of a single pricing model based on the gate zones, which according to the study team was the most economical, clear and efficient model from the different perspectives studied. The lines formed by payment cards follow, for example, the boundaries of the new public transport ticketing and taxation systems, and payments are staggered so that the traffic orientation is in balance with the transportability of the transport system.<br />
<br />
However, during the evaluation process, it was noted that if the level of pricing is matched to the social economy correctly and bottleneck investments are planned based on this demand, the road network will utilize more users with more naturally mobile mobility needs. In this case, the disadvantages of pricing (additional cost) and benefits (time savings) are better balanced.<br />
<br />
From the point of view of control, it is also worthwhile collecting charges where the external costs occur and its level and the disadvantages disappear. The model included in the impact assessment was also studied as a sensitivity review for larger versions that were found to have positive effects. At the same time, it is also worthwhile to make road network bottlenecks in order to provide useful traffic to the road network without jeopardizing the flow of traffic, without requiring pricing guidance as much as the entire network is in effective use. Public transport projects, on the other hand, will safeguard the level of service of those who move from the road network by means of guidance (otherwise the congestion).<br />
<br />
The best performance of vehicle pricing is ultimately linked to its role in the development of the entire transport system and land use, which should be balanced as a whole. The key conclusion of the technical review is that although the study has examined various primitive port models and their implications, it will be possible to plan and evaluate almost unlimitedly different combinations of gate positions and pay levels for which a more complete overall solution can be found than it was now. In any further planning, it is important to thoroughly analyze the pricing system at its best as part of the entire transport system plan and also the land use planning.<br />
<br />
'''The effects of the area level impact of the investigated functional pricing model clearly support the achievement of the regional development objectives as part of the HLJ 2015 Plan and its MAL Framework<br />
<br />
The effects of the package of measures, which are examined in Chapter 5, are summarized in Table 5. As has been noted in previous national road toll surveys and international follow-up studies, the analyzes carried out show that vehicle pricing is a viable solution to future problems and set targets. It is particularly effective in safeguarding the functionality and sustainability of the regional transport system. The general improvement in traffic flow caused by passenger car bidding also benefits transport activities. This report does not assume or estimate the impact of payments for goods and distribution traffic. The whole set of measures is economically viable. In other respects, the situation is more complex.<br />
<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 5. Summary of Impact of the Pricing Procedure (VE1).<br />
|----<br />
! Focus areas<br />
| <br />
! A summary of the implications for the region's objectives<br />
! General additional criteria <br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Functionality of the transport system<br />
| +<br />
| Congestion in the fully used road network is controlled by control and bottleneck investments.<br />
|rowspan="24"|<br />
* An explored package of measures that includes a variety of measures in addition to pricing guidance is also economically viable (+ 20M € / yr)<br />
* The direction, significance and direction of impacts on different user groups and regions require further development of the functional model and compensation mechanisms.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| The travel times of the main freeways are about 10% shorter and are much more predictable thanks to guidance.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Transport chains are smoother, freight traffic does not pay. The level of bus service increases as quality corridors are not crowded.<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Significant environmental impacts<br />
| +<br />
| Traffic disadvantages and environmental loads are reduced by about 5%.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Vehicle noise reduction and emission sources are reduced by 5 or 8%.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Reduction of vehicle speeds reduces carbon dioxide emissions by 3 or 5%, making the achievement of climate targets more likely.<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| The development of sustainable mobility<br />
| +<br />
| The competitiveness of public transport improves, 100,000 more<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| The attractiveness of walking and cycling is increasing, as evidenced by a 2 percentage point increase in the share.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Mobility is safer since vehicle accidents are reduced by 4 or 8%.<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="4"| Growth direction and accessibility<br />
| +<br />
| The need for mobility decreases, as the region is compacted and the trips are reduced by 1 or 3%.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| SAVU accessibility for sustainable modes will be greatly improved thanks to the investment made possible by road tolls.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Car travel time gains are improved as speeds increase and average travel times are reduced by 5 or 8%.<br />
|----<br />
| -<br />
| Total accessibility decreases as tolls are experienced as a travel disadvantage.<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="6"| HS competitiveness and economic impact<br />
| +<br />
| The region remains attractive, functional and therefore competitive as the public transport service level, road network quality, congestion management and international connections improve.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Impact on Business / Logistics: The operating conditions of City Logistics will improve and there will be no significant changes to national logistics.<br />
|----<br />
| +/-<br />
| Impact on business / trade: The parent city and the districts of KUUMA municipalities will be strengthened as service centers. The attractiveness of the shopping districts of Ring Road I-III is weakened.<br />
|----<br />
| +/-<br />
| Impact on business life / jobs: The attractiveness of the capital city is improving and the attractiveness of the work centers in southern Espoo and Kehä I-III is weakened.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Mobility and customer satisfaction is improving.<br />
|----<br />
| -<br />
| Costs lower the reachability.<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="4"| Social endurance<br />
| +/-<br />
| Transport costs remain reasonable.<br />
|----<br />
| -<br />
| Low-cost mobility costs are increasing in some areas.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| There are alternatives for different travel needs<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Dependence on cars decreases<br />
|----<br />
|colspan="3"| The investment and operating costs of the zone port system are 20 - 25 M € / yr. The tested functional model is good for feasibility and risk management. The use of toll income as a new financial asset (net of € 150 million / year or € 80 million / year) is an essential part of profitability from a regional point of view.<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<br />
Although the need for mobility in the direction of the growth of the entire region decreases and the travel time gains of SAVU and car traffic in sustainable modes improve, the monetary growth of the toll charges is necessarily felt as a decrease in overall accessibility, which is a disadvantage. Pricing and transport system development measures also affect the growth directions of the region, as the relative accessibility of the regions will inevitably change. It is still likely that further development of a functional model and compensation mechanisms will be required in order to have the direction, significance and targeting desired.<br />
<br />
Comparing the alternative to VE0 60% of the population in the Helsinki region lives in regions where the effect of pricing is neutral, ie the difference between alternatives is small. In regions with attractive pricing disadvantages, one fifth of residents live and the same share lives in areas of healing power.<br />
<br />
One fifth of the jobs are located in regions whose pricing behavior has a detrimental effect on the comparison option and a quarter of them are in the areas of healing attractiveness. The differences are very large between regions in the metropolitan area. One third of Helsinki's jobs are in areas of improving attractiveness, while in Espoo the figure is one tenth, and in Vantaa none. Nearly 60% in Vantaa and 45% of jobs in the Espoo and Kauniainen districts are located in regions whose attraction decreases; In Helsinki, there are a dozen jobs in these areas. In the area of the Railway-KUUMA, the jobs are divided into half between the neutral and improving areas of attraction. Bus-KUUMA's jobs are located in almost completely neutral areas.<br />
<br />
Shopping and business trips are made mostly off peak hours on weekdays, so the toll rate for the pricing model is lower, as well as at weekends when no toll is charged. For this reason, pricing affects less fluency in mobility and on the other hand, payload is lower than on commuting. According to the results, however, the impact of pricing on the attractiveness of trading and service areas is strongly biased. Households direct their trips to neighboring areas as well as to the best accessible public transport concentrations at the expense of car-based mergers. The center of gravity of the Nuclear Power Center is increasing, but tolls in other parts of the city do not have a significant impact. Pricing does not undermine the conditions for new service concentrations in the city center. The impact is positive for the attractiveness of the service centers and local services of KUUMA municipalities.<br />
<br />
Competitiveness criteria that are commonly used in international competitiveness and well-being in cities are the public transport service level, road network quality, congestion management and international connections. A pricing package is a prerequisite for a Competitiveness Comprehensive Plan. The problem is the increase in traffic costs, which is not necessarily a big problem in the whole, as toll revenue can be directed as desired. However, it is clear that if returns are not returned to the region and are properly targeted, pricing is a risk to the region's competitiveness.<br />
<br />
Although pricing increases the cost of motoring, they are not expected to grow unreasonably in terms of social sustainability. Improved accessibility supports the attractiveness of residential areas and a balanced demographic structure. The accessibility of services and jobs through sustainable forms of travel will be improved. The development of centers and nodes supports the maintenance of services. Choices for car non-moving are improving. The accessibility of the transport system will be improved.<br />
<br />
The investigated functional gateway model is better than new types of mileage models for repayment, feasibility and risk management.<br />
<br />
'''The focus of the impacts on different groups and regions requires a functional model and its price levels to be adjusted, supported or compensated mechanisms<br />
<br />
Factors that may have an impact on the growth of the region's growth orientation and the potential for competitiveness are related to targeting effects. For example, the deterioration of the tractive power of the Ring Road / Ring Road III and the rise in commuting costs for workers in low-income workers in the service and production sectors.<br />
<br />
In particular, the relationship between pricing on land use and the potential to eliminate or mitigate relative regional handicaps to business life should also be clarified. In the future, the number of payment points, ie the number of frames and cross lines, and the amount of payments should be studied for the vitality and tax revenue of the municipality. Even though the premium income would be lost, employment and other tax revenue in the larger sense, for example in Vantaa, would be the road or the effects of financing road projects.<br />
<br />
In this regard, it is worth considering first reducing the target level of pricing financing. Raising the level of funding typically leads to pricing being not optimal for the steering effect and social economy. The pricing option, where tolls are half of the VE1 option, mitigates the deteriorating effect of pricing habitation in areas where the effect on relative accessibility is negative with the tested alternative. The lower pay level also has fewer and fewer areas of accessibility than the areas of weakened workplace accessibility.<br />
<br />
Relatively weakening regions can be supported by adjusting the form of pricing zones and the level of payments across the payment system and also by investments. The comparison option VE0 is, on the one hand, only one possible growth orientation growth scenario from many potential. Particularly, the regional development emphasis is reflected in the measures already taken, particularly in the areas of the Länsimetro and Ring Roads, where the accessibility of sustainable forms of transport is developing significantly from the situation in 2012. The relative accessibility impact of pricing is then reflected in comparison with option VE0, so that the accessibility and growth potential of some regions will deteriorate, even if compared to the current situation, they are more in favor of other regions in the region.<br />
<br />
'''The pricing model examined as part of the HLJ 2015 plan is economically viable<br />
<br />
According to the calculation in Chapter 6, the result of VE1 is EUR 19.5 million per year compared to the 0 + comparison option, which only executes projects that are running and (by 1.12.2015). However, in the case of pricing, the social economy net result is largely dependent on balancing the growth of motorists' costs and other objectives. The perceived disadvantage of the payment rises rapidly as fees and hence prices rise. When pricing is too strong, users' disadvantages and dissatisfaction grow faster than pricing revenue. Environmental and safety impacts and changes in operating costs and taxes are also included in the calculation.<br />
<br />
For this reason, chapter 5 also showed the variation of the model studied (VE3) where payments were halved. Alternative VE3's economic performance is EUR 32.4 million, or EUR 12.9 million more profitable than VE1. According to the socioeconomic calculation in Chapter 6, it is more efficient, as revenues fall less than the net disadvantages faced by users (payload and time and cost savings of congestion).<br />
<br />
Profitability and fairness of the model's end-to-end model can be further developed. Sensitivity reviews give this a look. For example, pricing guidance and bottleneck investments are an entity in which they affect each other's needs. If investment is carried out without pricing, bottlenecks can be dismantled, but the region's growth is still causing new congestion problems across the road network. If a mere pricing action is made, the road network may be under-utilized.<br />
<br />
Sensitivity assessments also show that the socio-economic cost-effectiveness of vehicle pricing and the need to secure the functioning of the road network will grow significantly if vehicle traffic is growing faster than expected in the forecasts of the calculations. This is also the case if funding for the development of the transport system is unsuccessful as planned, public transport ticket prices will have to increase or economic growth will accelerate, increasing the mobility of residents. The financing levels of the HLJ 2015 Plan and also the Comparative Option are fairly goal-oriented compared to the project-specific so-called " 0+ compared to the benchmarking principles. On the other hand, the need for pricing is reduced if the use of the car becomes more expensive or otherwise decreases.<br />
<br />
Time-sensitivity assessments of the differences in efficiency between vehicle traffic and the current 2025 and 2040 demand situation in the current situation (2012) also showed that the need for pricing is constantly increasing. The social cost of the pricing model studied in 2040 was many times higher than in 2025. However, because of the roughness of the calculations, the "right moment" is difficult to determine accurately.<br />
<br />
The conclusions drawn from the relative differences between the investigated comparative scenarios are clear, but the net results of the socioeconomic calculations have to be taken into account in the reserve since the calculations still involve a number of uncertainties and development needs, which are dealt with in Chapter 3.<br />
<br />
'''The financial impact of tolls is significant<br />
<br />
Payment levels also determine the revenue of the pricing, which is also part of the HLJ strategy in terms of funding. The impact of the question on the comparison of alternatives depends, of course, on the extent of the investment program and other measures, their financial need and how the costs of financing are taken into account in decision-making.<br />
<br />
The set return target includes a provision of 55 million to cover the higher cost of demand for public transport that may result in pricing and a general increase in service levels. For example, in Stockholm pricing has led to a drop in the number of trips and the impact on public transport was less than predicted. Investment levels also depend on both the profitability of the projects and the more general consideration of the financial level of the sensible region. If possible further studies lead to similar conclusions, it may be taken into account in the future definition of the yield level.<br />
<br />
'''The technical feasibility of pricing is good with the tested model<br />
<br />
The study did not detect any technical feasibility problems that would prevent the implementation of the investigated zone report system if it were decided to take action. Systems have been in use elsewhere for many years. The charging system is a combination of IT technology (computers, software and connection devices) and physical devices in the roadside and in cars. The average life span of technology is 5-8 years.<br />
<br />
On the other hand, the feasibility of a mileage system would be a question mark as there is no experience in passenger transport. With regard to technology, decision-making should be guided by operational needs, predictability of implementation costs and sufficiency of the payment system. Ideal system may have to wait a long time.<br />
<br />
The technical solutions described in this report can be considered to represent traditional or near-known solutions for the coming years. If you are looking for performance-based satellite positioning charges for passenger cars (which are nowhere), then a traditional vehicle solution solution is unlikely to be likely for many reasons. A separate retrofit vehicle device is quite expensive and can only be used in the form of a single service, ie tolls. The current implementations are all for heavy traffic. In this case, the vehicles to be equipped are much less and the resulting costs can be included in the freight rates and thus transferred to customers.<br />
<br />
On the one hand, technology development can be the doorstep, where new technologies will soon be possible. Different contexts have been considered for example. The potential of smartphones or navigators with regard to the pay-per-view. Already today, a passenger car with a few people may be able to ride several GPS devices: one smartphone per passenger, a navigator used by the driver, and several other devices, such as PCs or tablets. However, these can not yet be used to pay tolls that have their own requirements for safety and reliability. The road toll solution also includes a credible surveillance solution. It is therefore necessary to develop a new overall concept, taking into account the specific requirements of road tolls. From the point of view of the implementer, the situation is ultimately the following: a) Better solutions are expected, ie time when new, yet unknown solutions are viable, b) Do the risk of the developer or first-ever developer in the highly global application-oriented sector, or c) Whether it is available at decision-making, Is reasonably priced, fairly risk-free and stays on schedule.<br />
<br />
In connection with the toll road system in the Helsinki region, A possible nationwide system, whereby the role of mileage may change because the system is highly scalable. In this situation, the size of the Helsinki region's scale of systemic cost savings will change significantly in relation to the collection fees.<br />
<br />
It is still important to note that even though the recovery technology will later be "better", almost everything else remains intact, such as the basis for the payment and the use of revenues, legislation, organizational solutions (payer and system operator), sales network, surveillance technology, May pose new requirements. Technology choice is therefore not virtually bound by the solution in a very long time, and the pricing model examined in the study is likely to be implemented with both conventional technology and GNSS-based gravity technology. It is also important to note that a possible solution based on a license plate interpretation can be utilized in the control system if you switch to a satellite positioning system, for example.<br />
<br />
'''The introduction requires further action<br />
<br />
As noted above, the technical features of the priced pricing model can be further developed in many ways. Decision-making may also require the development of socio-economic evaluation methods. This should be done in the HLJ / MAL context, because optimal control depends naturally on what else in the region is decided to do. Not all of the technical specifications set out in Chapter 4 have been sensible at this stage, such as<br />
* Increase in peak hourly payouts according to the development of traffic jams,<br />
* Validity periods,<br />
* Daytime shears,<br />
* Vehicle categories subject to payment,<br />
* Handling occasional car drivers,<br />
* Security and security<br />
* Potential value-added services.<br />
<br />
You should only return to these if you decide to proceed with the planning of the action. Only then will you be able to design technical details.<br />
<br />
Some of the questions are those that require more detailed assessment methods because the evaluation method used to investigate the impact of strategic regional investment (HELMET) is virtually impossible as a traffic analysis of the two hourly and hourly hourly conversations, and much of the impact assessment is based on various extensions of these results. The modeling method does not allow for a more accurate analysis of these periods or sufficient analysis of other periods, rather than linking time groups to people, so that the targeting effects can not be reliably investigated. In this respect, only the simulation of direct impacts was based on a separate method.<br />
<br />
Implementation path requires its own discretion and impact assessment. The zone gate system can be constructed, for example, in stages, starting from the inner frames, so that the alternative models in Chapter 4 will work in the "series".<br />
<br />
'''Alternative means do not replace the pricing guidance presented in HLJ 2015<br />
<br />
The analysis of Chapter 8 shows that alternative, sufficiently impressive package solutions in the light of the growth of the region is difficult to elaborate and analyze using existing methods. Investments did not prove to be effective measures to compensate for vehicle traffic control and the calculation of public transport ticket prices was considered unrealistic without any idea of its financing. Parking policy has the same type of control and also financial impact as pricing, but it would require such comprehensive measures or policies as this can not be proposed by an expert in this study.<br />
<br />
The promotion of walking and cycling promoted by expert analysis could in itself be alternatives to vehicle pricing but would require more empirical information on the effectiveness of the measures and also the further development of methods for assessing the impact on transport system level so that their impact could be explored as part of the overall transport system.<br />
<br />
In the future, the effectiveness of interference management, movement control, services and intelligence will require more extensive and model-demanding reviews, which will only give a better idea of whether it can be used. Policies are further intensified so that pricing guidance is no longer needed as part of the HLJ strategy.<br />
<br />
The methods found in Chapter 8 have been mainly used by the HLJ 2015 process and no pricing has been found to be unnecessary at that stage, indicating the need for a measure. The resources of this study have not been able to make the overall program corresponding to the HLJ plan again, so the effects of the alternative strategy could not be estimated at the same level as in Chapter 5.<br />
<br />
It is also important to note that the impact of pricing does not contradict other development objectives of the transport system. Therefore, other measures should not be put in conflict with economic guidance, but the transport system and the whole community structure are a whole. All measures promoting the objectives support this whole and usually reinforce their synergy. This is also due to the fact that the effects of different measures are directed to the mechanisms of a different community structure, so their combinations can be designed so that the negative effects of a single action can be effectively mitigated. Half of the pricing can also be calculated by the fact that different compensation mechanisms are also possible, as net returns can be restored in the desired way back to society.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
<references/></div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=Talk:Congestion_charge&diff=40706Talk:Congestion charge2017-05-15T18:22:18Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Health effects, air quality and climate change */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Health effects, air quality and climate change ==<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Congestion charge scheme doesn't significantly affect air quality in cities.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{attack|# |Carbon footprint caused by stationary traffic or ‘vehicle idling’ resulting<br />
from gridlock across urbanized advanced economies. The fuel that is consumed while stationary in traffic<br />
results in higher emission of greenhouse gases and pollutants, which leads to poorer air quality,<br />
particularly in urban areas. <ref> [http://ibtta.org/sites/default/files/documents/MAF/Costs-of-Congestion-INRIX-Cebr-Report%20(3).pdf]</ref>|--[[User:Amr Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Amr Ebrahim|talk]]) 11:40, 28.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{defend|# | I support the noted argument that congestion charge could have a positive impact on quality. For instance, the congestion charge trial in Stockholm in 2006, based on measurements, it was estimated that this system resulted in a 15% reduction in total road use within the charged cordon. Total traffic emissions in this area of NOx and PM10 fell by 8.5% and 13%, respectively. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231008008091] </ref>|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk: Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 12:18, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
::{{attack|# | While Congestion pricing in Stockholm did reduce traffic emissions the reduction (especially along the most densely trafficked streets) was not sufficient for compliance with air quality standards. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231008008091] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:20, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{defend|# | I support the noted argument that congestion charge could have a positive impact on quality of air because a study of congestion pricing in Stockholm between 2006-2010 found that in the absence of congestion pricing that Stockholm's "air would have been five to ten percent more polluted between 2006 and 2010, and young children would have suffered 45 percent more asthma attacks . <ref> [https://www.insidescience.org/news/driving-fee-rolls-back-asthma-attacks-stockholm] </ref>|--[[User:edem agbenowu]] ([[User talk: edem agbenowu|talk]]) 12:18, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{defend|# | London Congestion pricing scheme brought significant reduction in the emissions of NOx and PM10 due to increased vehicle speed. Reduction in CO2 emissions was almost 20%. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231005007259] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 13:29, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# |By reduction of traffic flows, the release of several pollutant emissions also reduce over time. For example, Daniel and Bekka (2000) <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094119099921356?via%3Dihub]</ref> have showed that the emissions can decrease for 30% in highly congested parts of Delaware, US. |--[[User:Tamara Gajst]] ([[User talk:Tamara Gajst|talk]]) 13:36, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | While Congestion charge scheme initially reduced the number of vehicles entering central London, the congestion levels since 2012 were back at pre-2002 (pre-Congestion charge) levels. <ref> [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27199415] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:02, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# | Congestion charge scheme to a significant extend affect the reduction of of air pollution and promote air aquality according to Transport for London (TfL) Levels of nitrogen oxides (NOX), fell by 13.4% between 2002 & 2003, and carbon dioxide, as well as the levels of airborne particulates (PM10) within and alongside the congestion charge zone. According to the report from TfL since 2002, the nitrogen dioxide (NO2) produced by diesel exhaust has become a serious problem, reporting that the annual mean NO2 objective (of 40 μgm-3 or 21 ppb) was exceeded at all kerbside and roadside monitoring sites across central and greater London during 12 months between 2005 and 2006 and no areas within the Congestion Charge Zone reported NO2 levels above an upper limit of 200 μgm-3 (105 ppb). If this practice continue and also extended to other parts there will be great reduction in air pollution <ref> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge</ref>|--[[User:Margaret Arogunyo]] ([[User talk:Margaret Arogunyo|talk]]) 14:35, 15.5.2017}}<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Congestion charge scheme will improve the populations’ health. <br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Congestion scheme can encourage walking, cycling and using public transport, and may thereby reduce individual’s sedentary habits leading to an increase in populations physical activity that might affect the growing burden of obesity. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214140515006738] </ref>|--[[User:Tamara Gajst]] ([[User talk:Tamara Gajst|talk]]) 14:23, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{attack|# | Evidence for potential positive physical activity related health effects due to congestion pricing schemes is weak. <ref> [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16829328] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:28, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | Congestion charge can lead to reduction in road traffic related casualties and injuries.<ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856415000464] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:03, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{attack|# | Building roads with the intent of speeding up traffic usually generates extra traffic <ref> [http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.5172/impp.453.10.2-3.269] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:23, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | I think the discussion got out of context. When I wrote this statement I was referencing to the case of Helsinki. According to the summary of the environmental impact assessment of congestion charge in Helsinki, the decrease in the traffic carbon dioxide emission will range from 3% to 5%. The significance and the worthlessness of congestion charge implementation in Helsinki are questionable in environmental aspect especially if compared to other alternative, for instance: use of environment-friendly types of fuel. <ref> [https://www.hsl.fi/sites/default/files/uploads/ajoneuvoliikenteen_hinnoitteluselvitys_2016_en.pdf] </ref>|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk: Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 21:22, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}} <br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== Individual choice ==<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Congestion charge scheme constrains individual choice and behavior.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{attack|# |Urban dwellers are more geared towards behavioral adjustment, since they are aware of the dynamic of distributions of the costs of congestion on house hold and their societal sense of belonging. Therefore, the incidence of such costs and benefits affects the preferences and in turn the willingness to build coping strategies will emerge by acceptance. Hence this can only apply to urban dwellers the case with suburbia and rural surrounding still needs more attention.<ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361920997000035]</ref>|--[[User:Amr Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Amr Ebrahim|talk]]) 12:04, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# |Congestion scheme can promote sustainable mobility if the revenue is invested in public transportation infrastructure <ref> [http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09640568.2014.912615]</ref>.|--[[User:Tamara Gajst]] ([[User talk:Tamara Gajst|talk]]) 14:01, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{comment|# | In London Congestion charge scheme lead to increased use of public transport (50-60%), avoiding the areas (20-30%), car sharing (15-25%), reduced number of journeys, increased use of motorbikes and bicycles. <ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:11, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== Economy ==<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = The economic viability of tariffs and transformation of urban space will encourage more use of roads and cars.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{defend|#| Most economic decision in urbanized economical cities needs to overcome elements such as cost and convenience of toll collection, especially on down town streets. Nevertheless the regressive distributional impact, since lower income people spend a larger proportion of their income on commuting and have less work schedule flexibility, lack of trust in government to dispose of toll revenues wisely, and benefits that in some cases are so small as to be insignificant. These all can contribute for increased mileage attempting to look for either alternatives of escape the cost.<ref> [https://econ.ucsb.edu/~tedb/Courses/Ec1F07/traffic.pdf]</ref>|--[[User:Amr Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Amr Ebrahim|talk]]) 12:49, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# | 10 years after Congestion charge was implemented in London 10% reduction of traffic volumes was observed. <ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:28, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = congestion charge schemes can restrict urban mobility and human capital growth.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{defend|#|The tension between the demand side of transformation and the supply side of governance of cities with out a clear vision on urban transit can be problematic. The mobility towards more economic prosperous location is needed for economical growth, hence the increased living expense of commuting for a younger population can contribute to framing the city as economically hostile or expensive. more effort should be aimed toward different tariffs to different categories rather generalized schemes.<ref>[http://www.theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/congestion_apr10.pdf]</ref>|--[[User:Amr Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Amr Ebrahim|talk]]) 01:07, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# |In as much as mobility towards more economic prosperous location is needed for economic growth the delay associated with traffic could as well serve as disincentive for people to move into these locations.The faster someone can transact business in a location the more likely the individual will tend to conduct business in that location.Hence it might be difficult for younger population to see such places as economically hostile.Moreover as non-productive activity for most people, congestion reduces regional economic healt.<ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_congestion</ref>|--[[User:edem agbenowu]] ([[User talk:edem agbenowu|talk]]) 12:04, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# | 300 new buses and new or changed bus routes were introduced at the launch of London congestion charge scheme – showing that introduction of Congestion charge can increase the mobility and human capital growth. <ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:59, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:{{defend|# | Journey times in London reduced by 14% - indicating potential for increased mobility<ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_congestion_charge] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 14:08, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{comment|# | Accessibility and economic performance are closely related. Good accessibility can facilitate economic growth. <ref> [http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.5172/impp.453.10.2-3.269] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:05, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Toxicity charge as a form of congestion charge is unfair.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{defend|# |Older cars that do not meet Euro 4 standard paying an extra £10 charge on top of the congestion charge to drive in central London, within the Congestion Charge Zone is unfair because the fact that a car is old does not necessarily indicate that the emission levels are high <ref> [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/green-motoring/11187483/New-or-old-which-is-greener.html]</ref>|--[[User:Edem Agbenowu|Edem Agbenowu]]}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | People living within the congestion charge area shouldn’t pay the same amount as people driving there from outside. (i.e. In Milano residents have 40 free entries and after that discounted cost of 2 instead of 5 euros). <ref> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congestion_pricing] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:10, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | Only 10% of PM10 is due to exhaust emissions. Depending on the road the increase of driving speed may both increase or decrease the overall PM10 emissions. <ref> [http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10661-006-9296-4] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 13:45, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{attack|# | The ones responsible for the pollution should bear its price according to the “Polluter pays principle” <ref> [http://ec.europa.eu/environment/legal/law/pdf/principles/2%20Polluter%20Pays%20Principle_revised.pdf] </ref>|--[[User:Tine Bizjak]] ([[User talk: Tine Bizjak|talk]]) 15:14, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{comment|# |The purpose of congestion charge is to discourage traffic in the city centers but some mobile equipment do not have any emmission standard and by extension might not pay any congestion charge attributed with emissions in London examples are vehicles with less than 4 wheels, those with 2-stroke engines,hybrid vehicles,quadricycles but these means of transport could as well cause congestion in the city center <ref> [https://www.gov.uk/emissions-testing]</ref>|--[[User:Edem Agbenowu|Edem Agbenowu]] ([[User talk:Edem Agbenowu|talk]]) 04:42, 9 May 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = congestion charge prevents the occurrence of tragedy of the commons.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{defend|#|In any situation within a shared-resource system such as roads individual users acting independently according to their own self-interest behave contrary to the common good of all users by depleting or spoiling that resource through their collective action.The introduction of effective congestion charges will serve as a measures that may reduce congestion through economic incentives and disincentives <ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons]</ref>|--[[User:edem agbenowu]] ([[User talk:edem agbenowu|talk]]) 01:07, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = To ensure air quality standards, the congestion charge scheme needs to be dynamic.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
<br />
{{comment|# |Congestion charge should cover all seasons and hours of the day and should dynamically adapt according to meteorological conditions for pollution dispersion and contributions from different pollution sources. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856415000464] </ref>|--[[User:Tamara Gajst]] ([[User talk:Tamara Gajst|talk]]) 14:23, 15.5.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== Materials that can be used ==<br />
<br />
These are Finnish (focusing on Helsinki) discussions or proposals about congestion charge. The web pages are linked through Google translator so that the text shown is automatically translated text from Finnish to English. Mostly it works fine, but be aware of mistakes.<br />
* The environmental council of the city of Helsinki suggests (9th May 2017) that regional congestion charges should be available for cities and the cities also should get the money collected. [https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fi&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hel.fi%2Fstatic%2Fpublic%2Fhela%2FYmparistolautakunta%2FSuomi%2FEsitys%2F2017%2FYmk_2017-05-09_Ylk_8_El%2FF4C8DD44-AC2B-CD53-90B4-5BB46AD00000%2FAloite_valtiolle_lakimuutoksen_puolesta_joka_salli.html&edit-text=&act=url]<br />
* Osmo Soininvaara, a member of Helsinki City Council, suppports congestion charges. These are his arguments:<br />
** 3rd April 2017: congestion charges are effective in reducing traffic jams, they reduce emissions, and they collect money for the city. [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.soininvaara.fi%2F2017%2F04%2F03%2Fkaupunkirakentamisen-aika-35-ruuhkamaksut%2F]<br />
** 4th April 2017: even if a congestion charge punishes poor people (who can afford to sit in the current traffic jams but cannot afford the charges), the benefits (see previous point) spread to the whole community. [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.soininvaara.fi%2F2017%2F04%2F04%2Fkaupunkirakentamisen-aika-38-kuka-hyotyy-ruuhkamaksusta-koyhat-pois-rikkaiden-tielta%2F]<br />
* The Helsinki Regional Transport Agency HSL is planning congestion charges. News from February 2016.<br />
** Yle [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fyle.fi%2Fuutiset%2F3-8662824]<br />
** HSL:s own news [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.hsl.fi%2Fuutiset%2F2016%2Ftiemaksut-varmistaisivat-helsingin-seudun-kestavan-kasvun-7995]<br />
** Helsingin uutiset (a local newspaper) [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.helsinginuutiset.fi%2Fartikkeli%2F363860-ruuhkamaksut-kayttoon-ehka-jo-2020-kartta-nain-ne-vaikuttavat-sinuun]<br />
* Report on congestion charges in Helsinki, 2016 [https://www.hsl.fi/sites/default/files/uploads/ajoneuvoliikenteen_hinnoitteluselvitys_2016_en.pdf]<br />
* Background report on congestion charges, 2015 (in Finnish with English summary) [https://www.hsl.fi/sites/default/files/uploads/hsl_julkaisu_4_2016_ajoneuvoliikenteen_hinnoitteluselvitys_teknistoiminnallinen.pdf]<br />
* Autoliitto (Car Drivers' Association) opposes congestion charge in Helsinki (2009) [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fyle.fi%2Fuutiset%2F3-5911660], (2011) [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.autoliitto.fi%2Fen%2Ftiedote%2Fsuurimpia-karsijoita-olisivat-alueen-omat-veronmaksajat-ja-elinkeinoelama-ruuhkamaksut]<br />
** Hannu Oskala argues against Autoliitto's statements (2012) [https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fi&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fhannuoskala.fi%2F2012%2F04%2Fautoliitto-ja-ruuhkamaksut%2F]<br />
* Summary page of HSL material about congestion charge (mostly Finnish only) [https://www.hsl.fi/tiemaksut]<br />
* Helsingin kaupunki. Ruuhkamaksut tehokkain keino parantaa Helsingin ilmanlaatua nopeasti. (12.01.2017) [http://www.hel.fi/www/uutiset/fi/ymparistokeskus/ruuhkamaksut-12012017]<br />
* HSL (11.2.2016): Tiemaksut varmistaisivat Helsingin seudun kestävän kasvun [https://www.hsl.fi/uutiset/2016/tiemaksut-varmistaisivat-helsingin-seudun-kestavan-kasvun-7995]<br />
** Helsingin Sanomat [http://www.hs.fi/kaupunki/art-2000002885425.html]<br />
** Helsingin Uutiset [http://www.helsinginuutiset.fi/artikkeli/363860-ruuhkamaksut-kayttoon-ehka-jo-2020-kartta-nain-ne-vaikuttavat-sinuun]<br />
** Kauppalehti-blogi [http://blog.kauppalehti.fi/metrossanukkuja/ruuhkamaksu-voi-olla-maailman-tyhmin-idea]<br />
* LVM. (2011) Helsingin seudun ruuhkamaksu. Jatkoselvitys. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 5/2011. [http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-243-214-8]<br />
* LVM. (2007). Joukkoliikenteen houkuttelevuuden ja käytön lisääminen eri liikkujaryhmissä. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 63/2007. [http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-201-954-7]<br />
** Talouselämä-uutiskommentti [http://www.talouselama.fi/uutiset/ruuhkamaksu-rankaisee-koyhaa-3388061]<br />
* LVM. Tienkäyttömaksujärjestelmät. Esiselvitys. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 17/2006. [http://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/78730/Julkaisuja_17_2006.pdf?sequence=1]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Scientific articles about congestion charge and health<br />
*{{doi|10.1126/science.aaf3420}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.jth.2015.08.002}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1080/09640568.2014.912615}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.tra.2015.03.004}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.01.002}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.09.015}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1080/13547500902965252}}<br />
*{{doi|10.5172/impp.453.10.2-3.269}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.amepre.2006.03.030}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1136/jech.2003.012385}}<br />
<br />
=== Translations from the Finnish assessment report [https://www.hsl.fi/sites/default/files/uploads/hsl_julkaisu_4_2016_ajoneuvoliikenteen_hinnoitteluselvitys_teknistoiminnallinen.pdf]===<br />
<br />
====2.4 Eligibility of pricing====<br />
<br />
Economics theories, designing measures, and impact assessments are usually normative analyzes that answer the question of what should be done. An alternative, positive approach alternative describes institutional (situations based on habitual systems and organizational structures) where only certain things can be done, that is, acceptable. Decision-making systems are combinations of normative and positive operating environments.<br />
<br />
For example, in London, the main parties objected to setting a congestion charge. However, in 2003, a Mayor-independent candidate, Ken Livingstone, who had promised to implement congestion charges, was elected as mayor. The mayor of London has executive powers in such matters, where the views of the main parties were irrelevant. Before the mayoral elections, the Labor Party had separated Livingstone and set a formal candidate, but it did not end in the election. London congestion charges proved to be a success, and in the subsequent mayoral elections, Livingstone was again the Labor Party's official candidate and won the election.<br />
<br />
The political backdrop of the Stockholm congestion charge test, on the other hand, was based on the fact that the Swedish Green Party promised support for the Social Democrats' government if a congestion levy test was launched in Stockholm. In this case too, wider political and regional decision-making was largely ignored. The government that made the payments was lost in elections, but despite this, the new Swedish government decided to stabilize Stockholm's congestion charges because the benefits of the scheme were clear and the public opinion had turned to the side of the payments.<br />
<br />
London and Stockholm congestion charges are good examples of pricing-related decision-making and policy specificities. Göteborg's decision-making has progressed through a wider process. London and Stockholm congestion charges are also good examples of how fast the resistance to congestion charges can turn out to be accepted when the positive effects of the payment start to appear.<br />
<br />
Economics theory, studies and practical experience show that road tolls are a useful tool for transport policy. However, road user charges and congestion charges have not yet reached a well-established position in politics. The main reason is that they have no widespread support from citizens and politicians. The admissibility of road user fees is a challenge. In the 2007 study "Effects of Land Use Fees in Finland. Preliminary study "(LVM publications 35/2007), the subject matter was widely considered.<br />
<br />
Congestion as a phenomenon and vehicle pricing as a measure are complicated things to understand. For example, car makers do not always consider pricing as a particularly effective means of reducing congestion as they misjudge the volume of traffic that needs to be reduced in order for traffic to flow without congestion. The formation of congestion is a complex phenomenon and it is difficult to estimate the total number of traffic and disadvantages. Generally, it is estimated that the reduction target would be about 50%, even if the congestion would be eliminated by a 15% reduction. This is because the congestion increases steeply when the bus reaches its capacity.<br />
<br />
Congestion charges also tend to be strong opposition, as motorists feel that they are the victims of congestion and are not the cause of the congestion, and therefore the management of demand through payments is seen to be unfair. Even if one extra minute does not seem like a lot, 1500 more people in the same band feel the same. Every new car driver who travels to the crowd will, in addition to the slowdown in the journey they are experiencing, also have an additional extra delay.<br />
<br />
It is easier to accept individual access fees for bridge, tunnel or new lanes, as it is easy for people to experience the benefits of a new connection or service that is cost-effective. The admissibility of congestion charges increases, if the implementation of the payment involves improving the quality of the transport system, for example in the form of bottleneck investments. Generally, in the ex-post evaluation, approval will be greatly enhanced when it is seen that demand control works and mobility is more smooth even through concrete investments financed through pricing.<br />
<br />
Opinion polls show that the use of premium revenue is a very important factor for the acceptability of road user charges. Support for payment systems will increase considerably if it is decided beforehand that the premium revenue will be redirected to traffic. Usually, people consider it important to allocate premium revenue to the development of public transport, traffic routes and environmental damage reduction. It has also been found that improving the living environment and increasing road safety will greatly increase acceptance of payments. Instead, allocating funds to lowering other taxes or filling the state budget is not considered acceptable.<br />
<br />
People must also have options for using a newly priced car. This is why, for example, congestion charges usually involve improving public transport, which must take place at the latest at the same time as congestion charges are introduced. Equality and fairness issues are important to people, and they must be told how these things are resolved.<br />
<br />
The acceptability of pricing is also often undermined by the fact that citizens often see new payments as a new tax in addition to the existing ones. Taxes on transport are largely based on fiscal criteria, but because the level of taxes also affects mobility, it would be good to look at their welfare effects critically while deciding on pricing. It should be noted, however, that as a source of funding, the fuel tax is efficient due to its small collection costs and operates in the same way as pricing, especially in relation to performance-based external costs, especially outside congested urban areas. Effective control effects can be obtained by targeting pricing correctly in relation to the existing disadvantages and the potential benefits of potential mobility. For example, the fuel tax on steadily consuming every liter of fuel consumed is not an effective control in this respect.<br />
<br />
The key objective for business life is that the logistics costs can be lowered. In delivery chains, timing has a particularly high weight. In Stockholm, for example, the congestion fee reduced the logistical costs of business life and the distribution of deliveries went more efficiently. If road transport charges increase the cost of transport, they should significantly increase the service level.<br />
<br />
One argument against congestion charges is regional competition. Centers' shops are already competing with out-of-town shopping centers and, therefore, retailers in the city are afraid that congestion charges for city centers will strengthen the competitive position of external shopping centers. In practice, such effects have not been observed, for example, in Stockholm (Daunfelt et al., 2009), but the effects of the London congestion charge zone were noticeable (Quddus et al., 2007). However, it should be remembered that the attractiveness of commercial services in central cities is also negatively affected by the congested transport system.<br />
<br />
Growth in trade can ultimately lead to a more self-reliant community structure. However, the situation may also be the opposite. Better smooth traffic and improved public transport can bring more customers to the malls. For example, in Stockholm, sales of the downtown shopping center increased by 6 percent during the congestion charge test.<br />
<br />
One of the basic issues related to road charges is justice, which is defined in different ways, often based on personal circumstances and experience. Often, the fear is that congestion charges reduce the number of trips that are deemed necessary. These include trips to nearby shops, schools and the hospital. Tolls are seen to increase inequality and low-income mobility. However, these disadvantages may be reduced by means of timing of payments or by various compensation methods (eg limiting the number of payments or developing the supply and quality of alternative means of payment).<br />
<br />
New technologies raises doubts about functionality issues, complexity, and cost. Endangering privacy is a particularly sensitive issue in connection with new technologies. As stated in Chapter 4.3.5, security and privacy can, however, be managed in an acceptable manner, which is of paramount importance in the case of a mandatory tax or charge imposed by an authority.<br />
<br />
====3. Methods and premises ====<br />
'''3.1 Assessment frame<br />
<br />
The criteria for selecting the technical pricing model in Chapter 4 and the price levels were as follows:<br />
*Impact on goals.<br />
*Impact on social economy.<br />
*The amount of revenue required for investments in the HLJ strategy.<br />
*The feasibility of the system (including the ratio between system revenue and depreciation / operating costs) and risks.<br />
*Understandability and acceptability of the system, impact and price level (including the breakdown).<br />
<br />
The whole transport system options defined by the working group were compared on the basis of an even larger scale of frameworks, where the objectives of the HLJ Plan and of the more general MAL process were compiled into the framework of Table 1.<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Evaluation framework for Helsinki transport strategy<br />
|----<br />
! Focus areas|| Announced HJL/MAL target|| Criteria<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Functionality of the transport system|| Congestion is under control<br />
|rowspan="19"|<br />
* Socio-economic cost-effectiveness of the region/transport system<br />
* Direction of influence, significance and focus on different user groups and regions.<br />
|----<br />
|| Travel times predictable<br />
|----<br />
|| Travel and transportation chains smooth near and far<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Significant environmental impacts|| The disadvantages and loads of traffic will be reduced<br />
|----<br />
|| Exposure to noise and emissions is reduced<br />
|----<br />
|| Climate targets are achieved<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| The development of sustainable mobility|| The competitiveness of public transport is improving<br />
|----<br />
|| Cycling is tempting and smooth<br />
|----<br />
|| Moving safe in all modes<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Growth direction and accessibility|| The need for mobility decreases<br />
|----<br />
|| Accessibility of sustainable modes<br />
|----<br />
|| Accessibility of car traffic is improved<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| HS competitiveness and economic impact|| An attractive, versatile and functional region<br />
|----<br />
|| Business conditions are safeguarded<br />
|----<br />
|| Job Mobility and Customer Accessibility Improves<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Social endurance|| Transport costs remain reasonable<br />
|----<br />
|| Everyday travel options for different needs<br />
|----<br />
|| Dependence on cars is reduced<br />
|----<br />
|colspan="2"| The investment and operating costs of the system, feasibility and risks as well as the financial aspect<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
====9 Conclusions====<br />
'''Pricing of vehicle traffic is based on the challenge posed by the growth of the transport system<br />
<br />
As stated in chapters 3 and 4, for the functioning of the transport system, there is a congestion in the current state of the road network which would be good to remove for the functionality and competitiveness of the region, as the efficiency of the transport system is weakened by congestion by<br />
* travel times increasing,<br />
* the predictability of travel times deteriorating,<br />
* the need for equipment increasing and<br />
* accidents and emissions increasing.<br />
<br />
The traffic congestion now focuses on all radial routes, Ring Road I and the city center.<br />
Growth in the region is aggravated by the congestion of the road network, which is not managed by the means currently in use. It is important to note that, according to the analysis, the structure and demand of the road network capacity are imbalanced; Part of the network runs smoothly and the capacity is not necessarily effective, and on the other hand some of the network has clear operational problems.<br />
<br />
However, the congestion caused by the growth of the region has to be controlled by the functionality and competitiveness of the region. Congestion will only ease in the future for cycles for which the HLJ 2015 Plan has targeted capacity-building measures, for example on Tuusulanväylä between Ring Road III and Ring Road I and in the middle of Ring Road I, but at the whole network level, the congestion will not ease in the 2025 situation but worsens compared to the current situation. A significant increase in the capacity of the entire car traffic network is costly and would further increase car traffic, for example, from public transport.<br />
<br />
'''Financial control is proof that it is an effective way of balancing the demand for transport to take advantage of the service level offered by the entire transport system<br />
<br />
The functionality of pricing guidance is based on a number of Nordic, European and international examples, which are presented in Chapter 2. Pricing of vehicle traffic is an effective means of managing congestion as:<br />
* The journey moves to sustainable modes of transport. Particularly for longer journeys to public transport, the average length of journeys increases especially for public transport journeys, and the structure of the region is compressed into rampways.<br />
* Car traffic is redirected as cars are shorter and out of the highest priced areas. In the long term, land use based on accessibility of the car in the region also adapts to steering, concentrating the regional structure closer to the workplace concentrations and efficient rail transport.<br />
* Pricing drives motorists out of congested lanes, causing congestion to diminish, fluency improves. Some drivers can take advantage of improved fluency to meet their mobility needs more effectively.<br />
* In addition, the bottleneck investments made possible by pricing benefits make it possible for the entire network to be smoother and more efficient loading and to keep the need for pricing control reasonably priced.<br />
<br />
'''There are several technical options for tolls and their functionality is linked to the whole transport system and land use<br />
<br />
Pricing is a key component of the HJL 2015 strategy, which was not investigated at the time of the plan but by way of example by relying on a functional model of the LVM congestion charge (2009), based on satellite-based technology. This study covered a number of active road toll models for transport (Chapter 4).<br />
<br />
According to the study, the working group decided to evaluate the effects of a single pricing model based on the gate zones, which according to the study team was the most economical, clear and efficient model from the different perspectives studied. The lines formed by payment cards follow, for example, the boundaries of the new public transport ticketing and taxation systems, and payments are staggered so that the traffic orientation is in balance with the transportability of the transport system.<br />
<br />
However, during the evaluation process, it was noted that if the level of pricing is matched to the social economy correctly and bottleneck investments are planned based on this demand, the road network will utilize more users with more naturally mobile mobility needs. In this case, the disadvantages of pricing (additional cost) and benefits (time savings) are better balanced.<br />
<br />
From the point of view of control, it is also worthwhile collecting charges where the external costs occur and its level and the disadvantages disappear. The model included in the impact assessment was also studied as a sensitivity review for larger versions that were found to have positive effects. At the same time, it is also worthwhile to make road network bottlenecks in order to provide useful traffic to the road network without jeopardizing the flow of traffic, without requiring pricing guidance as much as the entire network is in effective use. Public transport projects, on the other hand, will safeguard the level of service of those who move from the road network by means of guidance (otherwise the congestion).<br />
<br />
The best performance of vehicle pricing is ultimately linked to its role in the development of the entire transport system and land use, which should be balanced as a whole. The key conclusion of the technical review is that although the study has examined various primitive port models and their implications, it will be possible to plan and evaluate almost unlimitedly different combinations of gate positions and pay levels for which a more complete overall solution can be found than it was now. In any further planning, it is important to thoroughly analyze the pricing system at its best as part of the entire transport system plan and also the land use planning.<br />
<br />
'''The effects of the area level impact of the investigated functional pricing model clearly support the achievement of the regional development objectives as part of the HLJ 2015 Plan and its MAL Framework<br />
<br />
The effects of the package of measures, which are examined in Chapter 5, are summarized in Table 5. As has been noted in previous national road toll surveys and international follow-up studies, the analyzes carried out show that vehicle pricing is a viable solution to future problems and set targets. It is particularly effective in safeguarding the functionality and sustainability of the regional transport system. The general improvement in traffic flow caused by passenger car bidding also benefits transport activities. This report does not assume or estimate the impact of payments for goods and distribution traffic. The whole set of measures is economically viable. In other respects, the situation is more complex.<br />
<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Table 5. Summary of Impact of the Pricing Procedure (VE1).<br />
|----<br />
! Focus areas<br />
| <br />
! A summary of the implications for the region's objectives<br />
! General additional criteria <br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Functionality of the transport system<br />
| +<br />
| Congestion in the fully used road network is controlled by control and bottleneck investments.<br />
|rowspan="24"|<br />
* An explored package of measures that includes a variety of measures in addition to pricing guidance is also economically viable (+ 20M € / yr)<br />
* The direction, significance and direction of impacts on different user groups and regions require further development of the functional model and compensation mechanisms.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| The travel times of the main freeways are about 10% shorter and are much more predictable thanks to guidance.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Transport chains are smoother, freight traffic does not pay. The level of bus service increases as quality corridors are not crowded.<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| Significant environmental impacts<br />
| +<br />
| Traffic disadvantages and environmental loads are reduced by about 5%.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Vehicle noise reduction and emission sources are reduced by 5 or 8%.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Reduction of vehicle speeds reduces carbon dioxide emissions by 3 or 5%, making the achievement of climate targets more likely.<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="3"| The development of sustainable mobility<br />
| +<br />
| The competitiveness of public transport improves, 100,000 more<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| The attractiveness of walking and cycling is increasing, as evidenced by a 2 percentage point increase in the share.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Mobility is safer since vehicle accidents are reduced by 4 or 8%.<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="4"| Growth direction and accessibility<br />
| +<br />
| The need for mobility decreases, as the region is compacted and the trips are reduced by 1 or 3%.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| SAVU accessibility for sustainable modes will be greatly improved thanks to the investment made possible by road tolls.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Car travel time gains are improved as speeds increase and average travel times are reduced by 5 or 8%.<br />
|----<br />
| -<br />
| Total accessibility decreases as tolls are experienced as a travel disadvantage.<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="6"| HS competitiveness and economic impact<br />
| +<br />
| The region remains attractive, functional and therefore competitive as the public transport service level, road network quality, congestion management and international connections improve.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Impact on Business / Logistics: The operating conditions of City Logistics will improve and there will be no significant changes to national logistics.<br />
|----<br />
| +/-<br />
| Impact on business / trade: The parent city and the districts of KUUMA municipalities will be strengthened as service centers. The attractiveness of the shopping districts of Ring Road I-III is weakened.<br />
|----<br />
| +/-<br />
| Impact on business life / jobs: The attractiveness of the capital city is improving and the attractiveness of the work centers in southern Espoo and Kehä I-III is weakened.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Mobility and customer satisfaction is improving.<br />
|----<br />
| -<br />
| Costs lower the reachability.<br />
|----<br />
|rowspan="4"| Social endurance<br />
| +/-<br />
| Transport costs remain reasonable.<br />
|----<br />
| -<br />
| Low-cost mobility costs are increasing in some areas.<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| There are alternatives for different travel needs<br />
|----<br />
| +<br />
| Dependence on cars decreases<br />
|----<br />
|colspan="3"| The investment and operating costs of the zone port system are 20 - 25 M € / yr. The tested functional model is good for feasibility and risk management. The use of toll income as a new financial asset (net of € 150 million / year or € 80 million / year) is an essential part of profitability from a regional point of view.<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<br />
Although the need for mobility in the direction of the growth of the entire region decreases and the travel time gains of SAVU and car traffic in sustainable modes improve, the monetary growth of the toll charges is necessarily felt as a decrease in overall accessibility, which is a disadvantage. Pricing and transport system development measures also affect the growth directions of the region, as the relative accessibility of the regions will inevitably change. It is still likely that further development of a functional model and compensation mechanisms will be required in order to have the direction, significance and targeting desired.<br />
<br />
Comparing the alternative to VE0 60% of the population in the Helsinki region lives in regions where the effect of pricing is neutral, ie the difference between alternatives is small. In regions with attractive pricing disadvantages, one fifth of residents live and the same share lives in areas of healing power.<br />
<br />
One fifth of the jobs are located in regions whose pricing behavior has a detrimental effect on the comparison option and a quarter of them are in the areas of healing attractiveness. The differences are very large between regions in the metropolitan area. One third of Helsinki's jobs are in areas of improving attractiveness, while in Espoo the figure is one tenth, and in Vantaa none. Nearly 60% in Vantaa and 45% of jobs in the Espoo and Kauniainen districts are located in regions whose attraction decreases; In Helsinki, there are a dozen jobs in these areas. In the area of the Railway-KUUMA, the jobs are divided into half between the neutral and improving areas of attraction. Bus-KUUMA's jobs are located in almost completely neutral areas.<br />
<br />
Shopping and business trips are made mostly off peak hours on weekdays, so the toll rate for the pricing model is lower, as well as at weekends when no toll is charged. For this reason, pricing affects less fluency in mobility and on the other hand, payload is lower than on commuting. According to the results, however, the impact of pricing on the attractiveness of trading and service areas is strongly biased. Households direct their trips to neighboring areas as well as to the best accessible public transport concentrations at the expense of car-based mergers. The center of gravity of the Nuclear Power Center is increasing, but tolls in other parts of the city do not have a significant impact. Pricing does not undermine the conditions for new service concentrations in the city center. The impact is positive for the attractiveness of the service centers and local services of KUUMA municipalities.<br />
<br />
Competitiveness criteria that are commonly used in international competitiveness and well-being in cities are the public transport service level, road network quality, congestion management and international connections. A pricing package is a prerequisite for a Competitiveness Comprehensive Plan. The problem is the increase in traffic costs, which is not necessarily a big problem in the whole, as toll revenue can be directed as desired. However, it is clear that if returns are not returned to the region and are properly targeted, pricing is a risk to the region's competitiveness.<br />
<br />
Although pricing increases the cost of motoring, they are not expected to grow unreasonably in terms of social sustainability. Improved accessibility supports the attractiveness of residential areas and a balanced demographic structure. The accessibility of services and jobs through sustainable forms of travel will be improved. The development of centers and nodes supports the maintenance of services. Choices for car non-moving are improving. The accessibility of the transport system will be improved.<br />
<br />
The investigated functional gateway model is better than new types of mileage models for repayment, feasibility and risk management.<br />
<br />
'''The focus of the impacts on different groups and regions requires a functional model and its price levels to be adjusted, supported or compensated mechanisms<br />
<br />
Factors that may have an impact on the growth of the region's growth orientation and the potential for competitiveness are related to targeting effects. For example, the deterioration of the tractive power of the Ring Road / Ring Road III and the rise in commuting costs for workers in low-income workers in the service and production sectors.<br />
<br />
In particular, the relationship between pricing on land use and the potential to eliminate or mitigate relative regional handicaps to business life should also be clarified. In the future, the number of payment points, ie the number of frames and cross lines, and the amount of payments should be studied for the vitality and tax revenue of the municipality. Even though the premium income would be lost, employment and other tax revenue in the larger sense, for example in Vantaa, would be the road or the effects of financing road projects.<br />
<br />
In this regard, it is worth considering first reducing the target level of pricing financing. Raising the level of funding typically leads to pricing being not optimal for the steering effect and social economy. The pricing option, where tolls are half of the VE1 option, mitigates the deteriorating effect of pricing habitation in areas where the effect on relative accessibility is negative with the tested alternative. The lower pay level also has fewer and fewer areas of accessibility than the areas of weakened workplace accessibility.<br />
<br />
Relatively weakening regions can be supported by adjusting the form of pricing zones and the level of payments across the payment system and also by investments. The comparison option VE0 is, on the one hand, only one possible growth orientation growth scenario from many potential. Particularly, the regional development emphasis is reflected in the measures already taken, particularly in the areas of the Länsimetro and Ring Roads, where the accessibility of sustainable forms of transport is developing significantly from the situation in 2012. The relative accessibility impact of pricing is then reflected in comparison with option VE0, so that the accessibility and growth potential of some regions will deteriorate, even if compared to the current situation, they are more in favor of other regions in the region.<br />
<br />
'''The pricing model examined as part of the HLJ 2015 plan is economically viable<br />
<br />
According to the calculation in Chapter 6, the result of VE1 is EUR 19.5 million per year compared to the 0 + comparison option, which only executes projects that are running and (by 1.12.2015). However, in the case of pricing, the social economy net result is largely dependent on balancing the growth of motorists' costs and other objectives. The perceived disadvantage of the payment rises rapidly as fees and hence prices rise. When pricing is too strong, users' disadvantages and dissatisfaction grow faster than pricing revenue. Environmental and safety impacts and changes in operating costs and taxes are also included in the calculation.<br />
<br />
For this reason, chapter 5 also showed the variation of the model studied (VE3) where payments were halved. Alternative VE3's economic performance is EUR 32.4 million, or EUR 12.9 million more profitable than VE1. According to the socioeconomic calculation in Chapter 6, it is more efficient, as revenues fall less than the net disadvantages faced by users (payload and time and cost savings of congestion).<br />
<br />
Profitability and fairness of the model's end-to-end model can be further developed. Sensitivity reviews give this a look. For example, pricing guidance and bottleneck investments are an entity in which they affect each other's needs. If investment is carried out without pricing, bottlenecks can be dismantled, but the region's growth is still causing new congestion problems across the road network. If a mere pricing action is made, the road network may be under-utilized.<br />
<br />
Sensitivity assessments also show that the socio-economic cost-effectiveness of vehicle pricing and the need to secure the functioning of the road network will grow significantly if vehicle traffic is growing faster than expected in the forecasts of the calculations. This is also the case if funding for the development of the transport system is unsuccessful as planned, public transport ticket prices will have to increase or economic growth will accelerate, increasing the mobility of residents. The financing levels of the HLJ 2015 Plan and also the Comparative Option are fairly goal-oriented compared to the project-specific so-called " 0+ compared to the benchmarking principles. On the other hand, the need for pricing is reduced if the use of the car becomes more expensive or otherwise decreases.<br />
<br />
Time-sensitivity assessments of the differences in efficiency between vehicle traffic and the current 2025 and 2040 demand situation in the current situation (2012) also showed that the need for pricing is constantly increasing. The social cost of the pricing model studied in 2040 was many times higher than in 2025. However, because of the roughness of the calculations, the "right moment" is difficult to determine accurately.<br />
<br />
The conclusions drawn from the relative differences between the investigated comparative scenarios are clear, but the net results of the socioeconomic calculations have to be taken into account in the reserve since the calculations still involve a number of uncertainties and development needs, which are dealt with in Chapter 3.<br />
<br />
'''The financial impact of tolls is significant<br />
<br />
Payment levels also determine the revenue of the pricing, which is also part of the HLJ strategy in terms of funding. The impact of the question on the comparison of alternatives depends, of course, on the extent of the investment program and other measures, their financial need and how the costs of financing are taken into account in decision-making.<br />
<br />
The set return target includes a provision of 55 million to cover the higher cost of demand for public transport that may result in pricing and a general increase in service levels. For example, in Stockholm pricing has led to a drop in the number of trips and the impact on public transport was less than predicted. Investment levels also depend on both the profitability of the projects and the more general consideration of the financial level of the sensible region. If possible further studies lead to similar conclusions, it may be taken into account in the future definition of the yield level.<br />
<br />
'''The technical feasibility of pricing is good with the tested model<br />
<br />
The study did not detect any technical feasibility problems that would prevent the implementation of the investigated zone report system if it were decided to take action. Systems have been in use elsewhere for many years. The charging system is a combination of IT technology (computers, software and connection devices) and physical devices in the roadside and in cars. The average life span of technology is 5-8 years.<br />
<br />
On the other hand, the feasibility of a mileage system would be a question mark as there is no experience in passenger transport. With regard to technology, decision-making should be guided by operational needs, predictability of implementation costs and sufficiency of the payment system. Ideal system may have to wait a long time.<br />
<br />
The technical solutions described in this report can be considered to represent traditional or near-known solutions for the coming years. If you are looking for performance-based satellite positioning charges for passenger cars (which are nowhere), then a traditional vehicle solution solution is unlikely to be likely for many reasons. A separate retrofit vehicle device is quite expensive and can only be used in the form of a single service, ie tolls. The current implementations are all for heavy traffic. In this case, the vehicles to be equipped are much less and the resulting costs can be included in the freight rates and thus transferred to customers.<br />
<br />
On the one hand, technology development can be the doorstep, where new technologies will soon be possible. Different contexts have been considered for example. The potential of smartphones or navigators with regard to the pay-per-view. Already today, a passenger car with a few people may be able to ride several GPS devices: one smartphone per passenger, a navigator used by the driver, and several other devices, such as PCs or tablets. However, these can not yet be used to pay tolls that have their own requirements for safety and reliability. The road toll solution also includes a credible surveillance solution. It is therefore necessary to develop a new overall concept, taking into account the specific requirements of road tolls. From the point of view of the implementer, the situation is ultimately the following: a) Better solutions are expected, ie time when new, yet unknown solutions are viable, b) Do the risk of the developer or first-ever developer in the highly global application-oriented sector, or c) Whether it is available at decision-making, Is reasonably priced, fairly risk-free and stays on schedule.<br />
<br />
In connection with the toll road system in the Helsinki region, A possible nationwide system, whereby the role of mileage may change because the system is highly scalable. In this situation, the size of the Helsinki region's scale of systemic cost savings will change significantly in relation to the collection fees.<br />
<br />
It is still important to note that even though the recovery technology will later be "better", almost everything else remains intact, such as the basis for the payment and the use of revenues, legislation, organizational solutions (payer and system operator), sales network, surveillance technology, May pose new requirements. Technology choice is therefore not virtually bound by the solution in a very long time, and the pricing model examined in the study is likely to be implemented with both conventional technology and GNSS-based gravity technology. It is also important to note that a possible solution based on a license plate interpretation can be utilized in the control system if you switch to a satellite positioning system, for example.<br />
<br />
'''The introduction requires further action<br />
<br />
As noted above, the technical features of the priced pricing model can be further developed in many ways. Decision-making may also require the development of socio-economic evaluation methods. This should be done in the HLJ / MAL context, because optimal control depends naturally on what else in the region is decided to do. Not all of the technical specifications set out in Chapter 4 have been sensible at this stage, such as<br />
* Increase in peak hourly payouts according to the development of traffic jams,<br />
* Validity periods,<br />
* Daytime shears,<br />
* Vehicle categories subject to payment,<br />
* Handling occasional car drivers,<br />
* Security and security<br />
* Potential value-added services.<br />
<br />
You should only return to these if you decide to proceed with the planning of the action. Only then will you be able to design technical details.<br />
<br />
Some of the questions are those that require more detailed assessment methods because the evaluation method used to investigate the impact of strategic regional investment (HELMET) is virtually impossible as a traffic analysis of the two hourly and hourly hourly conversations, and much of the impact assessment is based on various extensions of these results. The modeling method does not allow for a more accurate analysis of these periods or sufficient analysis of other periods, rather than linking time groups to people, so that the targeting effects can not be reliably investigated. In this respect, only the simulation of direct impacts was based on a separate method.<br />
<br />
Implementation path requires its own discretion and impact assessment. The zone gate system can be constructed, for example, in stages, starting from the inner frames, so that the alternative models in Chapter 4 will work in the "series".<br />
<br />
'''Alternative means do not replace the pricing guidance presented in HLJ 2015<br />
<br />
The analysis of Chapter 8 shows that alternative, sufficiently impressive package solutions in the light of the growth of the region is difficult to elaborate and analyze using existing methods. Investments did not prove to be effective measures to compensate for vehicle traffic control and the calculation of public transport ticket prices was considered unrealistic without any idea of its financing. Parking policy has the same type of control and also financial impact as pricing, but it would require such comprehensive measures or policies as this can not be proposed by an expert in this study.<br />
<br />
The promotion of walking and cycling promoted by expert analysis could in itself be alternatives to vehicle pricing but would require more empirical information on the effectiveness of the measures and also the further development of methods for assessing the impact on transport system level so that their impact could be explored as part of the overall transport system.<br />
<br />
In the future, the effectiveness of interference management, movement control, services and intelligence will require more extensive and model-demanding reviews, which will only give a better idea of whether it can be used. Policies are further intensified so that pricing guidance is no longer needed as part of the HLJ strategy.<br />
<br />
The methods found in Chapter 8 have been mainly used by the HLJ 2015 process and no pricing has been found to be unnecessary at that stage, indicating the need for a measure. The resources of this study have not been able to make the overall program corresponding to the HLJ plan again, so the effects of the alternative strategy could not be estimated at the same level as in Chapter 5.<br />
<br />
It is also important to note that the impact of pricing does not contradict other development objectives of the transport system. Therefore, other measures should not be put in conflict with economic guidance, but the transport system and the whole community structure are a whole. All measures promoting the objectives support this whole and usually reinforce their synergy. This is also due to the fact that the effects of different measures are directed to the mechanisms of a different community structure, so their combinations can be designed so that the negative effects of a single action can be effectively mitigated. Half of the pricing can also be calculated by the fact that different compensation mechanisms are also possible, as net returns can be restored in the desired way back to society.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<br />
<references/></div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=Talk:Congestion_charge&diff=40603Talk:Congestion charge2017-04-28T21:19:33Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Congestion charge scheme doesn't significantly affect air quality in cities.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{attack|# |Carbon footprint caused by stationary traffic or ‘vehicle idling’ resulting<br />
from gridlock across urbanized advanced economies. The fuel that is consumed while stationary in traffic<br />
results in higher emission of greenhouse gases and pollutants, which leads to poorer air quality,<br />
particularly in urban areas. <ref> [http://ibtta.org/sites/default/files/documents/MAF/Costs-of-Congestion-INRIX-Cebr-Report%20(3).pdf]</ref>|--[[User:Amr Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Amr Ebrahim|talk]]) 11:40, 28.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
{{defend|# | I support the noted argument that congestion charge could have a positive impact on quality. For instance, the congestion charge trial in Stockholm in 2006, based on measurements, it was estimated that this system resulted in a 15% reduction in total road use within the charged cordon. Total traffic emissions in this area of NOx and PM10 fell by 8.5% and 13%, respectively. <ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231008008091] </ref>|--[[User:Ehab Mustafa]] ([[User talk: Ehab Mustafa|talk]]) 12:18, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Congestion charge scheme constrains individual choice and behavior.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
{{attack|# |Urban dwellers are more geared towards behavioral adjustment, since they are aware of the dynamic of distributions of the costs of congestion on house hold and their societal sense of belonging. Therefore, the incidence of such costs and benefits affects the preferences and in turn the willingness to build coping strategies will emerge by acceptance. Hence this can only apply to urban dwellers the case with suburbia and rural surrounding still needs more attention.<ref> [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361920997000035]</ref>|--[[User:Amr Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Amr Ebrahim|talk]]) 12:04, 29.4.2017 (UTC)}}<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = The economic viability of tariffs and transformation of urban space will encourage more use of roads and cars.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
<br />
}}<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = congestion charge schemes can restrict urban mobility and human capital growth.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== Reference ==<br />
<references/></div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=Talk:Congestion_charge&diff=40598Talk:Congestion charge2017-04-28T20:15:39Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Congestion charge scheme doesn't significantly affect air quality in cities.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Congestion charge scheme constrains individual choice and behavior.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
<br />
}}</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=Talk:Congestion_charge&diff=40597Talk:Congestion charge2017-04-28T20:13:20Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: Created page with "{{discussion |Statements = Congestion charge scheme doesn't significantly affect air quality in cities. |Resolution = |Resolved = |Argumentation = }}"</p>
<hr />
<div>{{discussion<br />
|Statements = Congestion charge scheme doesn't significantly affect air quality in cities.<br />
|Resolution =<br />
|Resolved =<br />
|Argumentation = <br />
<br />
}}</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=Decision_analysis_and_risk_management_2017/Homework&diff=40522Decision analysis and risk management 2017/Homework2017-04-25T20:28:01Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{lecture|moderator=Jouni}}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Follow-up table of the homeworks'''. Green: work is acceptable. White: there is still work to do. Red: work is overdue. Deadline dates are mentioned in the column headings.<br />
|----<br />
! User <br />
! HW 1: Open assessment 30 Mar<br />
! HW 2: Basic skills of Opasnet 11 May<br />
! HW 3: Basic concepts of open assessment and co-creation 4 Apr<br />
! HW 4: Draft of an assessment plan 21 Apr<br />
! HW 5: Climate policy decisions and actions 21 Apr<br />
! HW 6: Collaboration in climate policy assessment 28 Apr<br />
! HW 7: Structured discussion 28 Apr<br />
! HW 8: Developing a variable page 11 May<br />
! HW 9: Evaluation of assessment 11 May<br />
! Seminars <br />
! Total score [max 5] (points)<br />
|----<br />
| [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr Ebrahim]]<br />
| [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 1|HW1a OK]] Add comments about HW1b-d!<br />
| <br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Edem Agbenowu|Edem Agbenowu]]<br />
| [[User:Edem Agbenowu#Homework 1|HW1a OK]] Add comments about HW1b-d!<br />
| <br />
| {{yes|[[User:Edem Agbenowu#Homework 3|HW3]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Ehab Mustafa#Homework 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes|[[User:Ehab Mustafa#Homework 3|HW3]]}}<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Ehab Mustafa#Homework 4|HW4]] see comments}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Jin Qiwen|Jin Qiwen]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Jin Qiwen#Homework 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|not finished [[User:Jin Qiwen#Homework 3|HW3]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Kaisu Lukkarinen|Kaisu Lukkarinen]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Kaisu Lukkarinen#Homework 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Kingsley Aliche|Kingsley Aliche]]<br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Margaret Arogunyo|Margaret Arogunyo]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Margaret Arogunyo#Home Work 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes|[[User:Margaret Arogunyo#Homework 3: Basic concepts of open assessment and co-creation|HW3a+b]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Nabin Subedi|Nabin Subedi]]<br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Noora Rantanen|Noora Rantanen]]<br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tamara Gajst|Tamara Gajst]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Tamara Gajst#Homework 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|[[User:Tamara Gajst#Homework 3|HW3A done, HW3B missing]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tarikul Islam|Tarikul Islam]]<br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tine Bizjak|Tine Bizjak]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|[[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 3: Basic concepts of open assessment and co-creation|HW3]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Zahra Shirani|Zahra Shirani]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Zahra Shirani#Homework 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|HW3a done, HW3b delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
|}<br />
<br />
'''Please read the homework assignments carefully and follow the instructions.''' If there is something unclear, please ask the course organizers (or fellow students) to explain and clarify! NOTE: Write all your homework answers on your own user page.<br />
<br />
Also add links to your homework answers in the table above. The evaluation of the homework exercises will be based on the answers found by following the links in the table. Students themselves are responsible for having the correct, complete and up-to-date links to homework answers. if you need help in adding the links to your homework answers to the table, please ask the course organizers (or fellow students) for advice. A convenient way to get help is to come to the exercise sessions.'''<br />
<br />
;Please note:<br />
* If your Homework says "OK" it means that the given homework is graded as "pass", i.e. at least 1 point. If you want to get better points, you should check and answer lecturers´ comments regarding that homework.<br />
* If there is no "OK" sign, you must revise your work according to the comments in order to make it acceptable.<br />
* You must write homework answers done in groups/pairs '''to only one''' place.<br />
* Add link to answers on your own user page if it is located on someone else's user page (do not copy the text on your own user page).<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 5 hours.<br />
<br />
'''Purpose: To familiarise yourself to the basic ideas of open policy practice.<br />
<br />
Read pages [[Open policy practice]], [[Knowledge crystal]], and [[Open assessment]] and browse [[Assessments are to change the world]] and [[Shared information objects in policy support]] and provide brief answers to three (3) questions from the following question list. You may also want to search from Opasnet. You are free to choose which questions to answer. '''Write your answers on your own Opasnet user page'''. Instructions on creating a user account and editing your own user page will be given on first lecture. '''In case of difficulties in wiki editing, write your answers on a separate document and copy them to your user page later'''. The questions and answers will be discussed on the second lecture (23 March). A sufficient length for each answers is a few sentences or bullet points. Please do not write lengthy essays, but instead try to identify and briefly describe the main points relevant in each question. The idea of this homework is not to find the right or correct answers, but instead to introduce the conceptual basis of this course to the students.<br />
<br />
'''Questions:<br />
# What is the main purpose of ''environmental health assessment''?<br />
# What is ''shared understanding''?<br />
# What are the main differences between ''regulatory'' and ''academic'' assessment approaches? Give examples of each.<br />
# What are ''co-creation skills''?<br />
# What are the main differences between ''open assessment'' and most other assessment approaches?<br />
# What is ''benefit-risk assessment''?<br />
# What is ''open assessment''?<br />
# What different ''purposes'' are there ''for participation'' in assessment and/or decision making?<br />
# What are the ''dimensions of openness''?<br />
# What ''relevant stakeholder roles'' are there in environmental health assessment and related decision making<br />
# What is ''effectiveness' in the context of environmental health assessment and related decision making?<br />
# What is the ''trialogical approach'' to knowledge creation and learning?<br />
# What is ''decision support''?<br />
# What is a ''pragmatic knowledge service''?<br />
# What is ''collaboration''?<br />
# What are the ''properties of good assessment?<br />
# What is the role of ''modelling'' in assessment and policy making?<br />
# What parts does the ''open policy practice'' consist of?<br />
# What does it mean that the results of assessments can be considered ''shared information objects''?<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 5 hours''<br />
<br />
'''Purpose: To learn the terms and concepts of open policy practice and see how they are related<br />
<br />
[https://quizlet.com/join/J43nT5Azy Join Quizlet] and practice with the sets of terms to learn the concepts:<br />
* [https://quizlet.com/196604415/principles-of-open-policy-practice-flash-cards/ Principles of open policy practice]<br />
* [https://quizlet.com/196602485/properties-of-good-assessment-flash-cards/ Properties of good assessment]<br />
* [https://quizlet.com/196600875/glossary-for-open-policy-practice-flash-cards/ Glossary for open policy practice], also the [https://quizlet.com/196599457/finnish-vocabulary-for-open-policy-practice-flash-cards/ Finnish terms] if you can Finnish.<br />
* [https://quizlet.com/196602931/categories-of-interaction-flash-cards/ Categories of interaction]<br />
* [https://quizlet.com/196602695/dimensions-of-openness-flash-cards/ Dimensions of openness]<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 5 hours''<br />
<br />
'''Purpose: To learn the basics of critical thinking and argumentation<br />
<br />
[https://www.khanacademy.org/ Join Khan Academy] and follow the course of [https://www.khanacademy.org/partner-content/wi-phi/wiphi-critical-thinking Critical thinking]. If you already know this topic well, just do the exercises.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 0.5 - 5 hours<br />
<br />
'''Purpose: To ensure that the basics of probability theory are clear <br />
(We assume that the basic statistics have been taught to students participating in this class.)<br />
<br />
Go through the contents of the Khan Academy courses [https://www.khanacademy.org/math/ap-statistics/probability-ap probability] and [https://www.khanacademy.org/math/statistics-probability/random-variables-stats-library random variables] and make sure that you refresh your memory on this. Do the exercises, and look at the videos if needed.<br />
<br />
There are also some other, more basic material that may be useful: [https://www.khanacademy.org/math/precalculus/prob-comb probabilities and combinatorics].<br />
<br />
== Homework 2: Basic skills of open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 5 hours''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Basic skills''': Mark "yes" when you know how to do this and put a link to the page where you have used the skill. Use these skills as parts of other homeworks.<br />
|----<br />
! User <br />
! [[Create article|Create a page and type]]<br />
! [[Help:Editing#Uploading|Upload]] a file and link it<br />
! [[Help:Editing#Text formatting|Use headings]], lists, bold, italic<br />
! Use internal and external [[Help:Editing#Linking|links]] and [[Help:Editing#Templates|templates]] <br />
! Use [[Help:Editing#Reference lists|references]]<br />
! Create a [[Help:Editing#Tables|prettytable]]<br />
! Upload data by [[help:Editing#Data table|t2b table]] and [[Uploading to Opasnet Base|Opasnet Base Uploader]]<br />
! Organise a [[discussion]]<br />
|----<br />
| [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr Ebrahim]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Edem Agbenowu|Edem Agbenowu]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]]<br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Jin Qiwen|Jin Qiwen]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Kaisu Lukkarinen|Kaisu Lukkarinen]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Kingsley Aliche|Kingsley Aliche]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Margaret Arogunyo|Margaret Arogunyo]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Nabin Subedi|Nabin Subedi]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Noora Rantanen|Noora Rantanen]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tamara Gajst|Tamara Gajst]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tarikul Islam|Tarikul Islam]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tine Bizjak|Tine Bizjak]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Zahra Shirani|Zahra Shirani]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}} <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
|}<br />
<br />
==Homework 3: Basic concepts of open assessment and co-creation==<br />
<br />
:'' Estimated working time: 2+5 hours.<br />
<br />
'''Task A:''' Read a) homeworks 1 and 2, b) [[Glossary#Terms in open policy practice]] and c) the introductory pages listed below. If you know Finnish, the [[:op_fi:Yhtäköyttä-hankkeen loppuraportti|Yhtäköyttä report]] contains a lot of the same material in a more organised way. After reading, write two questions that you think needs clarification. Write the questions on your own user page. The questions will be answered during the next lecture.<br />
<br />
{{Opasnet training}}<br />
<br />
'''Task B:''' Read the material in a {{#l:Darm reading co-creation.zip|zip file}} about co-creation, decision support models, and facilitation. It contains the following material (numbers refer to reference numbers in [[:op_fi:Yhtäköyttä-hankkeen loppuraportti|Yhtäköyttä report]].<br />
<br />
* 11: von Winterfeldt, D (2013). Bridging the gap between science and decision making. PNAS 110:3:14055-14061. [11]<br />
* 45: Aitamurto, T, Landemore, H. (2015) Five design principles for crowdsourced policymaking: Assessing the case of crowdsourced off-road traffic law in Finland. Journal of Social Media for Organizations. 2:1:1-19.<br />
* 46: Force11. FAIR data principles. [41] viitattu 22.2.2017.<br />
* 47: Prahalad, CK, Ramaswamy, V (2004). Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation. Journal of Interactive Marketing 18:3:5-14. doi:10.1002/dir.20015 [42]<br />
* 48: Mauser, W, Klepper, G, Rice, M, Schmalzbauer, BS, Hackmann, H, Leemans, R, Current, HM (2013). Transdisciplinary global change research: the co-creation of knowledge for sustainability. Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 5:3–4:420–431. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2013.07.001 <br />
* 49: Franco, LA, Montibeller, G (2010). Facilitated modelling in operational research. European Journal of Operational Research 205:3:489–500. [43]<br />
* 53: Kolbert, E. (2017) Why facts don't change our minds. The New Yorker, 27.2.2017. [47] viitattu 22.2.2017.<br />
<br />
Write a short assay on your user page about co-creation in decision support. What is co-creation? What advantage does it bring compared with more traditional decision support processes? What is the role of a facilitator, and what skills do they need?<br />
<br />
==Homework 4: Draft of an assessment plan==<br />
<br />
'''Note! Homework 4 answers will be used as materials in homework 10.'''<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 8 hours<br />
<br />
Task: With your pair, draft a plan of an assessment about the topic agreed on during the lecture. See the correct structure from [[Assessment]]. You may copy the structure directly from [[:Template:Assessment structure]]. Write the draft assessment on either your or your partner's user page (and put a link to it on the other's user page). Choose your specific topic within the broader area of '''climate change policies in a city'''. You can consider mitigation (how to reduce greenhouse gas emissions), adaptation (how to prepare for changes caused by climate change) or both. You may choose a specific city on your assessment, or look at some aspect in cities in general.<br />
<br />
You are expected to make plans about a good assessment related a topic of your choice (preferably related to climate change policies in cities). Fill in the subheadings in Scope and make plans about the Rationale: what variables or assessment parts you would need to be able to answer the question asked? However, you are NOT expected to come up with results or conclusions (although you can describe what kind of results you might get if the assessment was actually performed).<br />
<br />
== Homework 5: Climate policy decisions and actions ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 6 hours<br />
<br />
Consider that you are given an assignment to assess the ''direct or indirect health impacts caused by a climate (adaptation) strategy or program''. One of the first things in getting started with the assessment is to discuss, identify and explicate the decisions and options related to the assessment problem. In pairs choose one climate (adaptation) strategy/program from the material list below and identify and write out answers to the following questions based on the material. Use your own reasoning and knowledge or other sources (e.g. Google search) as complementary where the material is incomplete or inconclusive.<br />
<br />
'''Write your answers on either group member's user page (other member adds a link to the answers on his/her user page). <br />
<br />
Questions:<br />
* What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?<br />
** Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?<br />
* What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?<br />
** Who are those that actually realize these actions?<br />
* What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?<br />
** Who are the decision makers?<br />
* What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?<br />
** Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,<br />
** Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?<br />
** Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?<br />
* Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.<br />
* ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "[[shared understanding]]"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).<br />
<br />
Materials: <br />
<br />
* {{#l:Klimaprogramm-Bayern-2020.pdf}} {{#l:klimaprogramm2020_en_05_2009_ba.pdf}} [http://www.bayern.de/politik/initiativen/klimaprogramm-bayern-2020/ Bavarian Climate Programme 2020] [https://www.stmuv.bayern.de/umwelt/klimaschutz/klimaschutzpolitik/doc/klimaprogramm2020_en_05_2009_ba.pdf]<br />
* {{#l:Summary_Ludwigsburg_LEAP_Final_EN.pdf}} [http://www.sustainable-now.eu/fileadmin/template/projects/sustainable_now/files/Summary_Ludwigsburg_LEAP_Final_EN.pdf Integrated Climate Protection and Energy Strategy for Ludwigsburg]<br />
* {{#l:National_Climate_Change_Strategy_of_Hungary_2008.pdf}} [http://klima.kvvm.hu/documents/14/National_Climate_Change_Strategy_of_Hungary_2008.pdf National Climate Change Strategy of Hungary 2008] (mitigation, adaptation) <br />
* {{#l:YTV_climate_strategy_2030.pdf}} [http://www.planningclimatechange.org/joomla/0_upload/climate_strategy_2030.pdf Climate Strategy 2030 of Helsinki Metropolitan Area]<br />
* {{#l:11_2012_Helsinki_Metropolitan_Area_Climate_Change_Adaptation_Strategy.pdf}} [http://ilmastotyokalut.fi/files/2014/10/11_2012_Helsinki_Metropolitan_Area_Climate_Change_Adaptation_Strategy.pdf Climate Adaptation Strategy of Helsinki Metropolitan Area]<br />
* {{#l:NCCS-2012-Publication.pdf}} [https://www.nccs.gov.sg/nccs-2012/docs/NCCS-2012-Publication.pdf National Climate Change Strategy of Singapore 2012] (mitigation, adaptation) <br />
* {{#l:2011_09_06 KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN DEFINITIEF.pdf}} [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2011_09_06%20KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN%20DEFINITIEF.pdf Rotterdam Climate Initiative RCI] (Amr, Ehab)<br />
* {{#l:RCP_ENG_def.pdf}} [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/RCP/English/RCP_ENG_def.pdf Rotterdam Climate Proof Adaptation Programme 2010] (Amr, Ehab)<br />
* {{#l:Cover+Adaptation+to+climate+change+in+Switzerland.pdf}} [http://www.bafu.admin.ch/publikationen/publikation/01673/index.html?lang=en Adaptation to climate change in Switzerland]<br />
* {{#l:Ireland_at_Risk_2.pdf}} [http://www.iae.ie/site_media/pressroom/documents/2009/Nov/17/Ireland_at_Risk_2.pdf Ireland at Risk. Critical Infrastructure Adaptation for Climate Change]<br />
* {{#l:klimatilpasningsstrategi_uk_web.pdf}} [http://www.klimatilpasning.dk/media/5322/klimatilpasningsstrategi_uk_web.pdf Danish Strategy for Adaptation to a Changing Climate]<br />
* [http://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/web/guest/countries Climate adaptation materials in different European languages]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Helsingin ilmastonmuutos_-tiekartta]]<br />
<br />
== Homework 6: Collaboration in climate policy assessment ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 6 hours<br />
<br />
This exercise continues from homework 5. With the same pair, using the same material, and building on your homework 5 answers, identify and write out your answers to the following questions. Narrow your scrutiny down to e.g. one or two decisions/actions/goals if needed. Base your answers on the climate program/strategy paper you have chosen, but also apply your own reasoning, other DARM 2015 course materials etc., particularly on the second set of questions.<br />
<br />
'''Write your answers on either group member's user page (other member adds a link to the answers on his/her user page). <br />
<br />
'''Homework 6, part A:'''<br />
Questions about identifying roles and participation:<br />
* Who are the relevant participants of the assessment?<br />
* What roles the different participants (may) take in the assessment?<br />
* What kind of relevant knowledge they (may) have regarding the assessment?<br />
* What needs and aims do they represent in the assessment? <br />
<br />
'''Homework 6, part B:'''<br />
Consider also the following questions about facilitating collaboration:<br />
* How could the relevant participants be involved in the assessment in an effective way?<br />
* How can the quality of an assessment be assured if anyone can participate?<br />
* How can you prevent malevolent contributions where the purpose is to vandalise the process?<br />
* How can you make the outcome converge to a conclusion, because all issues are uncertain and controversial?<br />
* How can you ensure that the outcomes are useful for the users?<br />
<br />
== Homework 7: Structured discussion ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 20 hours<br />
<br />
{{summary box<br />
| question = What are the evaluation criteria for structured discussion (homework 7)?<br />
| answer = Evaluation of arguments:<br />
* Each argument is evaluated either A (very good), B (good), or C (irrelevant).<br />
* When you have written at least one A argument and at least three B arguments, you get grade 2.<br />
* When you have written at least four B arguments you get grade 1.5.<br />
* If you have written at least two B arguments you get grade 1.<br />
* Argument with C is a slight dis-merit and may affect borderline situations.<br />
* B argument is the default. A arguments differ from B arguments by having<br />
** an important, unique aspect,<br />
** good referencing, and/or<br />
** clever use of hierarchy.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
The objective of this homework is to learn to organise existing written material into a [[discussion|structured discussion]] with a main statement and related arguments. In addition, students should learn to develop and use own arguments within a structured discussion. For examples, see<br />
* [[Talk:Environmental impact assessment directive]]<br />
* [[Talk:Assessment of the health impacts of H1N1 vaccination]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Keskustelu:Pneumokokkirokotteen turvallisuus]]<br />
* [[Talk:Climate change policies in Helsinki]]<br />
<br />
Your task is to initiate and participate in structured discussions on page [[Talk:Congestion charge]] according to the instructions on page [[Discussion]]. Come up with one original statement for a discussion based your own ideas, by talking to Helsinki city representatives (jari.viinanen(at)hel.fi, mira.jarkko(at)hel.fi) or the material below.<br />
<br />
'''Articles in Wikipedia<br />
* [[:en:Congestion pricing|Congestion pricing]]<br />
* [[:en:London congestion charge|London congestion charge]]<br />
* [[:fi:Ruuhkamaksu|Ruuhkamaksu]]<br />
<br />
'''Studies about congestion charges in Helsinki<br />
(and related discussion) {{comment|# |If you know Finnish, you should first look at these texts to make their arguments available to others in English.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:43, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
* Helsingin kaupunki. Ruuhkamaksut tehokkain keino parantaa Helsingin ilmanlaatua nopeasti. (12.01.2017) [http://www.hel.fi/www/uutiset/fi/ymparistokeskus/ruuhkamaksut-12012017]<br />
* HSL (11.2.2016): Tiemaksut varmistaisivat Helsingin seudun kestävän kasvun [https://www.hsl.fi/uutiset/2016/tiemaksut-varmistaisivat-helsingin-seudun-kestavan-kasvun-7995]<br />
** Helsingin Sanomat [http://www.hs.fi/kaupunki/art-2000002885425.html]<br />
** Helsingin Uutiset [http://www.helsinginuutiset.fi/artikkeli/363860-ruuhkamaksut-kayttoon-ehka-jo-2020-kartta-nain-ne-vaikuttavat-sinuun]<br />
** Kauppalehti-blogi [http://blog.kauppalehti.fi/metrossanukkuja/ruuhkamaksu-voi-olla-maailman-tyhmin-idea]<br />
* LVM. (2011) Helsingin seudun ruuhkamaksu. Jatkoselvitys. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 5/2011. [http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-243-214-8]<br />
* LVM. (2007). Joukkoliikenteen houkuttelevuuden ja käytön lisääminen eri liikkujaryhmissä. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 63/2007. [http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-201-954-7]<br />
** Talouselämä-uutiskommentti [http://www.talouselama.fi/uutiset/ruuhkamaksu-rankaisee-koyhaa-3388061]<br />
* LVM. Tienkäyttömaksujärjestelmät. Esiselvitys. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 17/2006. [http://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/78730/Julkaisuja_17_2006.pdf?sequence=1]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Scientific articles about congestion charge and health<br />
*{{doi|10.1126/science.aaf3420}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.jth.2015.08.002}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1080/09640568.2014.912615}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.tra.2015.03.004}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.01.002}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.09.015}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1080/13547500902965252}}<br />
*{{doi|10.5172/impp.453.10.2-3.269}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.amepre.2006.03.030}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1136/jech.2003.012385}}<br />
<br />
Build the content to your discussion based on different materials you can find from the climate reports in homework 5, from the Internet, and from the city representatives. Note that you can and should also participate in discussions launched by other students.<br />
<br />
As facilitators, you should pay attention to get as many different opinions documented as possible. So, jump into a role of a stakeholder and try to think what he/she would say. Possible roles include:<br />
* A national authority giving environmental permissions.<br />
* A taxi company.<br />
* A department store inside or outside a planned congestion charge zone.<br />
* A nature conservationist.<br />
* A local politician interested in both nature and local economy.<br />
* A citizen.<br />
<br />
Note that you are allowed to:<br />
* Contradict your own arguments.<br />
* Update and improve statements if they are too vague or poorly written. However, be careful not to push the existing argumentation out of context. Instead of making large changes to a statement, start a new discussion with your new statement.<br />
* Add your signature to other people's arguments if you agree with them. Note that the first name is assumed to be the original author, so don't put your name first.<br />
* Clarify other people's arguments, if you do it carefully and do not change the meaning.<br />
* Copy arguments from one discussion to another, if they are relevant. But instead of copying large blocks, make references to the other discussion instead.<br />
<br />
== Homework 8: Participate in an assessment ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: '''44 hours'''<br />
<br />
* Everyone participates in making an open assessment. The topic is [[Congestion charge]] to reduce car traffic. This relates to a larger topic [[Climate change policies in Helsinki]]. The topic shares some similarities with [[Climate change policies and health in Kuopio]] and [[Climate change policies in Basel]], although congestion charge was not discussed in those assessments.<br />
* Based on structured discussions in Homework 7, every pair selects a sub-topic (or research question) and develops at least one variable page that asks that question and answers it. Before starting a variable page, suggestionss about relevant questions should be discussed on the assessment page ([[Congestion charge]]). This is because the relevance of a specific question depends on other questions asked, and some issues link causally together nicely when the questions are formulated in a coherent manner.<br />
* The task is to produce a shared understanding of the assessment topic, i.e. congestion charges in Helsinki. The shared understanding is produced using the [[structure of shared understanding]]. In practice:<br />
** Each main subtopic is described on its own page in Opasnet.<br />
** Find enough relevant information for a plausible answer, synthesise the information on the page, and quantitate it.<br />
** The connections of the pages and other items are described on three tables: a) Items, b) Relations, and c) Evaluations. Page [[Voting age]] has an example about how to use the tables.<br />
* The data should be documented well enough to convince a critical reader that this is a good answer to the question.<br />
* Other examples of [[shared understanding]] ([[:op_fi:Jaetun ymmärryksen menetelmä]]) in Finnish:<br />
** [[:op_fi:Keskipitkän aikavälin ilmastopolitiikan suunnitelma]],<br />
** [[:op_fi:Energiarenessanssi]],<br />
** [[:op_fi:Pietarsaaren rokotuskeskustelu]]<br />
<br />
== Homework 9: Evaluation of assessment ==<br />
<br />
:'' Estimated working time: 8 hours.<br />
<br />
In this exercise you are asked to look into and evaluate one homework 4 draft assessment (other than your own) and one real-life assessment performed in Opasnet (listed below). <br />
* [[Helsinki energy decision 2015]]<br />
* [[Climate change policies and health in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Climate change policies in Basel]]<br />
* [[Pneumococcal vaccine]]<br />
* [[Water guide]]<br />
* [[Fukushima nuclear accident]]<br />
* [[Risk assessment on Hämeenkyrö municipal solid waste incinerator]]<br />
* [[Comparative risk assessment of dioxin and fine particles]]<br />
* [[Benefit-risk assessment of fish consumption for Beneris]]<br />
* [[Emission assessment of small-scale energy production in the Helsinki metropolitan area]]<br />
* [[Assessment of building policies' effect on dampness and asthma in Europe]]<br />
* [[Assessment of the health impacts of H1N1 vaccination]]<br />
* [[Benefit-risk assessment of cinnamon]]<br />
* [[INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF WASTE MANAGEMENT IN LAZIO (ITALY)]]<br />
* [[The health risks and benefits of cycling in urban environments compared with car use: health impact assessment study]]<br />
* [[Environmental impact assessment directive]]<br />
* [[Assessment on impacts of emission trading on city-level (ET-CL)]]<br />
* [[Gasbus - health impacts of Helsinki bus traffic]]<br />
* [[Biofuel assessments]]<br />
* Assessments in Finnish:<br />
** [[:op_fi:Pahtavaaran kaivos]]<br />
** [[:op_fi:Silakan hyöty-riskiarvio]]<br />
** [[:op_fi:Rauman sataman laajennuksen vaikutus terveyteen]]<br />
** [[:op_fi:Talvivaaran kaivoksen terveysvaikutukset]]<br />
<br />
<br />
The work is based on instructions and tables on page [[Open policy practice#Evaluation and management]]. Find the assessments by the two users below you on the user/homework list on top of this page (the last on the list shall pick the first two users on the list and the second last on the list shall pick the last and the first user).<br />
<br />
'''This exercise is intended to be done individually.''' However, co-operation between students is recommended.<br />
<br />
'''First characterize the draft assessments''' according to the ''Knowledge-policy interaction'' and ''Dimensions of openness'' frameworks. The things to consider in the characterization are listed and explained in the tables in [[Open policy practice#Evaluation and management]].<br />
<br />
In order to identify the last point in framework for characterising settings (Table 3.), mode of interaction that the draft assessment builds on, characterize the dimensions of openness in the assessment explained in Table 4. ([[Open policy practice#Dimensions of openness]]). The example categories for interaction mentioned in Table 3 are explained in Table 5 ([[Open policy practice#Categories of interaction]]).<br />
<br />
'''Second, evaluate the assessment drafts''' according to the (slightly modified) ''[[Open policy practice#Properties of good decision support]]'' framework. Base your evaluation on the characterization you have made. The things to consider in the evaluation are listed and explained in Table 2. For each attribute (i.e. an aspect to consider) give a numerical evaluation on a 1-5 scale (1 = poor, 5 = excellent). Also briefly write down your reasoning for each numerical evaluation. If something seems completely missing or not possible to evaluate, the numerical evaluation is 0 (also write down your reasoning why the particular aspect of the draft assessment deserves an evaluation of 0).<br />
<br />
Evaluation of assessments is not only something to be done after an assessment has been completed. Instead, evaluation should be seen as a means to guide the making of assessments towards their aims while they are still happening. Therefore, '''the third task of this exercise is to formulate suggestions for developing/improving the draft assessment'''. Write your suggestions as comments/arguments to the user pages where the draft assessment descriptions are. Also point out where the information in the draft assessment is/was missing or insufficient for characterization or evaluation.<br />
<br />
'''Homework 4 answers will be used as materials in this exercise.''' It is recommended that you attempt to do this exercise only starting on the deadline of Homework 4.<br />
<br />
Links to some examples of using the above mentioned evaluation frameworks:<br />
* [[Openness in participation, assessment, and policy making upon issues of environment and environmental health: a review of literature and recent project results]] (Dimensions of openness)<br />
* [[Assessment of impacts to environment and health in influencing manufacturing and public policy]] (Knowledge-policy interaction.)<br />
* [[Evaluating effectiveness of open assessments on alternative biofuel sources]] (Dimensions of openness and Properties of good assessment.)<br />
* [[:op_fi:Puijon metsien käyttösuunnitelman päätöksenteko]] (All methods. In Finnish)<br />
<br />
== Extra homework (not evaluated): Structure of pages and objects and R code==<br />
<br />
{{comment|# |In the next course, we need a homework where there is one variable and some related (pre-known) data. The task is to go through the data, evaluate its applicability, transform it into a format that better answers the question, and discuss different interpretations. The purpose is to produce a probability distribution as an answer to the question. This variable might be a part of the [[training assessment]]. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 14:47, 19 May 2015 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 8 hours<br />
<br />
The objective of this homework is that you learn to see what different parts of a page are and how they are related to each other and to other pages. Especially, an objective is to understand the role of R code in this system. You should learn to identify key things from a code and understand their use and connections to other parts of an assessment. These skill are then needed in Homework 9 when we actually perform an assessment.<br />
<br />
With your pair, select and '''reserve three pages''' (by adding your usernames beside the page link) from the list below. At least two of them have to contain t2b tables and R code. Go through the content by doing all of the key tasks below, if possible. Also look at the additional questions and answer at least some of them. Write your answers to the page by using the comment, defend (when things are OK), and attack (when things are not OK) buttons. If you can, improve the content or suggest tasks for improvement.<br />
<br />
In addition, select three other pages from the list such that another pair has already done the work. Read the content and their comments, and agree or disagree with them. Try to improve the content further.<br />
<br />
; Key tasks<br />
* Check that the page has a correct page type and change when needed. Check that the page has all subheadings that belong to the page type. Add, if missing.<br />
* Categorise the page to relevant categories.<br />
* Organise the content into the right subheadings. Especially, look what is Data and what is Answer.<br />
* Check and update the Dependencies. Also check that the Answers in dependency pages are coherent with this page.<br />
* Make rcodes that a) creates the ovariable (under Calculations) and b) gets the latest ovariable and prints basic results (under Answer).<br />
* Test any existing code and report its functionalities on the page.<br />
* Write or update a summary (one paragraph in the very beginning explaining the main points of the text) on the page. If the content is too unclear to write a good summary, write down clarification questions to the moderator of that page.<br />
* If you have problems with any previous steps, describe them on the relevant point on the page.<br />
<br />
<br />
; Additional questions<br />
* Does the page have a correct page type?<br />
* Does the page have a question? Is it clear and unambiguous?<br />
* Does the page have an answer to the question? Does it actually give an answer to what is asked?<br />
* With variables, is the answer given as a link to a model run with calculated results? If yes,<br />
** Does the model run have a clear result table?<br />
** Does the model run have a clear result graph?<br />
** Is it clear where the code that was used to run the results is?<br />
* In method pages: based on the guidance in the answer, is it possible to actually use the method in an assessment?<br />
* In method pages: What data is required to be able to use the method? Are the requirements listed under "Inputs"?<br />
* Are there data on the page that is needed to answer the question? Are it in machine-readable format (i.e., in t2b table or directly stored in the database)?<br />
** Are the data under Rationale/Data subheading, (or in methods under Rationale/Inputs)?<br />
* Is there data or text that is NOT needed to justify the answer? Would that data be in better place on another page with a different question? What would that question be?<br />
* If the data is needed but is not used in the Answer, update it or suggest tasks to update it.<br />
* Are there external variables whose values need to be known to be able to estimate this object? If yes, <br />
** Are these listed under Rationale/Dependencies?<br />
** Are there equations (as text) for calculating this object based on the dependencies under Rationale/Formula (or Rationale/Calculations)<br />
* Is there an R code that implements the object? <br />
** With variables, is the code under Rationale/Calculations?<br />
** With methods, is there a code under Rationale/Calculations that defines the method object?<br />
** With methods, is there a code under Answer that describes how the method object is used??<br />
** If there are dependencies and formula, does the code take them in to produce an ovariable?<br />
** If there are data, does the code take them in to produce an ovariable?<br />
** When you run the code, does it crash (i.e. produce an error message) before completion? When and why (use ''show code'' and ''show messages and errors'' to understand what's going on)?<br />
** Are there several different codes on the page? Are their purposes clear?<br />
** Does the page use other pages (objects) in calculations? Are these connections listed explicitly as links under the R code?<br />
* Does the page have an evaluation (edistymisluokitus) in either a separate box in the beginning, or in the metadata box?<br />
* Does the page have other subheadings (See also, References, Related files, Keywords)? <br />
** Are there links to other related pages? Are relevant links missing?<br />
* Is the page categorised to relevant categories?<br />
* With encyclopedia pages: is the content detailed enough so that one or more variables or methods could be made based on it? Does such page(s) exist? Are these pages linked to each other?<br />
* Does the page explain its links to other pages? Is it clear how the page could be used as a part of an assessment?<br />
* Do you find other pages that actually have duplicate content? Is some content outdated (based on e.g. version history?)? Suggest how pages should be updated, deleted, or merged.<br />
* Do you find errors or mistakes on the page?<br />
* Is the text clear? <br />
* Write or update a summary (one paragraph in the very beginning explaining the main points of the text) on the page. If the content is too unclear to write a good summary, write down clarification questions to the moderator of that page.<br />
* Is the text properly referenced?<br />
* Are there discussions on the Talk page? If yes, <br />
** Have they been linked to from the main page? <br />
** Have the current resolutions been incorporated in the main page?<br />
<br />
; Pages with R code<br />
<br />
* [[Buildings in Basel]]<br />
* [[Exposure to PM2.5 in Finland]]<br />
* [[OpasnetUtils/Drafts]]<br />
* [[Energy use of buildings]] <br />
* [[Emission factors for burning processes]]<br />
* [[Building model]] <br />
* [[Health impact assessment]]<br />
* [[Disease risk]]<br />
* [[ERFs of environmental pollutants]]<br />
* [[Burden of disease in Finland]]<br />
* [[Climate change policies and health in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Building stock in Kuopio]] <br />
* [[Exposure to PM2.5 in Finland]]<br />
* [[Population of Kuopio]]<br />
* [[ERF of indoor dampness on respiratory health effects]] <br />
* [[Concentration-response to PM2.5]]<br />
* [[Climate change policies in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Energy balance]]<br />
* [[Energy balance in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Energy balance in Stuttgart]]<br />
* [[Energy balance in Suzhou]]<br />
* [[Energy transformations]]<br />
* [[Greenhouse gas emissions in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Emission factors for burning processes]]<br />
* [[Energy consumption of heating of buildings in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Fuels used by Haapaniemi energy plant]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Luikonlahden rikastamon ympäristöterveysriskien arviointi]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Väestön kohdekohtainen ympäristöperäisen haitta-ainealtistumisen ja terveysriskin arviointi]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Kuljetuksen päästöt]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Kaivoksen kuljetusten pölypäästö]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Metallimalmin murskausprosessin pölypäästöt]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Rikastekuljetukset]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Metallimalmin hihnakuljetuksen pölypäästöt]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Kohdekohtaisen Minera-arvioinnin mallisivu]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Järvisedimenttien metallipitoisuudet]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Energiantuotannon päästökertoimet/Sähköntuotanto]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Talvivaaran kaivoksen terveysvaikutukset]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Väestön kohdekohtainen ympäristöperäisen haitta-ainealtistumisen arviointi]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Pneumokokki]]<br />
<br />
; Pages without R code<br />
* [[Haapaniemi energy plant in Kuopio]] <br />
* [[Energy consumption of heating of buildings in Kuopio]] <br />
* [[Energy consumption and GHG emissions in Kuopio by sector]]<br />
* [[Effect of urban land use change on ambient air temperature]]<br />
* [[HI:Residential floorspace in Europe]] <br />
* [[Climate change policies in Thessaloniki]]<br />
* [[Greenhouse gas emissions in Rotterdam]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Ympäristöterveydelliset viite- ja raja-arvot]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Haitta-aineiden imeytyminen iholta elimistöön]]<br />
<br />
== Seminar: Lessons learned ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated preparing time: 9 hours for the three topics.<br />
<br />
Each group has a slot of 30 min to present their topic and discuss it. A recommendation is to aim at 20 min of presentation and 10 min of discussion. Each group has a different topic, but each topic is about one of the homeworks. Note that each group has THREE different presentations related to the work the group has done: one presenting an assessment (HW4-6), one about structured discussion or evaluation (HW8, 10) and one about a part of the Helsinki assessment (HW9). Remember that the audience has not read the report or assessment of your topic. So, in the presentation first describe the main purpose and content of your topic/material.<br />
<br />
When preparing your presentation, focus on three things:<br />
# Describe the '''substantive content''' of your topic. What did you learn about it, what conclusions were made based on the material and the work?<br />
# Describe '''how the content relates to a wider perspective''', namely an assessment or a decision process. What additional value did this topic bring? Did it change conclusions? Was it important in increasing understanding, or some other way?<br />
# '''How was it incorporated into the bigger picture?''' What methods were used to incorporate it? How were the methods used, and did the methods work for their purpose?<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Times and topics for the seminar presentations {{attack|# |These are times for the 2015 course. Will be updated.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 13:10, 6 March 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
! Time|| Presenter|| Topic|| Presentation<br />
|----<br />
|colspan="4"| Monday<br />
|----<br />
|| 11 May 9.15-9.45|| Mari, Anni, Michael|| HW4 Draft assessment||{{#l:DARM_HW4.pptx}}<br />
|----<br />
|| 11 May 9.45-10.15|| Mohammad, Paula|| HW5 Climate policy decisions|| {{#l:Climate policy 11052015.pptx}}<br />
|----<br />
|| 11 May 10.15-10.45|| Evans, Aishat, Badejo|| HW6 Collaboration in climate policy assessment||{{#l:DARM 1.pptx}} <br />
|----<br />
|colspan="4"| Break<br />
|----<br />
|| 11 May 12.15-12.45|| Mari, Anni, Michael|| HW8 Structured discussion|| {{#l:Opasnet.pptx}}[[Talk:Climate change policies in Helsinki#Discussions about climate change policies in Helsinki]]<br />
|----<br />
|| 11 May 12.45-13.15|| Mohammad, Paula|| HW10 Evaluation of a previous assessment|| {{#l:Climate change policies_11052015.pptx}}<br />
|----<br />
|| 11 May 13.15-13.45|| Evans, Aishat, Badejo|| HW10 Evaluation of a draft assessment|| {{#l:DARM 2.pptx}}<br />
|----<br />
|colspan="4"| Tuesday<br />
|----<br />
|| 12 May 12.15-12.45|| Sonja|| Climate policies of Helsinki (background, roadmap)|| {{#l:DARM.pptx}}<br />
|----<br />
|| 12 May 12.45-13.15|| Mari, Anni, Michael|| [[Building stock in Helsinki|HW9 Variable page]]|| {{#l:PresentationHW9.pptx}} Tables 4 & 5<br />
|----<br />
|| 12 May 13.15-13.45|| Mohammad, Paula|| [[Building stock in Helsinki|HW9 Variable page]]|| {{#l:Tables one and two.pdf}}<br />
|----<br />
|colspan="4"| Break<br />
|----<br />
|| 12 May 14.00-14.30|| Evans, Aishat, Badejo|| [[Building stock in Helsinki|HW9 Variable page]]|| {{#l:Helsinki Building Stock.pptx}} Table 6<br />
|----<br />
|| 12 May 14.30-15.00|| Jouni|| Assessment of climate policies of Helsinki|| [[Climate change policies in Helsinki#Calculations]]<br />
|----<br />
|| 12 May 15.00-15.45|| Jouni|| Evaluation and feedback|| [[OPP#Properties of good decision support]]<br />
|----<br />
|}</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Amr_Ebrahim&diff=40521User:Amr Ebrahim2017-04-25T20:25:24Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 6: Collaboration in climate policy assessment */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Homework 1 ==<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Good. You have answered more questions than asked for. I have added some clarifications to the text.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 07:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
'''Homework 1a: Open policy practice'''<br />
1. What is the main purpose of environmental health assessment?<br />
* Studying the characteristics of our living environment and its impacts on human health by applying research to validate cause and effect relations.<br />
*Improving plans using pragma-dilectic theory through knowledge sharing approaches, while taking in consideration complexity.<br />
*Supply knowledge in regards to facilitating communication and implementation of assessment produced to assist governance to desired outcomes.<br />
2.What is shared understanding? <br />
:The purposeful rafting of polarity in final decision options at hand. Employing experts and stakeholders in process of collective understanding of the magnitude of decision options. Involving means of support to execute, evaluate and manage intended knowledge rendered towards decision making. Throughout co-creating and facilitating synthesis utilizing probability and quantitative modeling.<br />
3. What are the main differences between regulatory and academic assessment approaches? Give examples of each.<br />
;Regulatory Assessment Approach: Captures the political infusion of societal decision making . They often look at decision from the lens of authorities and its association with communal and private governance. Poor policies can be the results of poor understanding of the interaction dynamics of each party. An example for that can be the COP private funding policies. {{attack|# |Typically, these are assessments whose content and/or process is regulated by law, e.g. chemical safety assessment by the REACH directive, or environmental impact assessments regulated by the EIA directive.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 07:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
;Academic Assessment Approach: The discipline that recognizes objectives towards decision making process through sufficing information needed.This takes place through a process of decision support by creating research questions that follows pragmatic rational. An example can be energy efficiency and nudge theory.<br />
4. What are co-creation skills? <br />
An amalgamating function that insures the execution , evaluation and management ( also referred to as international experience {{attack|# |Not international experience but ''interactional expertise'', meaning that people working in co-creation (often called facilitators) are able to interact with other disciplines and people. They are experts in making syntheses of the information produced.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 07:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}). Which is as set of capabilities that combines expertise, administrative and active involvement to handle the task of collaboration, information objectives and shared understanding. Towards purposeful management of decision making and information.<br />
5. What are the main differences between open assessment and most other assessment approaches? <br />
;Open Assessment: is a method that capitalizes on the use of information to generate better policies decision by explicitly introduce value judgement. based on scientific methods and structure to deal with disputes and contending in an open platform based on observation and reason to reject of accept. <br />
; other <s>open</s> assessment:all assessment methods has common structure to enable effective automation and rendering of information by structures attributes and sub-attributes encompassing ( scope, answers, rational).{{attack|# |Question, answer, and rationale are typical for open assessments, not other assessments. Open participation is a key difference between open assessment and other approaches.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 07:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
6. What is benefit-risk assessment? <br />
The prerequisite for safety procedures , where reveals the intrinsic hazardous component, substance or product.Composed of ( decompose- assessment, exposure-assessment, hazard identification and risk characterization. {{attack|# |What you describe is a typical risk assessment. Benefit-risk assessment looks also at the benefits of the activity or product.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 07:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
7. What is open assessment? <br />
:Is a method that attempts to answer a set of scientific questions that can improve societal decision making in an open participation context to produce value judgement.<br />
8. What different purposes are there for participation in assessment and/or decision making? <br />
:The purpose of participating in an assessment is to improve deliberate plans of actions that guides decision making to reach desired outcomes. It helps set milestones to impact, causes, problem owners, targeted segments and level of interaction.<br />
9. What are the dimensions of openness? <br />
:It is a principle framework to insure and monitor deviation from ideal state of openness during execution creating the balance needed for open practice and openness towards closed process.that takes place in a continual fashion to assist with participatory assessment and decision making process in a step-by-step consideration.<br />
10. What relevant stakeholder roles are there in environmental health assessment and related decision making <br />
:Knowledge about environmental health relationships and actions influencing them are tightly interconnected. Therefore, categories of interactions are set to facilitate interactions between stakeholders in the level of involvement. ( Isolated, informing, participatory, joint and shared). <br />
11.What is effectiveness' in the context of environmental health assessment and related decision making?<br />
:It is the follow up and post hoc analysis of the changes that can be provoked after the delivery of results to insure good assessment and evaluation. Throughout running evaluation approach to influence the decision making process addressing (quality of content, applicability and efficiency). Effective environmental health assessment therefore necessitates collaboration between environmental experts and decision makers.<br />
12.What is the trialogical approach to knowledge creation and learning?<br />
:It is the relevant involvement of all parties in the process learning to produce knowledge artifacts in a collective learning explicit linking knowledge creation to practice. It usually is considered in the context of computer support collaborative learning considering issues with knowledge creation and innovation.<br />
13. What is decision support?<br />
: A scheme core to evaluate and manage decision in open policy practice.to evaluate what exactly went wrong after results are obtains from the process. Contributing to decision making with high quality of content.<br />
14. What is a pragmatic knowledge service?<br />
: is a hybrid system of information technology not only meant for creating practical knowledge but also a vehicle of cultural change from individualistic perspective. Governed by 4 major characteristics: collaboration, knowledge practice, knowledge implementation and adaptability.<br />
15. What is collaboration?<br />
: Building and managing networked communities and social relations required for carrying out knowledge advancement effort. Allowing users to learn, lean, share and combine each other’s competences and experiences.<br />
16. What are the properties of good assessment?<br />
:Informative, collaborative, coherent) in regards to content. (In regards to applicability (relevance, availability, usability and acceptability) and intra/inter - assessments in regards to efficiency.<br />
17. What is the role of modelling in assessment and policy making?<br />
: It is the co-creation and facilitation category used to develop actual assessment models based on generic methods and case specifications.<br />
18. What parts does the open policy practice consist of?<br />
:Intentionality, causality, critique, shared information objects, openness and reuse. {{attack|# |These are principles used. It consists of these parts: shared understanding as the ultimate goal; execution (this work follows the principles you mention); co-creation skills and facilitation; and evaluation and management.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 07:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
19. What does it mean that the results of assessments can be considered shared information objects?<br />
:Information shared using a systemic structure that allows open work space. Used to define research questions to be answered in open assessment. While collaborate to answer questions to with stand critique and build causal connections.<br />
<br />
== Homework 6 ==<br />
<br />
'' Homework 6: Collaboration in climate policy assessment ( AMR, [[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab]]) ''<br />
<br />
'''Homework 6, part A:''' <br />
<br />
Questions about identifying roles and participation:<br />
* Who are the relevant participants of the assessment? and their roles?<br />
*Regulatory participants:<br />
# EU room for the river projects and altered discharge regimes at the German-Dutch border. <br />
# Delta Committee to parliament. <br />
# Regional board consisting of (municipalities, provinces, the waterboards.<br />
#‘bestuurlijke tafels’ national governmental stakeholders.<br />
* Execution Participants: <br />
# Port Rotterdam Company<br />
# Rotterdam Delta commissioner. <br />
# Deltares research institute.<br />
# Network Organisation for Quality of Environnment (NOK).<br />
# "maatschappelijke adviesgroep" (MAG) included stakeholders from a range of sectors, including inland shipping, nature NGO’s, logistics, industry, residents and is headed by the mayor of Rotterdam. <br />
# landscape architects under supervision of a national atelier.<br />
* What kind of relevant knowledge they (may) have regarding the assessment?<br />
* What needs and aims do they represent in the assessment?<br />
<br />
''''Deltares, Port Rotterdam and NOK:'''<br />
# GIS mapped megasites description: current and planned use, potential and actual risks<br />
# Boundary conditions for sustainable development: stakeholders interest, funding options and legislative framework (water quality targets set by water framework directive).<br />
# Management instruments and effects: risk-function relations and risk reduction measures.<br />
# Description of Management Options.<br />
# Option driven rehabilitation scenarios, technical feasibility tests and technical designs.<br />
# Cost-efficient management scenarios and selection of final project goals<br />
# Embedding principles and organizational models for implementation<br />
# Procedure for risk assessment and evaluating the proportionality of hazard prevention measures.<br />
# Assessment system for hazard appraisal and measure rankin with regard to subsequent utilization (function-orientated risk assessment).<br />
# Guideline for monitoring and predicting the temporal and spatial behaviour of environmental aspects for cost-effective procedures based on the risk-related management of sites.<br />
# Evaluation study on sites risk assessments comparing national requirements versus the new harmonized procedures.<br />
'''EU and regulatory:'''<br />
# Technical guideline for the implementation of MNA for the management of multiple enviromental hazards.<br />
# Report on the applicability of existing protocols/guidelines for EU sites.<br />
# Protocol/technical guideline for the implementation on MNA (Demona).<br />
# Procedure for description of the legislative framework.<br />
'''‘maatschappelijke adviesgroep’ (MAG) and Delta committee:'''<br />
# Cost-estimation tool, CARO – Cost Analysis of Remediation Options Tool Description.<br />
# Comparative analysis of cost-efficiency.<br />
# Procedure for description of stakeholder's interest and commitment towards current and future use.<br />
# Procedure for listing research needs and site investigation requirements.<br />
<br />
'''Homework 6, part B:'''<br />
* How could the relevant participants be involved in the assessment in an effective way?<br />
# Continuous update of boundary conditions and discussions about the possible future strategy.<br />
# Approval and adjustments of conceptual model concept: discussion on receptors (what are the receptors?)<br />
# Decision about further IMS development<br />
* How can the quality of an assessment be assured if anyone can participate?<br />
# Make an overview of boundary conditions.<br />
# Build the conceptual model including the transfer pathways that are taken into account and the planes of compliance.<br />
# overview of objectives and interests as well as the current and possible future strategy for managing.<br />
* How can you prevent malevolent contributions where the purpose is to vandalise the process?<br />
# Build a process descriptions maintaining confidentiality and the provide clarity in way the results are presented.<br />
# Determine risks and derive local standards suggestions for clustering, including organizational arguments as basis for clustering (such as similarity of activities and the cooperation and synergy between neighboring locations).<br />
* How can you make the outcome converge to a conclusion, because all issues are uncertain and controversial?<br />
# Define risk management objectives while bearing in mind that discussion on objectives is ongoing. <br />
# Insure Intensive communication between the execution team and regulatory through designing clear orientation and workshops.<br />
# Prioritization and optimization of risk, while controlling the propositions in scenarios.<br />
* How can you ensure that the outcomes are useful for the users?<br />
# Build implementation plan that is clear and fortified with comments and open for improvement.<br />
# Insure that all parties involved understand and are committed to guidelines set for implementations.<br />
# Develop monitoring program built on indicators that provide practical considerations and synergy.<br />
# Medium-Long term process reviews with continuous commitment assured.</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40520User:Ehab Mustafa2017-04-25T20:19:38Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 6 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Helsinki, Espoo, Kauniainen and Vantaa<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40519User:Ehab Mustafa2017-04-25T20:18:49Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: </p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following<br />
adaptation measure(s):<br />
1) Dike reinforcement<br />
2) Water storage Grevelingen<br />
3) Room for the River measures<br />
4) Channel deepening<br />
5) Full closure with dams and sluices<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
The addressed threat is different climate changes associated with delta water management. The measure reduces flood risk. Especially, economic values and sociocultural values are at stake. Since the Netherlands is a densely populated country with a high GDP, a flood can cause enormous damages. Climate change increases flood risk by higher river discharges and sea level rise. These include the following aspects:<br />
# Casualities<br />
# People affected<br />
# Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)<br />
# Infrastructure<br />
# Agriculture<br />
# Utility companies<br />
# Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses<br />
# Indirect damages<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Helsinki, Espoo, Kauniainen and Vantaa<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 6''' =<br />
<br />
I refer my work to [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]'s [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=Decision_analysis_and_risk_management_2017/Homework&diff=40518Decision analysis and risk management 2017/Homework2017-04-25T20:07:54Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{lecture|moderator=Jouni}}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Follow-up table of the homeworks'''. Green: work is acceptable. White: there is still work to do. Red: work is overdue. Deadline dates are mentioned in the column headings.<br />
|----<br />
! User <br />
! HW 1: Open assessment 30 Mar<br />
! HW 2: Basic skills of Opasnet 11 May<br />
! HW 3: Basic concepts of open assessment and co-creation 4 Apr<br />
! HW 4: Draft of an assessment plan 21 Apr<br />
! HW 5: Climate policy decisions and actions 21 Apr<br />
! HW 6: Collaboration in climate policy assessment 28 Apr<br />
! HW 7: Structured discussion 28 Apr<br />
! HW 8: Developing a variable page 11 May<br />
! HW 9: Evaluation of assessment 11 May<br />
! Seminars <br />
! Total score [max 5] (points)<br />
|----<br />
| [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr Ebrahim]]<br />
| [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 1|HW1a OK]] Add comments about HW1b-d!<br />
| <br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{[[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Edem Agbenowu|Edem Agbenowu]]<br />
| [[User:Edem Agbenowu#Homework 1|HW1a OK]] Add comments about HW1b-d!<br />
| <br />
| {{yes|[[User:Edem Agbenowu#Homework 3|HW3]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Ehab Mustafa#Homework 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes|[[User:Ehab Mustafa#Homework 3|HW3]]}}<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Ehab Mustafa#Homework 4|HW4]] see comments}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Jin Qiwen|Jin Qiwen]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Jin Qiwen#Homework 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|not finished [[User:Jin Qiwen#Homework 3|HW3]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Kaisu Lukkarinen|Kaisu Lukkarinen]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Kaisu Lukkarinen#Homework 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Kingsley Aliche|Kingsley Aliche]]<br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Margaret Arogunyo|Margaret Arogunyo]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Margaret Arogunyo#Home Work 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes|[[User:Margaret Arogunyo#Homework 3: Basic concepts of open assessment and co-creation|HW3a+b]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Nabin Subedi|Nabin Subedi]]<br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Noora Rantanen|Noora Rantanen]]<br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tamara Gajst|Tamara Gajst]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Tamara Gajst#Homework 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|[[User:Tamara Gajst#Homework 3|HW3A done, HW3B missing]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tarikul Islam|Tarikul Islam]]<br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tine Bizjak|Tine Bizjak]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|[[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 3: Basic concepts of open assessment and co-creation|HW3]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Zahra Shirani|Zahra Shirani]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Zahra Shirani#Homework 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|HW3a done, HW3b delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
|}<br />
<br />
'''Please read the homework assignments carefully and follow the instructions.''' If there is something unclear, please ask the course organizers (or fellow students) to explain and clarify! NOTE: Write all your homework answers on your own user page.<br />
<br />
Also add links to your homework answers in the table above. The evaluation of the homework exercises will be based on the answers found by following the links in the table. Students themselves are responsible for having the correct, complete and up-to-date links to homework answers. if you need help in adding the links to your homework answers to the table, please ask the course organizers (or fellow students) for advice. A convenient way to get help is to come to the exercise sessions.'''<br />
<br />
;Please note:<br />
* If your Homework says "OK" it means that the given homework is graded as "pass", i.e. at least 1 point. If you want to get better points, you should check and answer lecturers´ comments regarding that homework.<br />
* If there is no "OK" sign, you must revise your work according to the comments in order to make it acceptable.<br />
* You must write homework answers done in groups/pairs '''to only one''' place.<br />
* Add link to answers on your own user page if it is located on someone else's user page (do not copy the text on your own user page).<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 5 hours.<br />
<br />
'''Purpose: To familiarise yourself to the basic ideas of open policy practice.<br />
<br />
Read pages [[Open policy practice]], [[Knowledge crystal]], and [[Open assessment]] and browse [[Assessments are to change the world]] and [[Shared information objects in policy support]] and provide brief answers to three (3) questions from the following question list. You may also want to search from Opasnet. You are free to choose which questions to answer. '''Write your answers on your own Opasnet user page'''. Instructions on creating a user account and editing your own user page will be given on first lecture. '''In case of difficulties in wiki editing, write your answers on a separate document and copy them to your user page later'''. The questions and answers will be discussed on the second lecture (23 March). A sufficient length for each answers is a few sentences or bullet points. Please do not write lengthy essays, but instead try to identify and briefly describe the main points relevant in each question. The idea of this homework is not to find the right or correct answers, but instead to introduce the conceptual basis of this course to the students.<br />
<br />
'''Questions:<br />
# What is the main purpose of ''environmental health assessment''?<br />
# What is ''shared understanding''?<br />
# What are the main differences between ''regulatory'' and ''academic'' assessment approaches? Give examples of each.<br />
# What are ''co-creation skills''?<br />
# What are the main differences between ''open assessment'' and most other assessment approaches?<br />
# What is ''benefit-risk assessment''?<br />
# What is ''open assessment''?<br />
# What different ''purposes'' are there ''for participation'' in assessment and/or decision making?<br />
# What are the ''dimensions of openness''?<br />
# What ''relevant stakeholder roles'' are there in environmental health assessment and related decision making<br />
# What is ''effectiveness' in the context of environmental health assessment and related decision making?<br />
# What is the ''trialogical approach'' to knowledge creation and learning?<br />
# What is ''decision support''?<br />
# What is a ''pragmatic knowledge service''?<br />
# What is ''collaboration''?<br />
# What are the ''properties of good assessment?<br />
# What is the role of ''modelling'' in assessment and policy making?<br />
# What parts does the ''open policy practice'' consist of?<br />
# What does it mean that the results of assessments can be considered ''shared information objects''?<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 5 hours''<br />
<br />
'''Purpose: To learn the terms and concepts of open policy practice and see how they are related<br />
<br />
[https://quizlet.com/join/J43nT5Azy Join Quizlet] and practice with the sets of terms to learn the concepts:<br />
* [https://quizlet.com/196604415/principles-of-open-policy-practice-flash-cards/ Principles of open policy practice]<br />
* [https://quizlet.com/196602485/properties-of-good-assessment-flash-cards/ Properties of good assessment]<br />
* [https://quizlet.com/196600875/glossary-for-open-policy-practice-flash-cards/ Glossary for open policy practice], also the [https://quizlet.com/196599457/finnish-vocabulary-for-open-policy-practice-flash-cards/ Finnish terms] if you can Finnish.<br />
* [https://quizlet.com/196602931/categories-of-interaction-flash-cards/ Categories of interaction]<br />
* [https://quizlet.com/196602695/dimensions-of-openness-flash-cards/ Dimensions of openness]<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 5 hours''<br />
<br />
'''Purpose: To learn the basics of critical thinking and argumentation<br />
<br />
[https://www.khanacademy.org/ Join Khan Academy] and follow the course of [https://www.khanacademy.org/partner-content/wi-phi/wiphi-critical-thinking Critical thinking]. If you already know this topic well, just do the exercises.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 0.5 - 5 hours<br />
<br />
'''Purpose: To ensure that the basics of probability theory are clear <br />
(We assume that the basic statistics have been taught to students participating in this class.)<br />
<br />
Go through the contents of the Khan Academy courses [https://www.khanacademy.org/math/ap-statistics/probability-ap probability] and [https://www.khanacademy.org/math/statistics-probability/random-variables-stats-library random variables] and make sure that you refresh your memory on this. Do the exercises, and look at the videos if needed.<br />
<br />
There are also some other, more basic material that may be useful: [https://www.khanacademy.org/math/precalculus/prob-comb probabilities and combinatorics].<br />
<br />
== Homework 2: Basic skills of open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 5 hours''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Basic skills''': Mark "yes" when you know how to do this and put a link to the page where you have used the skill. Use these skills as parts of other homeworks.<br />
|----<br />
! User <br />
! [[Create article|Create a page and type]]<br />
! [[Help:Editing#Uploading|Upload]] a file and link it<br />
! [[Help:Editing#Text formatting|Use headings]], lists, bold, italic<br />
! Use internal and external [[Help:Editing#Linking|links]] and [[Help:Editing#Templates|templates]] <br />
! Use [[Help:Editing#Reference lists|references]]<br />
! Create a [[Help:Editing#Tables|prettytable]]<br />
! Upload data by [[help:Editing#Data table|t2b table]] and [[Uploading to Opasnet Base|Opasnet Base Uploader]]<br />
! Organise a [[discussion]]<br />
|----<br />
| [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr Ebrahim]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Edem Agbenowu|Edem Agbenowu]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]]<br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Jin Qiwen|Jin Qiwen]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Kaisu Lukkarinen|Kaisu Lukkarinen]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Kingsley Aliche|Kingsley Aliche]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Margaret Arogunyo|Margaret Arogunyo]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Nabin Subedi|Nabin Subedi]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Noora Rantanen|Noora Rantanen]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tamara Gajst|Tamara Gajst]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tarikul Islam|Tarikul Islam]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tine Bizjak|Tine Bizjak]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Zahra Shirani|Zahra Shirani]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}} <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
|}<br />
<br />
==Homework 3: Basic concepts of open assessment and co-creation==<br />
<br />
:'' Estimated working time: 2+5 hours.<br />
<br />
'''Task A:''' Read a) homeworks 1 and 2, b) [[Glossary#Terms in open policy practice]] and c) the introductory pages listed below. If you know Finnish, the [[:op_fi:Yhtäköyttä-hankkeen loppuraportti|Yhtäköyttä report]] contains a lot of the same material in a more organised way. After reading, write two questions that you think needs clarification. Write the questions on your own user page. The questions will be answered during the next lecture.<br />
<br />
{{Opasnet training}}<br />
<br />
'''Task B:''' Read the material in a {{#l:Darm reading co-creation.zip|zip file}} about co-creation, decision support models, and facilitation. It contains the following material (numbers refer to reference numbers in [[:op_fi:Yhtäköyttä-hankkeen loppuraportti|Yhtäköyttä report]].<br />
<br />
* 11: von Winterfeldt, D (2013). Bridging the gap between science and decision making. PNAS 110:3:14055-14061. [11]<br />
* 45: Aitamurto, T, Landemore, H. (2015) Five design principles for crowdsourced policymaking: Assessing the case of crowdsourced off-road traffic law in Finland. Journal of Social Media for Organizations. 2:1:1-19.<br />
* 46: Force11. FAIR data principles. [41] viitattu 22.2.2017.<br />
* 47: Prahalad, CK, Ramaswamy, V (2004). Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation. Journal of Interactive Marketing 18:3:5-14. doi:10.1002/dir.20015 [42]<br />
* 48: Mauser, W, Klepper, G, Rice, M, Schmalzbauer, BS, Hackmann, H, Leemans, R, Current, HM (2013). Transdisciplinary global change research: the co-creation of knowledge for sustainability. Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 5:3–4:420–431. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2013.07.001 <br />
* 49: Franco, LA, Montibeller, G (2010). Facilitated modelling in operational research. European Journal of Operational Research 205:3:489–500. [43]<br />
* 53: Kolbert, E. (2017) Why facts don't change our minds. The New Yorker, 27.2.2017. [47] viitattu 22.2.2017.<br />
<br />
Write a short assay on your user page about co-creation in decision support. What is co-creation? What advantage does it bring compared with more traditional decision support processes? What is the role of a facilitator, and what skills do they need?<br />
<br />
==Homework 4: Draft of an assessment plan==<br />
<br />
'''Note! Homework 4 answers will be used as materials in homework 10.'''<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 8 hours<br />
<br />
Task: With your pair, draft a plan of an assessment about the topic agreed on during the lecture. See the correct structure from [[Assessment]]. You may copy the structure directly from [[:Template:Assessment structure]]. Write the draft assessment on either your or your partner's user page (and put a link to it on the other's user page). Choose your specific topic within the broader area of '''climate change policies in a city'''. You can consider mitigation (how to reduce greenhouse gas emissions), adaptation (how to prepare for changes caused by climate change) or both. You may choose a specific city on your assessment, or look at some aspect in cities in general.<br />
<br />
You are expected to make plans about a good assessment related a topic of your choice (preferably related to climate change policies in cities). Fill in the subheadings in Scope and make plans about the Rationale: what variables or assessment parts you would need to be able to answer the question asked? However, you are NOT expected to come up with results or conclusions (although you can describe what kind of results you might get if the assessment was actually performed).<br />
<br />
== Homework 5: Climate policy decisions and actions ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 6 hours<br />
<br />
Consider that you are given an assignment to assess the ''direct or indirect health impacts caused by a climate (adaptation) strategy or program''. One of the first things in getting started with the assessment is to discuss, identify and explicate the decisions and options related to the assessment problem. In pairs choose one climate (adaptation) strategy/program from the material list below and identify and write out answers to the following questions based on the material. Use your own reasoning and knowledge or other sources (e.g. Google search) as complementary where the material is incomplete or inconclusive.<br />
<br />
'''Write your answers on either group member's user page (other member adds a link to the answers on his/her user page). <br />
<br />
Questions:<br />
* What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?<br />
** Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?<br />
* What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?<br />
** Who are those that actually realize these actions?<br />
* What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?<br />
** Who are the decision makers?<br />
* What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?<br />
** Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,<br />
** Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?<br />
** Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?<br />
* Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.<br />
* ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "[[shared understanding]]"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).<br />
<br />
Materials: <br />
<br />
* {{#l:Klimaprogramm-Bayern-2020.pdf}} {{#l:klimaprogramm2020_en_05_2009_ba.pdf}} [http://www.bayern.de/politik/initiativen/klimaprogramm-bayern-2020/ Bavarian Climate Programme 2020] [https://www.stmuv.bayern.de/umwelt/klimaschutz/klimaschutzpolitik/doc/klimaprogramm2020_en_05_2009_ba.pdf]<br />
* {{#l:Summary_Ludwigsburg_LEAP_Final_EN.pdf}} [http://www.sustainable-now.eu/fileadmin/template/projects/sustainable_now/files/Summary_Ludwigsburg_LEAP_Final_EN.pdf Integrated Climate Protection and Energy Strategy for Ludwigsburg]<br />
* {{#l:National_Climate_Change_Strategy_of_Hungary_2008.pdf}} [http://klima.kvvm.hu/documents/14/National_Climate_Change_Strategy_of_Hungary_2008.pdf National Climate Change Strategy of Hungary 2008] (mitigation, adaptation) <br />
* {{#l:YTV_climate_strategy_2030.pdf}} [http://www.planningclimatechange.org/joomla/0_upload/climate_strategy_2030.pdf Climate Strategy 2030 of Helsinki Metropolitan Area]<br />
* {{#l:11_2012_Helsinki_Metropolitan_Area_Climate_Change_Adaptation_Strategy.pdf}} [http://ilmastotyokalut.fi/files/2014/10/11_2012_Helsinki_Metropolitan_Area_Climate_Change_Adaptation_Strategy.pdf Climate Adaptation Strategy of Helsinki Metropolitan Area]<br />
* {{#l:NCCS-2012-Publication.pdf}} [https://www.nccs.gov.sg/nccs-2012/docs/NCCS-2012-Publication.pdf National Climate Change Strategy of Singapore 2012] (mitigation, adaptation) <br />
* {{#l:2011_09_06 KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN DEFINITIEF.pdf}} [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2011_09_06%20KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN%20DEFINITIEF.pdf Rotterdam Climate Initiative RCI] (Amr, Ehab)<br />
* {{#l:RCP_ENG_def.pdf}} [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/RCP/English/RCP_ENG_def.pdf Rotterdam Climate Proof Adaptation Programme 2010] (Amr, Ehab)<br />
* {{#l:Cover+Adaptation+to+climate+change+in+Switzerland.pdf}} [http://www.bafu.admin.ch/publikationen/publikation/01673/index.html?lang=en Adaptation to climate change in Switzerland]<br />
* {{#l:Ireland_at_Risk_2.pdf}} [http://www.iae.ie/site_media/pressroom/documents/2009/Nov/17/Ireland_at_Risk_2.pdf Ireland at Risk. Critical Infrastructure Adaptation for Climate Change]<br />
* {{#l:klimatilpasningsstrategi_uk_web.pdf}} [http://www.klimatilpasning.dk/media/5322/klimatilpasningsstrategi_uk_web.pdf Danish Strategy for Adaptation to a Changing Climate]<br />
* [http://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/web/guest/countries Climate adaptation materials in different European languages]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Helsingin ilmastonmuutos_-tiekartta]]<br />
<br />
== Homework 6: Collaboration in climate policy assessment ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 6 hours<br />
<br />
This exercise continues from homework 5. With the same pair, using the same material, and building on your homework 5 answers, identify and write out your answers to the following questions. Narrow your scrutiny down to e.g. one or two decisions/actions/goals if needed. Base your answers on the climate program/strategy paper you have chosen, but also apply your own reasoning, other DARM 2015 course materials etc., particularly on the second set of questions.<br />
<br />
'''Write your answers on either group member's user page (other member adds a link to the answers on his/her user page). <br />
<br />
'''Homework 6, part A:'''<br />
Questions about identifying roles and participation:<br />
* Who are the relevant participants of the assessment?<br />
* What roles the different participants (may) take in the assessment?<br />
* What kind of relevant knowledge they (may) have regarding the assessment?<br />
* What needs and aims do they represent in the assessment? <br />
<br />
'''Homework 6, part B:'''<br />
Consider also the following questions about facilitating collaboration:<br />
* How could the relevant participants be involved in the assessment in an effective way?<br />
* How can the quality of an assessment be assured if anyone can participate?<br />
* How can you prevent malevolent contributions where the purpose is to vandalise the process?<br />
* How can you make the outcome converge to a conclusion, because all issues are uncertain and controversial?<br />
* How can you ensure that the outcomes are useful for the users?<br />
<br />
== Homework 7: Structured discussion ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 20 hours<br />
<br />
{{summary box<br />
| question = What are the evaluation criteria for structured discussion (homework 7)?<br />
| answer = Evaluation of arguments:<br />
* Each argument is evaluated either A (very good), B (good), or C (irrelevant).<br />
* When you have written at least one A argument and at least three B arguments, you get grade 2.<br />
* When you have written at least four B arguments you get grade 1.5.<br />
* If you have written at least two B arguments you get grade 1.<br />
* Argument with C is a slight dis-merit and may affect borderline situations.<br />
* B argument is the default. A arguments differ from B arguments by having<br />
** an important, unique aspect,<br />
** good referencing, and/or<br />
** clever use of hierarchy.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
The objective of this homework is to learn to organise existing written material into a [[discussion|structured discussion]] with a main statement and related arguments. In addition, students should learn to develop and use own arguments within a structured discussion. For examples, see<br />
* [[Talk:Environmental impact assessment directive]]<br />
* [[Talk:Assessment of the health impacts of H1N1 vaccination]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Keskustelu:Pneumokokkirokotteen turvallisuus]]<br />
* [[Talk:Climate change policies in Helsinki]]<br />
<br />
Your task is to initiate and participate in structured discussions on page [[Talk:Congestion charge]] according to the instructions on page [[Discussion]]. Come up with one original statement for a discussion based your own ideas, by talking to Helsinki city representatives (jari.viinanen(at)hel.fi, mira.jarkko(at)hel.fi) or the material below.<br />
<br />
'''Articles in Wikipedia<br />
* [[:en:Congestion pricing|Congestion pricing]]<br />
* [[:en:London congestion charge|London congestion charge]]<br />
* [[:fi:Ruuhkamaksu|Ruuhkamaksu]]<br />
<br />
'''Studies about congestion charges in Helsinki<br />
(and related discussion) {{comment|# |If you know Finnish, you should first look at these texts to make their arguments available to others in English.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:43, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
* Helsingin kaupunki. Ruuhkamaksut tehokkain keino parantaa Helsingin ilmanlaatua nopeasti. (12.01.2017) [http://www.hel.fi/www/uutiset/fi/ymparistokeskus/ruuhkamaksut-12012017]<br />
* HSL (11.2.2016): Tiemaksut varmistaisivat Helsingin seudun kestävän kasvun [https://www.hsl.fi/uutiset/2016/tiemaksut-varmistaisivat-helsingin-seudun-kestavan-kasvun-7995]<br />
** Helsingin Sanomat [http://www.hs.fi/kaupunki/art-2000002885425.html]<br />
** Helsingin Uutiset [http://www.helsinginuutiset.fi/artikkeli/363860-ruuhkamaksut-kayttoon-ehka-jo-2020-kartta-nain-ne-vaikuttavat-sinuun]<br />
** Kauppalehti-blogi [http://blog.kauppalehti.fi/metrossanukkuja/ruuhkamaksu-voi-olla-maailman-tyhmin-idea]<br />
* LVM. (2011) Helsingin seudun ruuhkamaksu. Jatkoselvitys. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 5/2011. [http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-243-214-8]<br />
* LVM. (2007). Joukkoliikenteen houkuttelevuuden ja käytön lisääminen eri liikkujaryhmissä. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 63/2007. [http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-201-954-7]<br />
** Talouselämä-uutiskommentti [http://www.talouselama.fi/uutiset/ruuhkamaksu-rankaisee-koyhaa-3388061]<br />
* LVM. Tienkäyttömaksujärjestelmät. Esiselvitys. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 17/2006. [http://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/78730/Julkaisuja_17_2006.pdf?sequence=1]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Scientific articles about congestion charge and health<br />
*{{doi|10.1126/science.aaf3420}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.jth.2015.08.002}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1080/09640568.2014.912615}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.tra.2015.03.004}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.01.002}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.09.015}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1080/13547500902965252}}<br />
*{{doi|10.5172/impp.453.10.2-3.269}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.amepre.2006.03.030}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1136/jech.2003.012385}}<br />
<br />
Build the content to your discussion based on different materials you can find from the climate reports in homework 5, from the Internet, and from the city representatives. Note that you can and should also participate in discussions launched by other students.<br />
<br />
As facilitators, you should pay attention to get as many different opinions documented as possible. So, jump into a role of a stakeholder and try to think what he/she would say. Possible roles include:<br />
* A national authority giving environmental permissions.<br />
* A taxi company.<br />
* A department store inside or outside a planned congestion charge zone.<br />
* A nature conservationist.<br />
* A local politician interested in both nature and local economy.<br />
* A citizen.<br />
<br />
Note that you are allowed to:<br />
* Contradict your own arguments.<br />
* Update and improve statements if they are too vague or poorly written. However, be careful not to push the existing argumentation out of context. Instead of making large changes to a statement, start a new discussion with your new statement.<br />
* Add your signature to other people's arguments if you agree with them. Note that the first name is assumed to be the original author, so don't put your name first.<br />
* Clarify other people's arguments, if you do it carefully and do not change the meaning.<br />
* Copy arguments from one discussion to another, if they are relevant. But instead of copying large blocks, make references to the other discussion instead.<br />
<br />
== Homework 8: Participate in an assessment ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: '''44 hours'''<br />
<br />
* Everyone participates in making an open assessment. The topic is [[Congestion charge]] to reduce car traffic. This relates to a larger topic [[Climate change policies in Helsinki]]. The topic shares some similarities with [[Climate change policies and health in Kuopio]] and [[Climate change policies in Basel]], although congestion charge was not discussed in those assessments.<br />
* Based on structured discussions in Homework 7, every pair selects a sub-topic (or research question) and develops at least one variable page that asks that question and answers it. Before starting a variable page, suggestionss about relevant questions should be discussed on the assessment page ([[Congestion charge]]). This is because the relevance of a specific question depends on other questions asked, and some issues link causally together nicely when the questions are formulated in a coherent manner.<br />
* The task is to produce a shared understanding of the assessment topic, i.e. congestion charges in Helsinki. The shared understanding is produced using the [[structure of shared understanding]]. In practice:<br />
** Each main subtopic is described on its own page in Opasnet.<br />
** Find enough relevant information for a plausible answer, synthesise the information on the page, and quantitate it.<br />
** The connections of the pages and other items are described on three tables: a) Items, b) Relations, and c) Evaluations. Page [[Voting age]] has an example about how to use the tables.<br />
* The data should be documented well enough to convince a critical reader that this is a good answer to the question.<br />
* Other examples of [[shared understanding]] ([[:op_fi:Jaetun ymmärryksen menetelmä]]) in Finnish:<br />
** [[:op_fi:Keskipitkän aikavälin ilmastopolitiikan suunnitelma]],<br />
** [[:op_fi:Energiarenessanssi]],<br />
** [[:op_fi:Pietarsaaren rokotuskeskustelu]]<br />
<br />
== Homework 9: Evaluation of assessment ==<br />
<br />
:'' Estimated working time: 8 hours.<br />
<br />
In this exercise you are asked to look into and evaluate one homework 4 draft assessment (other than your own) and one real-life assessment performed in Opasnet (listed below). <br />
* [[Helsinki energy decision 2015]]<br />
* [[Climate change policies and health in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Climate change policies in Basel]]<br />
* [[Pneumococcal vaccine]]<br />
* [[Water guide]]<br />
* [[Fukushima nuclear accident]]<br />
* [[Risk assessment on Hämeenkyrö municipal solid waste incinerator]]<br />
* [[Comparative risk assessment of dioxin and fine particles]]<br />
* [[Benefit-risk assessment of fish consumption for Beneris]]<br />
* [[Emission assessment of small-scale energy production in the Helsinki metropolitan area]]<br />
* [[Assessment of building policies' effect on dampness and asthma in Europe]]<br />
* [[Assessment of the health impacts of H1N1 vaccination]]<br />
* [[Benefit-risk assessment of cinnamon]]<br />
* [[INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF WASTE MANAGEMENT IN LAZIO (ITALY)]]<br />
* [[The health risks and benefits of cycling in urban environments compared with car use: health impact assessment study]]<br />
* [[Environmental impact assessment directive]]<br />
* [[Assessment on impacts of emission trading on city-level (ET-CL)]]<br />
* [[Gasbus - health impacts of Helsinki bus traffic]]<br />
* [[Biofuel assessments]]<br />
* Assessments in Finnish:<br />
** [[:op_fi:Pahtavaaran kaivos]]<br />
** [[:op_fi:Silakan hyöty-riskiarvio]]<br />
** [[:op_fi:Rauman sataman laajennuksen vaikutus terveyteen]]<br />
** [[:op_fi:Talvivaaran kaivoksen terveysvaikutukset]]<br />
<br />
<br />
The work is based on instructions and tables on page [[Open policy practice#Evaluation and management]]. Find the assessments by the two users below you on the user/homework list on top of this page (the last on the list shall pick the first two users on the list and the second last on the list shall pick the last and the first user).<br />
<br />
'''This exercise is intended to be done individually.''' However, co-operation between students is recommended.<br />
<br />
'''First characterize the draft assessments''' according to the ''Knowledge-policy interaction'' and ''Dimensions of openness'' frameworks. The things to consider in the characterization are listed and explained in the tables in [[Open policy practice#Evaluation and management]].<br />
<br />
In order to identify the last point in framework for characterising settings (Table 3.), mode of interaction that the draft assessment builds on, characterize the dimensions of openness in the assessment explained in Table 4. ([[Open policy practice#Dimensions of openness]]). The example categories for interaction mentioned in Table 3 are explained in Table 5 ([[Open policy practice#Categories of interaction]]).<br />
<br />
'''Second, evaluate the assessment drafts''' according to the (slightly modified) ''[[Open policy practice#Properties of good decision support]]'' framework. Base your evaluation on the characterization you have made. The things to consider in the evaluation are listed and explained in Table 2. For each attribute (i.e. an aspect to consider) give a numerical evaluation on a 1-5 scale (1 = poor, 5 = excellent). Also briefly write down your reasoning for each numerical evaluation. If something seems completely missing or not possible to evaluate, the numerical evaluation is 0 (also write down your reasoning why the particular aspect of the draft assessment deserves an evaluation of 0).<br />
<br />
Evaluation of assessments is not only something to be done after an assessment has been completed. Instead, evaluation should be seen as a means to guide the making of assessments towards their aims while they are still happening. Therefore, '''the third task of this exercise is to formulate suggestions for developing/improving the draft assessment'''. Write your suggestions as comments/arguments to the user pages where the draft assessment descriptions are. Also point out where the information in the draft assessment is/was missing or insufficient for characterization or evaluation.<br />
<br />
'''Homework 4 answers will be used as materials in this exercise.''' It is recommended that you attempt to do this exercise only starting on the deadline of Homework 4.<br />
<br />
Links to some examples of using the above mentioned evaluation frameworks:<br />
* [[Openness in participation, assessment, and policy making upon issues of environment and environmental health: a review of literature and recent project results]] (Dimensions of openness)<br />
* [[Assessment of impacts to environment and health in influencing manufacturing and public policy]] (Knowledge-policy interaction.)<br />
* [[Evaluating effectiveness of open assessments on alternative biofuel sources]] (Dimensions of openness and Properties of good assessment.)<br />
* [[:op_fi:Puijon metsien käyttösuunnitelman päätöksenteko]] (All methods. In Finnish)<br />
<br />
== Extra homework (not evaluated): Structure of pages and objects and R code==<br />
<br />
{{comment|# |In the next course, we need a homework where there is one variable and some related (pre-known) data. The task is to go through the data, evaluate its applicability, transform it into a format that better answers the question, and discuss different interpretations. The purpose is to produce a probability distribution as an answer to the question. This variable might be a part of the [[training assessment]]. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 14:47, 19 May 2015 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 8 hours<br />
<br />
The objective of this homework is that you learn to see what different parts of a page are and how they are related to each other and to other pages. Especially, an objective is to understand the role of R code in this system. You should learn to identify key things from a code and understand their use and connections to other parts of an assessment. These skill are then needed in Homework 9 when we actually perform an assessment.<br />
<br />
With your pair, select and '''reserve three pages''' (by adding your usernames beside the page link) from the list below. At least two of them have to contain t2b tables and R code. Go through the content by doing all of the key tasks below, if possible. Also look at the additional questions and answer at least some of them. Write your answers to the page by using the comment, defend (when things are OK), and attack (when things are not OK) buttons. If you can, improve the content or suggest tasks for improvement.<br />
<br />
In addition, select three other pages from the list such that another pair has already done the work. Read the content and their comments, and agree or disagree with them. Try to improve the content further.<br />
<br />
; Key tasks<br />
* Check that the page has a correct page type and change when needed. Check that the page has all subheadings that belong to the page type. Add, if missing.<br />
* Categorise the page to relevant categories.<br />
* Organise the content into the right subheadings. Especially, look what is Data and what is Answer.<br />
* Check and update the Dependencies. Also check that the Answers in dependency pages are coherent with this page.<br />
* Make rcodes that a) creates the ovariable (under Calculations) and b) gets the latest ovariable and prints basic results (under Answer).<br />
* Test any existing code and report its functionalities on the page.<br />
* Write or update a summary (one paragraph in the very beginning explaining the main points of the text) on the page. If the content is too unclear to write a good summary, write down clarification questions to the moderator of that page.<br />
* If you have problems with any previous steps, describe them on the relevant point on the page.<br />
<br />
<br />
; Additional questions<br />
* Does the page have a correct page type?<br />
* Does the page have a question? Is it clear and unambiguous?<br />
* Does the page have an answer to the question? Does it actually give an answer to what is asked?<br />
* With variables, is the answer given as a link to a model run with calculated results? If yes,<br />
** Does the model run have a clear result table?<br />
** Does the model run have a clear result graph?<br />
** Is it clear where the code that was used to run the results is?<br />
* In method pages: based on the guidance in the answer, is it possible to actually use the method in an assessment?<br />
* In method pages: What data is required to be able to use the method? Are the requirements listed under "Inputs"?<br />
* Are there data on the page that is needed to answer the question? Are it in machine-readable format (i.e., in t2b table or directly stored in the database)?<br />
** Are the data under Rationale/Data subheading, (or in methods under Rationale/Inputs)?<br />
* Is there data or text that is NOT needed to justify the answer? Would that data be in better place on another page with a different question? What would that question be?<br />
* If the data is needed but is not used in the Answer, update it or suggest tasks to update it.<br />
* Are there external variables whose values need to be known to be able to estimate this object? If yes, <br />
** Are these listed under Rationale/Dependencies?<br />
** Are there equations (as text) for calculating this object based on the dependencies under Rationale/Formula (or Rationale/Calculations)<br />
* Is there an R code that implements the object? <br />
** With variables, is the code under Rationale/Calculations?<br />
** With methods, is there a code under Rationale/Calculations that defines the method object?<br />
** With methods, is there a code under Answer that describes how the method object is used??<br />
** If there are dependencies and formula, does the code take them in to produce an ovariable?<br />
** If there are data, does the code take them in to produce an ovariable?<br />
** When you run the code, does it crash (i.e. produce an error message) before completion? When and why (use ''show code'' and ''show messages and errors'' to understand what's going on)?<br />
** Are there several different codes on the page? Are their purposes clear?<br />
** Does the page use other pages (objects) in calculations? Are these connections listed explicitly as links under the R code?<br />
* Does the page have an evaluation (edistymisluokitus) in either a separate box in the beginning, or in the metadata box?<br />
* Does the page have other subheadings (See also, References, Related files, Keywords)? <br />
** Are there links to other related pages? Are relevant links missing?<br />
* Is the page categorised to relevant categories?<br />
* With encyclopedia pages: is the content detailed enough so that one or more variables or methods could be made based on it? Does such page(s) exist? Are these pages linked to each other?<br />
* Does the page explain its links to other pages? Is it clear how the page could be used as a part of an assessment?<br />
* Do you find other pages that actually have duplicate content? Is some content outdated (based on e.g. version history?)? Suggest how pages should be updated, deleted, or merged.<br />
* Do you find errors or mistakes on the page?<br />
* Is the text clear? <br />
* Write or update a summary (one paragraph in the very beginning explaining the main points of the text) on the page. If the content is too unclear to write a good summary, write down clarification questions to the moderator of that page.<br />
* Is the text properly referenced?<br />
* Are there discussions on the Talk page? If yes, <br />
** Have they been linked to from the main page? <br />
** Have the current resolutions been incorporated in the main page?<br />
<br />
; Pages with R code<br />
<br />
* [[Buildings in Basel]]<br />
* [[Exposure to PM2.5 in Finland]]<br />
* [[OpasnetUtils/Drafts]]<br />
* [[Energy use of buildings]] <br />
* [[Emission factors for burning processes]]<br />
* [[Building model]] <br />
* [[Health impact assessment]]<br />
* [[Disease risk]]<br />
* [[ERFs of environmental pollutants]]<br />
* [[Burden of disease in Finland]]<br />
* [[Climate change policies and health in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Building stock in Kuopio]] <br />
* [[Exposure to PM2.5 in Finland]]<br />
* [[Population of Kuopio]]<br />
* [[ERF of indoor dampness on respiratory health effects]] <br />
* [[Concentration-response to PM2.5]]<br />
* [[Climate change policies in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Energy balance]]<br />
* [[Energy balance in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Energy balance in Stuttgart]]<br />
* [[Energy balance in Suzhou]]<br />
* [[Energy transformations]]<br />
* [[Greenhouse gas emissions in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Emission factors for burning processes]]<br />
* [[Energy consumption of heating of buildings in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Fuels used by Haapaniemi energy plant]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Luikonlahden rikastamon ympäristöterveysriskien arviointi]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Väestön kohdekohtainen ympäristöperäisen haitta-ainealtistumisen ja terveysriskin arviointi]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Kuljetuksen päästöt]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Kaivoksen kuljetusten pölypäästö]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Metallimalmin murskausprosessin pölypäästöt]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Rikastekuljetukset]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Metallimalmin hihnakuljetuksen pölypäästöt]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Kohdekohtaisen Minera-arvioinnin mallisivu]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Järvisedimenttien metallipitoisuudet]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Energiantuotannon päästökertoimet/Sähköntuotanto]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Talvivaaran kaivoksen terveysvaikutukset]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Väestön kohdekohtainen ympäristöperäisen haitta-ainealtistumisen arviointi]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Pneumokokki]]<br />
<br />
; Pages without R code<br />
* [[Haapaniemi energy plant in Kuopio]] <br />
* [[Energy consumption of heating of buildings in Kuopio]] <br />
* [[Energy consumption and GHG emissions in Kuopio by sector]]<br />
* [[Effect of urban land use change on ambient air temperature]]<br />
* [[HI:Residential floorspace in Europe]] <br />
* [[Climate change policies in Thessaloniki]]<br />
* [[Greenhouse gas emissions in Rotterdam]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Ympäristöterveydelliset viite- ja raja-arvot]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Haitta-aineiden imeytyminen iholta elimistöön]]<br />
<br />
== Seminar: Lessons learned ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated preparing time: 9 hours for the three topics.<br />
<br />
Each group has a slot of 30 min to present their topic and discuss it. A recommendation is to aim at 20 min of presentation and 10 min of discussion. Each group has a different topic, but each topic is about one of the homeworks. Note that each group has THREE different presentations related to the work the group has done: one presenting an assessment (HW4-6), one about structured discussion or evaluation (HW8, 10) and one about a part of the Helsinki assessment (HW9). Remember that the audience has not read the report or assessment of your topic. So, in the presentation first describe the main purpose and content of your topic/material.<br />
<br />
When preparing your presentation, focus on three things:<br />
# Describe the '''substantive content''' of your topic. What did you learn about it, what conclusions were made based on the material and the work?<br />
# Describe '''how the content relates to a wider perspective''', namely an assessment or a decision process. What additional value did this topic bring? Did it change conclusions? Was it important in increasing understanding, or some other way?<br />
# '''How was it incorporated into the bigger picture?''' What methods were used to incorporate it? How were the methods used, and did the methods work for their purpose?<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Times and topics for the seminar presentations {{attack|# |These are times for the 2015 course. Will be updated.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 13:10, 6 March 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
! Time|| Presenter|| Topic|| Presentation<br />
|----<br />
|colspan="4"| Monday<br />
|----<br />
|| 11 May 9.15-9.45|| Mari, Anni, Michael|| HW4 Draft assessment||{{#l:DARM_HW4.pptx}}<br />
|----<br />
|| 11 May 9.45-10.15|| Mohammad, Paula|| HW5 Climate policy decisions|| {{#l:Climate policy 11052015.pptx}}<br />
|----<br />
|| 11 May 10.15-10.45|| Evans, Aishat, Badejo|| HW6 Collaboration in climate policy assessment||{{#l:DARM 1.pptx}} <br />
|----<br />
|colspan="4"| Break<br />
|----<br />
|| 11 May 12.15-12.45|| Mari, Anni, Michael|| HW8 Structured discussion|| {{#l:Opasnet.pptx}}[[Talk:Climate change policies in Helsinki#Discussions about climate change policies in Helsinki]]<br />
|----<br />
|| 11 May 12.45-13.15|| Mohammad, Paula|| HW10 Evaluation of a previous assessment|| {{#l:Climate change policies_11052015.pptx}}<br />
|----<br />
|| 11 May 13.15-13.45|| Evans, Aishat, Badejo|| HW10 Evaluation of a draft assessment|| {{#l:DARM 2.pptx}}<br />
|----<br />
|colspan="4"| Tuesday<br />
|----<br />
|| 12 May 12.15-12.45|| Sonja|| Climate policies of Helsinki (background, roadmap)|| {{#l:DARM.pptx}}<br />
|----<br />
|| 12 May 12.45-13.15|| Mari, Anni, Michael|| [[Building stock in Helsinki|HW9 Variable page]]|| {{#l:PresentationHW9.pptx}} Tables 4 & 5<br />
|----<br />
|| 12 May 13.15-13.45|| Mohammad, Paula|| [[Building stock in Helsinki|HW9 Variable page]]|| {{#l:Tables one and two.pdf}}<br />
|----<br />
|colspan="4"| Break<br />
|----<br />
|| 12 May 14.00-14.30|| Evans, Aishat, Badejo|| [[Building stock in Helsinki|HW9 Variable page]]|| {{#l:Helsinki Building Stock.pptx}} Table 6<br />
|----<br />
|| 12 May 14.30-15.00|| Jouni|| Assessment of climate policies of Helsinki|| [[Climate change policies in Helsinki#Calculations]]<br />
|----<br />
|| 12 May 15.00-15.45|| Jouni|| Evaluation and feedback|| [[OPP#Properties of good decision support]]<br />
|----<br />
|}</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=Decision_analysis_and_risk_management_2017/Homework&diff=40517Decision analysis and risk management 2017/Homework2017-04-25T20:06:19Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{lecture|moderator=Jouni}}<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Follow-up table of the homeworks'''. Green: work is acceptable. White: there is still work to do. Red: work is overdue. Deadline dates are mentioned in the column headings.<br />
|----<br />
! User <br />
! HW 1: Open assessment 30 Mar<br />
! HW 2: Basic skills of Opasnet 11 May<br />
! HW 3: Basic concepts of open assessment and co-creation 4 Apr<br />
! HW 4: Draft of an assessment plan 21 Apr<br />
! HW 5: Climate policy decisions and actions 21 Apr<br />
! HW 6: Collaboration in climate policy assessment 28 Apr<br />
! HW 7: Structured discussion 28 Apr<br />
! HW 8: Developing a variable page 11 May<br />
! HW 9: Evaluation of assessment 11 May<br />
! Seminars <br />
! Total score [max 5] (points)<br />
|----<br />
| [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr Ebrahim]]<br />
| [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 1|HW1a OK]] Add comments about HW1b-d!<br />
| <br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| [[User:Amr Ebrahim#Homework 6|HW6]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Edem Agbenowu|Edem Agbenowu]]<br />
| [[User:Edem Agbenowu#Homework 1|HW1a OK]] Add comments about HW1b-d!<br />
| <br />
| {{yes|[[User:Edem Agbenowu#Homework 3|HW3]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Ehab Mustafa#Homework 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes|[[User:Ehab Mustafa#Homework 3|HW3]]}}<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Ehab Mustafa#Homework 4|HW4]] see comments}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Jin Qiwen|Jin Qiwen]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Jin Qiwen#Homework 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|not finished [[User:Jin Qiwen#Homework 3|HW3]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Kaisu Lukkarinen|Kaisu Lukkarinen]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Kaisu Lukkarinen#Homework 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Kingsley Aliche|Kingsley Aliche]]<br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Margaret Arogunyo|Margaret Arogunyo]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Margaret Arogunyo#Home Work 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes|[[User:Margaret Arogunyo#Homework 3: Basic concepts of open assessment and co-creation|HW3a+b]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Nabin Subedi|Nabin Subedi]]<br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Noora Rantanen|Noora Rantanen]]<br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tamara Gajst|Tamara Gajst]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Tamara Gajst#Homework 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|[[User:Tamara Gajst#Homework 3|HW3A done, HW3B missing]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tarikul Islam|Tarikul Islam]]<br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tine Bizjak|Tine Bizjak]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|[[User:Tine Bizjak#Homework 3: Basic concepts of open assessment and co-creation|HW3]]}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Zahra Shirani|Zahra Shirani]]<br />
| {{yes|[[User:Zahra Shirani#Homework 1|HW1]]}}<br />
| <br />
| {{no|HW3a done, HW3b delayed}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
|}<br />
<br />
'''Please read the homework assignments carefully and follow the instructions.''' If there is something unclear, please ask the course organizers (or fellow students) to explain and clarify! NOTE: Write all your homework answers on your own user page.<br />
<br />
Also add links to your homework answers in the table above. The evaluation of the homework exercises will be based on the answers found by following the links in the table. Students themselves are responsible for having the correct, complete and up-to-date links to homework answers. if you need help in adding the links to your homework answers to the table, please ask the course organizers (or fellow students) for advice. A convenient way to get help is to come to the exercise sessions.'''<br />
<br />
;Please note:<br />
* If your Homework says "OK" it means that the given homework is graded as "pass", i.e. at least 1 point. If you want to get better points, you should check and answer lecturers´ comments regarding that homework.<br />
* If there is no "OK" sign, you must revise your work according to the comments in order to make it acceptable.<br />
* You must write homework answers done in groups/pairs '''to only one''' place.<br />
* Add link to answers on your own user page if it is located on someone else's user page (do not copy the text on your own user page).<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 5 hours.<br />
<br />
'''Purpose: To familiarise yourself to the basic ideas of open policy practice.<br />
<br />
Read pages [[Open policy practice]], [[Knowledge crystal]], and [[Open assessment]] and browse [[Assessments are to change the world]] and [[Shared information objects in policy support]] and provide brief answers to three (3) questions from the following question list. You may also want to search from Opasnet. You are free to choose which questions to answer. '''Write your answers on your own Opasnet user page'''. Instructions on creating a user account and editing your own user page will be given on first lecture. '''In case of difficulties in wiki editing, write your answers on a separate document and copy them to your user page later'''. The questions and answers will be discussed on the second lecture (23 March). A sufficient length for each answers is a few sentences or bullet points. Please do not write lengthy essays, but instead try to identify and briefly describe the main points relevant in each question. The idea of this homework is not to find the right or correct answers, but instead to introduce the conceptual basis of this course to the students.<br />
<br />
'''Questions:<br />
# What is the main purpose of ''environmental health assessment''?<br />
# What is ''shared understanding''?<br />
# What are the main differences between ''regulatory'' and ''academic'' assessment approaches? Give examples of each.<br />
# What are ''co-creation skills''?<br />
# What are the main differences between ''open assessment'' and most other assessment approaches?<br />
# What is ''benefit-risk assessment''?<br />
# What is ''open assessment''?<br />
# What different ''purposes'' are there ''for participation'' in assessment and/or decision making?<br />
# What are the ''dimensions of openness''?<br />
# What ''relevant stakeholder roles'' are there in environmental health assessment and related decision making<br />
# What is ''effectiveness' in the context of environmental health assessment and related decision making?<br />
# What is the ''trialogical approach'' to knowledge creation and learning?<br />
# What is ''decision support''?<br />
# What is a ''pragmatic knowledge service''?<br />
# What is ''collaboration''?<br />
# What are the ''properties of good assessment?<br />
# What is the role of ''modelling'' in assessment and policy making?<br />
# What parts does the ''open policy practice'' consist of?<br />
# What does it mean that the results of assessments can be considered ''shared information objects''?<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 5 hours''<br />
<br />
'''Purpose: To learn the terms and concepts of open policy practice and see how they are related<br />
<br />
[https://quizlet.com/join/J43nT5Azy Join Quizlet] and practice with the sets of terms to learn the concepts:<br />
* [https://quizlet.com/196604415/principles-of-open-policy-practice-flash-cards/ Principles of open policy practice]<br />
* [https://quizlet.com/196602485/properties-of-good-assessment-flash-cards/ Properties of good assessment]<br />
* [https://quizlet.com/196600875/glossary-for-open-policy-practice-flash-cards/ Glossary for open policy practice], also the [https://quizlet.com/196599457/finnish-vocabulary-for-open-policy-practice-flash-cards/ Finnish terms] if you can Finnish.<br />
* [https://quizlet.com/196602931/categories-of-interaction-flash-cards/ Categories of interaction]<br />
* [https://quizlet.com/196602695/dimensions-of-openness-flash-cards/ Dimensions of openness]<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 5 hours''<br />
<br />
'''Purpose: To learn the basics of critical thinking and argumentation<br />
<br />
[https://www.khanacademy.org/ Join Khan Academy] and follow the course of [https://www.khanacademy.org/partner-content/wi-phi/wiphi-critical-thinking Critical thinking]. If you already know this topic well, just do the exercises.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 0.5 - 5 hours<br />
<br />
'''Purpose: To ensure that the basics of probability theory are clear <br />
(We assume that the basic statistics have been taught to students participating in this class.)<br />
<br />
Go through the contents of the Khan Academy courses [https://www.khanacademy.org/math/ap-statistics/probability-ap probability] and [https://www.khanacademy.org/math/statistics-probability/random-variables-stats-library random variables] and make sure that you refresh your memory on this. Do the exercises, and look at the videos if needed.<br />
<br />
There are also some other, more basic material that may be useful: [https://www.khanacademy.org/math/precalculus/prob-comb probabilities and combinatorics].<br />
<br />
== Homework 2: Basic skills of open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 5 hours''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Basic skills''': Mark "yes" when you know how to do this and put a link to the page where you have used the skill. Use these skills as parts of other homeworks.<br />
|----<br />
! User <br />
! [[Create article|Create a page and type]]<br />
! [[Help:Editing#Uploading|Upload]] a file and link it<br />
! [[Help:Editing#Text formatting|Use headings]], lists, bold, italic<br />
! Use internal and external [[Help:Editing#Linking|links]] and [[Help:Editing#Templates|templates]] <br />
! Use [[Help:Editing#Reference lists|references]]<br />
! Create a [[Help:Editing#Tables|prettytable]]<br />
! Upload data by [[help:Editing#Data table|t2b table]] and [[Uploading to Opasnet Base|Opasnet Base Uploader]]<br />
! Organise a [[discussion]]<br />
|----<br />
| [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr Ebrahim]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Edem Agbenowu|Edem Agbenowu]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab Mustafa]]<br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Jin Qiwen|Jin Qiwen]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Kaisu Lukkarinen|Kaisu Lukkarinen]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Kingsley Aliche|Kingsley Aliche]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Margaret Arogunyo|Margaret Arogunyo]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Nabin Subedi|Nabin Subedi]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Noora Rantanen|Noora Rantanen]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tamara Gajst|Tamara Gajst]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tarikul Islam|Tarikul Islam]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Tine Bizjak|Tine Bizjak]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}}<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
| [[User:Zahra Shirani|Zahra Shirani]]<br />
| <br />
| <br />
| {{yes}} <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
| <br />
|---- <br />
|}<br />
<br />
==Homework 3: Basic concepts of open assessment and co-creation==<br />
<br />
:'' Estimated working time: 2+5 hours.<br />
<br />
'''Task A:''' Read a) homeworks 1 and 2, b) [[Glossary#Terms in open policy practice]] and c) the introductory pages listed below. If you know Finnish, the [[:op_fi:Yhtäköyttä-hankkeen loppuraportti|Yhtäköyttä report]] contains a lot of the same material in a more organised way. After reading, write two questions that you think needs clarification. Write the questions on your own user page. The questions will be answered during the next lecture.<br />
<br />
{{Opasnet training}}<br />
<br />
'''Task B:''' Read the material in a {{#l:Darm reading co-creation.zip|zip file}} about co-creation, decision support models, and facilitation. It contains the following material (numbers refer to reference numbers in [[:op_fi:Yhtäköyttä-hankkeen loppuraportti|Yhtäköyttä report]].<br />
<br />
* 11: von Winterfeldt, D (2013). Bridging the gap between science and decision making. PNAS 110:3:14055-14061. [11]<br />
* 45: Aitamurto, T, Landemore, H. (2015) Five design principles for crowdsourced policymaking: Assessing the case of crowdsourced off-road traffic law in Finland. Journal of Social Media for Organizations. 2:1:1-19.<br />
* 46: Force11. FAIR data principles. [41] viitattu 22.2.2017.<br />
* 47: Prahalad, CK, Ramaswamy, V (2004). Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation. Journal of Interactive Marketing 18:3:5-14. doi:10.1002/dir.20015 [42]<br />
* 48: Mauser, W, Klepper, G, Rice, M, Schmalzbauer, BS, Hackmann, H, Leemans, R, Current, HM (2013). Transdisciplinary global change research: the co-creation of knowledge for sustainability. Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 5:3–4:420–431. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2013.07.001 <br />
* 49: Franco, LA, Montibeller, G (2010). Facilitated modelling in operational research. European Journal of Operational Research 205:3:489–500. [43]<br />
* 53: Kolbert, E. (2017) Why facts don't change our minds. The New Yorker, 27.2.2017. [47] viitattu 22.2.2017.<br />
<br />
Write a short assay on your user page about co-creation in decision support. What is co-creation? What advantage does it bring compared with more traditional decision support processes? What is the role of a facilitator, and what skills do they need?<br />
<br />
==Homework 4: Draft of an assessment plan==<br />
<br />
'''Note! Homework 4 answers will be used as materials in homework 10.'''<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 8 hours<br />
<br />
Task: With your pair, draft a plan of an assessment about the topic agreed on during the lecture. See the correct structure from [[Assessment]]. You may copy the structure directly from [[:Template:Assessment structure]]. Write the draft assessment on either your or your partner's user page (and put a link to it on the other's user page). Choose your specific topic within the broader area of '''climate change policies in a city'''. You can consider mitigation (how to reduce greenhouse gas emissions), adaptation (how to prepare for changes caused by climate change) or both. You may choose a specific city on your assessment, or look at some aspect in cities in general.<br />
<br />
You are expected to make plans about a good assessment related a topic of your choice (preferably related to climate change policies in cities). Fill in the subheadings in Scope and make plans about the Rationale: what variables or assessment parts you would need to be able to answer the question asked? However, you are NOT expected to come up with results or conclusions (although you can describe what kind of results you might get if the assessment was actually performed).<br />
<br />
== Homework 5: Climate policy decisions and actions ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 6 hours<br />
<br />
Consider that you are given an assignment to assess the ''direct or indirect health impacts caused by a climate (adaptation) strategy or program''. One of the first things in getting started with the assessment is to discuss, identify and explicate the decisions and options related to the assessment problem. In pairs choose one climate (adaptation) strategy/program from the material list below and identify and write out answers to the following questions based on the material. Use your own reasoning and knowledge or other sources (e.g. Google search) as complementary where the material is incomplete or inconclusive.<br />
<br />
'''Write your answers on either group member's user page (other member adds a link to the answers on his/her user page). <br />
<br />
Questions:<br />
* What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?<br />
** Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?<br />
* What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?<br />
** Who are those that actually realize these actions?<br />
* What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?<br />
** Who are the decision makers?<br />
* What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?<br />
** Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,<br />
** Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?<br />
** Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?<br />
* Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.<br />
* ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "[[shared understanding]]"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).<br />
<br />
Materials: <br />
<br />
* {{#l:Klimaprogramm-Bayern-2020.pdf}} {{#l:klimaprogramm2020_en_05_2009_ba.pdf}} [http://www.bayern.de/politik/initiativen/klimaprogramm-bayern-2020/ Bavarian Climate Programme 2020] [https://www.stmuv.bayern.de/umwelt/klimaschutz/klimaschutzpolitik/doc/klimaprogramm2020_en_05_2009_ba.pdf]<br />
* {{#l:Summary_Ludwigsburg_LEAP_Final_EN.pdf}} [http://www.sustainable-now.eu/fileadmin/template/projects/sustainable_now/files/Summary_Ludwigsburg_LEAP_Final_EN.pdf Integrated Climate Protection and Energy Strategy for Ludwigsburg]<br />
* {{#l:National_Climate_Change_Strategy_of_Hungary_2008.pdf}} [http://klima.kvvm.hu/documents/14/National_Climate_Change_Strategy_of_Hungary_2008.pdf National Climate Change Strategy of Hungary 2008] (mitigation, adaptation) <br />
* {{#l:YTV_climate_strategy_2030.pdf}} [http://www.planningclimatechange.org/joomla/0_upload/climate_strategy_2030.pdf Climate Strategy 2030 of Helsinki Metropolitan Area]<br />
* {{#l:11_2012_Helsinki_Metropolitan_Area_Climate_Change_Adaptation_Strategy.pdf}} [http://ilmastotyokalut.fi/files/2014/10/11_2012_Helsinki_Metropolitan_Area_Climate_Change_Adaptation_Strategy.pdf Climate Adaptation Strategy of Helsinki Metropolitan Area]<br />
* {{#l:NCCS-2012-Publication.pdf}} [https://www.nccs.gov.sg/nccs-2012/docs/NCCS-2012-Publication.pdf National Climate Change Strategy of Singapore 2012] (mitigation, adaptation) <br />
* {{#l:2011_09_06 KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN DEFINITIEF.pdf}} [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2011_09_06%20KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN%20DEFINITIEF.pdf Rotterdam Climate Initiative RCI] (Amr, Ehab)<br />
* {{#l:RCP_ENG_def.pdf}} [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/RCP/English/RCP_ENG_def.pdf Rotterdam Climate Proof Adaptation Programme 2010] (Amr, Ehab)<br />
* {{#l:Cover+Adaptation+to+climate+change+in+Switzerland.pdf}} [http://www.bafu.admin.ch/publikationen/publikation/01673/index.html?lang=en Adaptation to climate change in Switzerland]<br />
* {{#l:Ireland_at_Risk_2.pdf}} [http://www.iae.ie/site_media/pressroom/documents/2009/Nov/17/Ireland_at_Risk_2.pdf Ireland at Risk. Critical Infrastructure Adaptation for Climate Change]<br />
* {{#l:klimatilpasningsstrategi_uk_web.pdf}} [http://www.klimatilpasning.dk/media/5322/klimatilpasningsstrategi_uk_web.pdf Danish Strategy for Adaptation to a Changing Climate]<br />
* [http://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/web/guest/countries Climate adaptation materials in different European languages]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Helsingin ilmastonmuutos_-tiekartta]]<br />
<br />
== Homework 6: Collaboration in climate policy assessment ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 6 hours<br />
<br />
This exercise continues from homework 5. With the same pair, using the same material, and building on your homework 5 answers, identify and write out your answers to the following questions. Narrow your scrutiny down to e.g. one or two decisions/actions/goals if needed. Base your answers on the climate program/strategy paper you have chosen, but also apply your own reasoning, other DARM 2015 course materials etc., particularly on the second set of questions.<br />
<br />
'''Write your answers on either group member's user page (other member adds a link to the answers on his/her user page). <br />
<br />
'''Homework 6, part A:'''<br />
Questions about identifying roles and participation:<br />
* Who are the relevant participants of the assessment?<br />
* What roles the different participants (may) take in the assessment?<br />
* What kind of relevant knowledge they (may) have regarding the assessment?<br />
* What needs and aims do they represent in the assessment? <br />
<br />
'''Homework 6, part B:'''<br />
Consider also the following questions about facilitating collaboration:<br />
* How could the relevant participants be involved in the assessment in an effective way?<br />
* How can the quality of an assessment be assured if anyone can participate?<br />
* How can you prevent malevolent contributions where the purpose is to vandalise the process?<br />
* How can you make the outcome converge to a conclusion, because all issues are uncertain and controversial?<br />
* How can you ensure that the outcomes are useful for the users?<br />
<br />
== Homework 7: Structured discussion ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 20 hours<br />
<br />
{{summary box<br />
| question = What are the evaluation criteria for structured discussion (homework 7)?<br />
| answer = Evaluation of arguments:<br />
* Each argument is evaluated either A (very good), B (good), or C (irrelevant).<br />
* When you have written at least one A argument and at least three B arguments, you get grade 2.<br />
* When you have written at least four B arguments you get grade 1.5.<br />
* If you have written at least two B arguments you get grade 1.<br />
* Argument with C is a slight dis-merit and may affect borderline situations.<br />
* B argument is the default. A arguments differ from B arguments by having<br />
** an important, unique aspect,<br />
** good referencing, and/or<br />
** clever use of hierarchy.<br />
}}<br />
<br />
The objective of this homework is to learn to organise existing written material into a [[discussion|structured discussion]] with a main statement and related arguments. In addition, students should learn to develop and use own arguments within a structured discussion. For examples, see<br />
* [[Talk:Environmental impact assessment directive]]<br />
* [[Talk:Assessment of the health impacts of H1N1 vaccination]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Keskustelu:Pneumokokkirokotteen turvallisuus]]<br />
* [[Talk:Climate change policies in Helsinki]]<br />
<br />
Your task is to initiate and participate in structured discussions on page [[Talk:Congestion charge]] according to the instructions on page [[Discussion]]. Come up with one original statement for a discussion based your own ideas, by talking to Helsinki city representatives (jari.viinanen(at)hel.fi, mira.jarkko(at)hel.fi) or the material below.<br />
<br />
'''Articles in Wikipedia<br />
* [[:en:Congestion pricing|Congestion pricing]]<br />
* [[:en:London congestion charge|London congestion charge]]<br />
* [[:fi:Ruuhkamaksu|Ruuhkamaksu]]<br />
<br />
'''Studies about congestion charges in Helsinki<br />
(and related discussion) {{comment|# |If you know Finnish, you should first look at these texts to make their arguments available to others in English.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 10:43, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
* Helsingin kaupunki. Ruuhkamaksut tehokkain keino parantaa Helsingin ilmanlaatua nopeasti. (12.01.2017) [http://www.hel.fi/www/uutiset/fi/ymparistokeskus/ruuhkamaksut-12012017]<br />
* HSL (11.2.2016): Tiemaksut varmistaisivat Helsingin seudun kestävän kasvun [https://www.hsl.fi/uutiset/2016/tiemaksut-varmistaisivat-helsingin-seudun-kestavan-kasvun-7995]<br />
** Helsingin Sanomat [http://www.hs.fi/kaupunki/art-2000002885425.html]<br />
** Helsingin Uutiset [http://www.helsinginuutiset.fi/artikkeli/363860-ruuhkamaksut-kayttoon-ehka-jo-2020-kartta-nain-ne-vaikuttavat-sinuun]<br />
** Kauppalehti-blogi [http://blog.kauppalehti.fi/metrossanukkuja/ruuhkamaksu-voi-olla-maailman-tyhmin-idea]<br />
* LVM. (2011) Helsingin seudun ruuhkamaksu. Jatkoselvitys. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 5/2011. [http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-243-214-8]<br />
* LVM. (2007). Joukkoliikenteen houkuttelevuuden ja käytön lisääminen eri liikkujaryhmissä. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 63/2007. [http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-201-954-7]<br />
** Talouselämä-uutiskommentti [http://www.talouselama.fi/uutiset/ruuhkamaksu-rankaisee-koyhaa-3388061]<br />
* LVM. Tienkäyttömaksujärjestelmät. Esiselvitys. Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriön julkaisuja 17/2006. [http://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/78730/Julkaisuja_17_2006.pdf?sequence=1]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Scientific articles about congestion charge and health<br />
*{{doi|10.1126/science.aaf3420}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.jth.2015.08.002}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1080/09640568.2014.912615}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.tra.2015.03.004}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.01.002}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.09.015}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1080/13547500902965252}}<br />
*{{doi|10.5172/impp.453.10.2-3.269}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1016/j.amepre.2006.03.030}}<br />
*{{doi|10.1136/jech.2003.012385}}<br />
<br />
Build the content to your discussion based on different materials you can find from the climate reports in homework 5, from the Internet, and from the city representatives. Note that you can and should also participate in discussions launched by other students.<br />
<br />
As facilitators, you should pay attention to get as many different opinions documented as possible. So, jump into a role of a stakeholder and try to think what he/she would say. Possible roles include:<br />
* A national authority giving environmental permissions.<br />
* A taxi company.<br />
* A department store inside or outside a planned congestion charge zone.<br />
* A nature conservationist.<br />
* A local politician interested in both nature and local economy.<br />
* A citizen.<br />
<br />
Note that you are allowed to:<br />
* Contradict your own arguments.<br />
* Update and improve statements if they are too vague or poorly written. However, be careful not to push the existing argumentation out of context. Instead of making large changes to a statement, start a new discussion with your new statement.<br />
* Add your signature to other people's arguments if you agree with them. Note that the first name is assumed to be the original author, so don't put your name first.<br />
* Clarify other people's arguments, if you do it carefully and do not change the meaning.<br />
* Copy arguments from one discussion to another, if they are relevant. But instead of copying large blocks, make references to the other discussion instead.<br />
<br />
== Homework 8: Participate in an assessment ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: '''44 hours'''<br />
<br />
* Everyone participates in making an open assessment. The topic is [[Congestion charge]] to reduce car traffic. This relates to a larger topic [[Climate change policies in Helsinki]]. The topic shares some similarities with [[Climate change policies and health in Kuopio]] and [[Climate change policies in Basel]], although congestion charge was not discussed in those assessments.<br />
* Based on structured discussions in Homework 7, every pair selects a sub-topic (or research question) and develops at least one variable page that asks that question and answers it. Before starting a variable page, suggestionss about relevant questions should be discussed on the assessment page ([[Congestion charge]]). This is because the relevance of a specific question depends on other questions asked, and some issues link causally together nicely when the questions are formulated in a coherent manner.<br />
* The task is to produce a shared understanding of the assessment topic, i.e. congestion charges in Helsinki. The shared understanding is produced using the [[structure of shared understanding]]. In practice:<br />
** Each main subtopic is described on its own page in Opasnet.<br />
** Find enough relevant information for a plausible answer, synthesise the information on the page, and quantitate it.<br />
** The connections of the pages and other items are described on three tables: a) Items, b) Relations, and c) Evaluations. Page [[Voting age]] has an example about how to use the tables.<br />
* The data should be documented well enough to convince a critical reader that this is a good answer to the question.<br />
* Other examples of [[shared understanding]] ([[:op_fi:Jaetun ymmärryksen menetelmä]]) in Finnish:<br />
** [[:op_fi:Keskipitkän aikavälin ilmastopolitiikan suunnitelma]],<br />
** [[:op_fi:Energiarenessanssi]],<br />
** [[:op_fi:Pietarsaaren rokotuskeskustelu]]<br />
<br />
== Homework 9: Evaluation of assessment ==<br />
<br />
:'' Estimated working time: 8 hours.<br />
<br />
In this exercise you are asked to look into and evaluate one homework 4 draft assessment (other than your own) and one real-life assessment performed in Opasnet (listed below). <br />
* [[Helsinki energy decision 2015]]<br />
* [[Climate change policies and health in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Climate change policies in Basel]]<br />
* [[Pneumococcal vaccine]]<br />
* [[Water guide]]<br />
* [[Fukushima nuclear accident]]<br />
* [[Risk assessment on Hämeenkyrö municipal solid waste incinerator]]<br />
* [[Comparative risk assessment of dioxin and fine particles]]<br />
* [[Benefit-risk assessment of fish consumption for Beneris]]<br />
* [[Emission assessment of small-scale energy production in the Helsinki metropolitan area]]<br />
* [[Assessment of building policies' effect on dampness and asthma in Europe]]<br />
* [[Assessment of the health impacts of H1N1 vaccination]]<br />
* [[Benefit-risk assessment of cinnamon]]<br />
* [[INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF WASTE MANAGEMENT IN LAZIO (ITALY)]]<br />
* [[The health risks and benefits of cycling in urban environments compared with car use: health impact assessment study]]<br />
* [[Environmental impact assessment directive]]<br />
* [[Assessment on impacts of emission trading on city-level (ET-CL)]]<br />
* [[Gasbus - health impacts of Helsinki bus traffic]]<br />
* [[Biofuel assessments]]<br />
* Assessments in Finnish:<br />
** [[:op_fi:Pahtavaaran kaivos]]<br />
** [[:op_fi:Silakan hyöty-riskiarvio]]<br />
** [[:op_fi:Rauman sataman laajennuksen vaikutus terveyteen]]<br />
** [[:op_fi:Talvivaaran kaivoksen terveysvaikutukset]]<br />
<br />
<br />
The work is based on instructions and tables on page [[Open policy practice#Evaluation and management]]. Find the assessments by the two users below you on the user/homework list on top of this page (the last on the list shall pick the first two users on the list and the second last on the list shall pick the last and the first user).<br />
<br />
'''This exercise is intended to be done individually.''' However, co-operation between students is recommended.<br />
<br />
'''First characterize the draft assessments''' according to the ''Knowledge-policy interaction'' and ''Dimensions of openness'' frameworks. The things to consider in the characterization are listed and explained in the tables in [[Open policy practice#Evaluation and management]].<br />
<br />
In order to identify the last point in framework for characterising settings (Table 3.), mode of interaction that the draft assessment builds on, characterize the dimensions of openness in the assessment explained in Table 4. ([[Open policy practice#Dimensions of openness]]). The example categories for interaction mentioned in Table 3 are explained in Table 5 ([[Open policy practice#Categories of interaction]]).<br />
<br />
'''Second, evaluate the assessment drafts''' according to the (slightly modified) ''[[Open policy practice#Properties of good decision support]]'' framework. Base your evaluation on the characterization you have made. The things to consider in the evaluation are listed and explained in Table 2. For each attribute (i.e. an aspect to consider) give a numerical evaluation on a 1-5 scale (1 = poor, 5 = excellent). Also briefly write down your reasoning for each numerical evaluation. If something seems completely missing or not possible to evaluate, the numerical evaluation is 0 (also write down your reasoning why the particular aspect of the draft assessment deserves an evaluation of 0).<br />
<br />
Evaluation of assessments is not only something to be done after an assessment has been completed. Instead, evaluation should be seen as a means to guide the making of assessments towards their aims while they are still happening. Therefore, '''the third task of this exercise is to formulate suggestions for developing/improving the draft assessment'''. Write your suggestions as comments/arguments to the user pages where the draft assessment descriptions are. Also point out where the information in the draft assessment is/was missing or insufficient for characterization or evaluation.<br />
<br />
'''Homework 4 answers will be used as materials in this exercise.''' It is recommended that you attempt to do this exercise only starting on the deadline of Homework 4.<br />
<br />
Links to some examples of using the above mentioned evaluation frameworks:<br />
* [[Openness in participation, assessment, and policy making upon issues of environment and environmental health: a review of literature and recent project results]] (Dimensions of openness)<br />
* [[Assessment of impacts to environment and health in influencing manufacturing and public policy]] (Knowledge-policy interaction.)<br />
* [[Evaluating effectiveness of open assessments on alternative biofuel sources]] (Dimensions of openness and Properties of good assessment.)<br />
* [[:op_fi:Puijon metsien käyttösuunnitelman päätöksenteko]] (All methods. In Finnish)<br />
<br />
== Extra homework (not evaluated): Structure of pages and objects and R code==<br />
<br />
{{comment|# |In the next course, we need a homework where there is one variable and some related (pre-known) data. The task is to go through the data, evaluate its applicability, transform it into a format that better answers the question, and discuss different interpretations. The purpose is to produce a probability distribution as an answer to the question. This variable might be a part of the [[training assessment]]. |--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 14:47, 19 May 2015 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
:''Estimated working time: 8 hours<br />
<br />
The objective of this homework is that you learn to see what different parts of a page are and how they are related to each other and to other pages. Especially, an objective is to understand the role of R code in this system. You should learn to identify key things from a code and understand their use and connections to other parts of an assessment. These skill are then needed in Homework 9 when we actually perform an assessment.<br />
<br />
With your pair, select and '''reserve three pages''' (by adding your usernames beside the page link) from the list below. At least two of them have to contain t2b tables and R code. Go through the content by doing all of the key tasks below, if possible. Also look at the additional questions and answer at least some of them. Write your answers to the page by using the comment, defend (when things are OK), and attack (when things are not OK) buttons. If you can, improve the content or suggest tasks for improvement.<br />
<br />
In addition, select three other pages from the list such that another pair has already done the work. Read the content and their comments, and agree or disagree with them. Try to improve the content further.<br />
<br />
; Key tasks<br />
* Check that the page has a correct page type and change when needed. Check that the page has all subheadings that belong to the page type. Add, if missing.<br />
* Categorise the page to relevant categories.<br />
* Organise the content into the right subheadings. Especially, look what is Data and what is Answer.<br />
* Check and update the Dependencies. Also check that the Answers in dependency pages are coherent with this page.<br />
* Make rcodes that a) creates the ovariable (under Calculations) and b) gets the latest ovariable and prints basic results (under Answer).<br />
* Test any existing code and report its functionalities on the page.<br />
* Write or update a summary (one paragraph in the very beginning explaining the main points of the text) on the page. If the content is too unclear to write a good summary, write down clarification questions to the moderator of that page.<br />
* If you have problems with any previous steps, describe them on the relevant point on the page.<br />
<br />
<br />
; Additional questions<br />
* Does the page have a correct page type?<br />
* Does the page have a question? Is it clear and unambiguous?<br />
* Does the page have an answer to the question? Does it actually give an answer to what is asked?<br />
* With variables, is the answer given as a link to a model run with calculated results? If yes,<br />
** Does the model run have a clear result table?<br />
** Does the model run have a clear result graph?<br />
** Is it clear where the code that was used to run the results is?<br />
* In method pages: based on the guidance in the answer, is it possible to actually use the method in an assessment?<br />
* In method pages: What data is required to be able to use the method? Are the requirements listed under "Inputs"?<br />
* Are there data on the page that is needed to answer the question? Are it in machine-readable format (i.e., in t2b table or directly stored in the database)?<br />
** Are the data under Rationale/Data subheading, (or in methods under Rationale/Inputs)?<br />
* Is there data or text that is NOT needed to justify the answer? Would that data be in better place on another page with a different question? What would that question be?<br />
* If the data is needed but is not used in the Answer, update it or suggest tasks to update it.<br />
* Are there external variables whose values need to be known to be able to estimate this object? If yes, <br />
** Are these listed under Rationale/Dependencies?<br />
** Are there equations (as text) for calculating this object based on the dependencies under Rationale/Formula (or Rationale/Calculations)<br />
* Is there an R code that implements the object? <br />
** With variables, is the code under Rationale/Calculations?<br />
** With methods, is there a code under Rationale/Calculations that defines the method object?<br />
** With methods, is there a code under Answer that describes how the method object is used??<br />
** If there are dependencies and formula, does the code take them in to produce an ovariable?<br />
** If there are data, does the code take them in to produce an ovariable?<br />
** When you run the code, does it crash (i.e. produce an error message) before completion? When and why (use ''show code'' and ''show messages and errors'' to understand what's going on)?<br />
** Are there several different codes on the page? Are their purposes clear?<br />
** Does the page use other pages (objects) in calculations? Are these connections listed explicitly as links under the R code?<br />
* Does the page have an evaluation (edistymisluokitus) in either a separate box in the beginning, or in the metadata box?<br />
* Does the page have other subheadings (See also, References, Related files, Keywords)? <br />
** Are there links to other related pages? Are relevant links missing?<br />
* Is the page categorised to relevant categories?<br />
* With encyclopedia pages: is the content detailed enough so that one or more variables or methods could be made based on it? Does such page(s) exist? Are these pages linked to each other?<br />
* Does the page explain its links to other pages? Is it clear how the page could be used as a part of an assessment?<br />
* Do you find other pages that actually have duplicate content? Is some content outdated (based on e.g. version history?)? Suggest how pages should be updated, deleted, or merged.<br />
* Do you find errors or mistakes on the page?<br />
* Is the text clear? <br />
* Write or update a summary (one paragraph in the very beginning explaining the main points of the text) on the page. If the content is too unclear to write a good summary, write down clarification questions to the moderator of that page.<br />
* Is the text properly referenced?<br />
* Are there discussions on the Talk page? If yes, <br />
** Have they been linked to from the main page? <br />
** Have the current resolutions been incorporated in the main page?<br />
<br />
; Pages with R code<br />
<br />
* [[Buildings in Basel]]<br />
* [[Exposure to PM2.5 in Finland]]<br />
* [[OpasnetUtils/Drafts]]<br />
* [[Energy use of buildings]] <br />
* [[Emission factors for burning processes]]<br />
* [[Building model]] <br />
* [[Health impact assessment]]<br />
* [[Disease risk]]<br />
* [[ERFs of environmental pollutants]]<br />
* [[Burden of disease in Finland]]<br />
* [[Climate change policies and health in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Building stock in Kuopio]] <br />
* [[Exposure to PM2.5 in Finland]]<br />
* [[Population of Kuopio]]<br />
* [[ERF of indoor dampness on respiratory health effects]] <br />
* [[Concentration-response to PM2.5]]<br />
* [[Climate change policies in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Energy balance]]<br />
* [[Energy balance in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Energy balance in Stuttgart]]<br />
* [[Energy balance in Suzhou]]<br />
* [[Energy transformations]]<br />
* [[Greenhouse gas emissions in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Emission factors for burning processes]]<br />
* [[Energy consumption of heating of buildings in Kuopio]]<br />
* [[Fuels used by Haapaniemi energy plant]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Luikonlahden rikastamon ympäristöterveysriskien arviointi]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Väestön kohdekohtainen ympäristöperäisen haitta-ainealtistumisen ja terveysriskin arviointi]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Kuljetuksen päästöt]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Kaivoksen kuljetusten pölypäästö]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Metallimalmin murskausprosessin pölypäästöt]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Rikastekuljetukset]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Metallimalmin hihnakuljetuksen pölypäästöt]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Kohdekohtaisen Minera-arvioinnin mallisivu]] <br />
* [[:op_fi:Järvisedimenttien metallipitoisuudet]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Energiantuotannon päästökertoimet/Sähköntuotanto]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Talvivaaran kaivoksen terveysvaikutukset]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Väestön kohdekohtainen ympäristöperäisen haitta-ainealtistumisen arviointi]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Pneumokokki]]<br />
<br />
; Pages without R code<br />
* [[Haapaniemi energy plant in Kuopio]] <br />
* [[Energy consumption of heating of buildings in Kuopio]] <br />
* [[Energy consumption and GHG emissions in Kuopio by sector]]<br />
* [[Effect of urban land use change on ambient air temperature]]<br />
* [[HI:Residential floorspace in Europe]] <br />
* [[Climate change policies in Thessaloniki]]<br />
* [[Greenhouse gas emissions in Rotterdam]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Ympäristöterveydelliset viite- ja raja-arvot]]<br />
* [[:op_fi:Haitta-aineiden imeytyminen iholta elimistöön]]<br />
<br />
== Seminar: Lessons learned ==<br />
<br />
:''Estimated preparing time: 9 hours for the three topics.<br />
<br />
Each group has a slot of 30 min to present their topic and discuss it. A recommendation is to aim at 20 min of presentation and 10 min of discussion. Each group has a different topic, but each topic is about one of the homeworks. Note that each group has THREE different presentations related to the work the group has done: one presenting an assessment (HW4-6), one about structured discussion or evaluation (HW8, 10) and one about a part of the Helsinki assessment (HW9). Remember that the audience has not read the report or assessment of your topic. So, in the presentation first describe the main purpose and content of your topic/material.<br />
<br />
When preparing your presentation, focus on three things:<br />
# Describe the '''substantive content''' of your topic. What did you learn about it, what conclusions were made based on the material and the work?<br />
# Describe '''how the content relates to a wider perspective''', namely an assessment or a decision process. What additional value did this topic bring? Did it change conclusions? Was it important in increasing understanding, or some other way?<br />
# '''How was it incorporated into the bigger picture?''' What methods were used to incorporate it? How were the methods used, and did the methods work for their purpose?<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+'''Times and topics for the seminar presentations {{attack|# |These are times for the 2015 course. Will be updated.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 13:10, 6 March 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
! Time|| Presenter|| Topic|| Presentation<br />
|----<br />
|colspan="4"| Monday<br />
|----<br />
|| 11 May 9.15-9.45|| Mari, Anni, Michael|| HW4 Draft assessment||{{#l:DARM_HW4.pptx}}<br />
|----<br />
|| 11 May 9.45-10.15|| Mohammad, Paula|| HW5 Climate policy decisions|| {{#l:Climate policy 11052015.pptx}}<br />
|----<br />
|| 11 May 10.15-10.45|| Evans, Aishat, Badejo|| HW6 Collaboration in climate policy assessment||{{#l:DARM 1.pptx}} <br />
|----<br />
|colspan="4"| Break<br />
|----<br />
|| 11 May 12.15-12.45|| Mari, Anni, Michael|| HW8 Structured discussion|| {{#l:Opasnet.pptx}}[[Talk:Climate change policies in Helsinki#Discussions about climate change policies in Helsinki]]<br />
|----<br />
|| 11 May 12.45-13.15|| Mohammad, Paula|| HW10 Evaluation of a previous assessment|| {{#l:Climate change policies_11052015.pptx}}<br />
|----<br />
|| 11 May 13.15-13.45|| Evans, Aishat, Badejo|| HW10 Evaluation of a draft assessment|| {{#l:DARM 2.pptx}}<br />
|----<br />
|colspan="4"| Tuesday<br />
|----<br />
|| 12 May 12.15-12.45|| Sonja|| Climate policies of Helsinki (background, roadmap)|| {{#l:DARM.pptx}}<br />
|----<br />
|| 12 May 12.45-13.15|| Mari, Anni, Michael|| [[Building stock in Helsinki|HW9 Variable page]]|| {{#l:PresentationHW9.pptx}} Tables 4 & 5<br />
|----<br />
|| 12 May 13.15-13.45|| Mohammad, Paula|| [[Building stock in Helsinki|HW9 Variable page]]|| {{#l:Tables one and two.pdf}}<br />
|----<br />
|colspan="4"| Break<br />
|----<br />
|| 12 May 14.00-14.30|| Evans, Aishat, Badejo|| [[Building stock in Helsinki|HW9 Variable page]]|| {{#l:Helsinki Building Stock.pptx}} Table 6<br />
|----<br />
|| 12 May 14.30-15.00|| Jouni|| Assessment of climate policies of Helsinki|| [[Climate change policies in Helsinki#Calculations]]<br />
|----<br />
|| 12 May 15.00-15.45|| Jouni|| Evaluation and feedback|| [[OPP#Properties of good decision support]]<br />
|----<br />
|}</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Amr_Ebrahim&diff=40516User:Amr Ebrahim2017-04-25T19:55:06Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 6: Collaboration in climate policy assessment */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Homework 1 ==<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Good. You have answered more questions than asked for. I have added some clarifications to the text.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 07:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
'''Homework 1a: Open policy practice'''<br />
1. What is the main purpose of environmental health assessment?<br />
* Studying the characteristics of our living environment and its impacts on human health by applying research to validate cause and effect relations.<br />
*Improving plans using pragma-dilectic theory through knowledge sharing approaches, while taking in consideration complexity.<br />
*Supply knowledge in regards to facilitating communication and implementation of assessment produced to assist governance to desired outcomes.<br />
2.What is shared understanding? <br />
:The purposeful rafting of polarity in final decision options at hand. Employing experts and stakeholders in process of collective understanding of the magnitude of decision options. Involving means of support to execute, evaluate and manage intended knowledge rendered towards decision making. Throughout co-creating and facilitating synthesis utilizing probability and quantitative modeling.<br />
3. What are the main differences between regulatory and academic assessment approaches? Give examples of each.<br />
;Regulatory Assessment Approach: Captures the political infusion of societal decision making . They often look at decision from the lens of authorities and its association with communal and private governance. Poor policies can be the results of poor understanding of the interaction dynamics of each party. An example for that can be the COP private funding policies. {{attack|# |Typically, these are assessments whose content and/or process is regulated by law, e.g. chemical safety assessment by the REACH directive, or environmental impact assessments regulated by the EIA directive.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 07:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
;Academic Assessment Approach: The discipline that recognizes objectives towards decision making process through sufficing information needed.This takes place through a process of decision support by creating research questions that follows pragmatic rational. An example can be energy efficiency and nudge theory.<br />
4. What are co-creation skills? <br />
An amalgamating function that insures the execution , evaluation and management ( also referred to as international experience {{attack|# |Not international experience but ''interactional expertise'', meaning that people working in co-creation (often called facilitators) are able to interact with other disciplines and people. They are experts in making syntheses of the information produced.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 07:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}). Which is as set of capabilities that combines expertise, administrative and active involvement to handle the task of collaboration, information objectives and shared understanding. Towards purposeful management of decision making and information.<br />
5. What are the main differences between open assessment and most other assessment approaches? <br />
;Open Assessment: is a method that capitalizes on the use of information to generate better policies decision by explicitly introduce value judgement. based on scientific methods and structure to deal with disputes and contending in an open platform based on observation and reason to reject of accept. <br />
; other <s>open</s> assessment:all assessment methods has common structure to enable effective automation and rendering of information by structures attributes and sub-attributes encompassing ( scope, answers, rational).{{attack|# |Question, answer, and rationale are typical for open assessments, not other assessments. Open participation is a key difference between open assessment and other approaches.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 07:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
6. What is benefit-risk assessment? <br />
The prerequisite for safety procedures , where reveals the intrinsic hazardous component, substance or product.Composed of ( decompose- assessment, exposure-assessment, hazard identification and risk characterization. {{attack|# |What you describe is a typical risk assessment. Benefit-risk assessment looks also at the benefits of the activity or product.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 07:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
7. What is open assessment? <br />
:Is a method that attempts to answer a set of scientific questions that can improve societal decision making in an open participation context to produce value judgement.<br />
8. What different purposes are there for participation in assessment and/or decision making? <br />
:The purpose of participating in an assessment is to improve deliberate plans of actions that guides decision making to reach desired outcomes. It helps set milestones to impact, causes, problem owners, targeted segments and level of interaction.<br />
9. What are the dimensions of openness? <br />
:It is a principle framework to insure and monitor deviation from ideal state of openness during execution creating the balance needed for open practice and openness towards closed process.that takes place in a continual fashion to assist with participatory assessment and decision making process in a step-by-step consideration.<br />
10. What relevant stakeholder roles are there in environmental health assessment and related decision making <br />
:Knowledge about environmental health relationships and actions influencing them are tightly interconnected. Therefore, categories of interactions are set to facilitate interactions between stakeholders in the level of involvement. ( Isolated, informing, participatory, joint and shared). <br />
11.What is effectiveness' in the context of environmental health assessment and related decision making?<br />
:It is the follow up and post hoc analysis of the changes that can be provoked after the delivery of results to insure good assessment and evaluation. Throughout running evaluation approach to influence the decision making process addressing (quality of content, applicability and efficiency). Effective environmental health assessment therefore necessitates collaboration between environmental experts and decision makers.<br />
12.What is the trialogical approach to knowledge creation and learning?<br />
:It is the relevant involvement of all parties in the process learning to produce knowledge artifacts in a collective learning explicit linking knowledge creation to practice. It usually is considered in the context of computer support collaborative learning considering issues with knowledge creation and innovation.<br />
13. What is decision support?<br />
: A scheme core to evaluate and manage decision in open policy practice.to evaluate what exactly went wrong after results are obtains from the process. Contributing to decision making with high quality of content.<br />
14. What is a pragmatic knowledge service?<br />
: is a hybrid system of information technology not only meant for creating practical knowledge but also a vehicle of cultural change from individualistic perspective. Governed by 4 major characteristics: collaboration, knowledge practice, knowledge implementation and adaptability.<br />
15. What is collaboration?<br />
: Building and managing networked communities and social relations required for carrying out knowledge advancement effort. Allowing users to learn, lean, share and combine each other’s competences and experiences.<br />
16. What are the properties of good assessment?<br />
:Informative, collaborative, coherent) in regards to content. (In regards to applicability (relevance, availability, usability and acceptability) and intra/inter - assessments in regards to efficiency.<br />
17. What is the role of modelling in assessment and policy making?<br />
: It is the co-creation and facilitation category used to develop actual assessment models based on generic methods and case specifications.<br />
18. What parts does the open policy practice consist of?<br />
:Intentionality, causality, critique, shared information objects, openness and reuse. {{attack|# |These are principles used. It consists of these parts: shared understanding as the ultimate goal; execution (this work follows the principles you mention); co-creation skills and facilitation; and evaluation and management.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 07:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
19. What does it mean that the results of assessments can be considered shared information objects?<br />
:Information shared using a systemic structure that allows open work space. Used to define research questions to be answered in open assessment. While collaborate to answer questions to with stand critique and build causal connections.<br />
<br />
== Homework 6: Collaboration in climate policy assessment ==<br />
'''Homework 6, part A:''' ( AMR, [[User:Ehab Mustafa|Ehab]])<br />
<br />
Questions about identifying roles and participation:<br />
* Who are the relevant participants of the assessment? and their roles?<br />
*Regulatory participants:<br />
# EU room for the river projects and altered discharge regimes at the German-Dutch border. <br />
# Delta Committee to parliament. <br />
# Regional board consisting of (municipalities, provinces, the waterboards.<br />
#‘bestuurlijke tafels’ national governmental stakeholders.<br />
* Execution Participants: <br />
# Port Rotterdam Company<br />
# Rotterdam Delta commissioner. <br />
# Deltares research institute.<br />
# Network Organisation for Quality of Environnment (NOK).<br />
# "maatschappelijke adviesgroep" (MAG) included stakeholders from a range of sectors, including inland shipping, nature NGO’s, logistics, industry, residents and is headed by the mayor of Rotterdam. <br />
# landscape architects under supervision of a national atelier.<br />
* What kind of relevant knowledge they (may) have regarding the assessment?<br />
* What needs and aims do they represent in the assessment?<br />
<br />
''''Deltares, Port Rotterdam and NOK:'''<br />
# GIS mapped megasites description: current and planned use, potential and actual risks<br />
# Boundary conditions for sustainable development: stakeholders interest, funding options and legislative framework (water quality targets set by water framework directive).<br />
# Management instruments and effects: risk-function relations and risk reduction measures.<br />
# Description of Management Options.<br />
# Option driven rehabilitation scenarios, technical feasibility tests and technical designs.<br />
# Cost-efficient management scenarios and selection of final project goals<br />
# Embedding principles and organizational models for implementation<br />
# Procedure for risk assessment and evaluating the proportionality of hazard prevention measures.<br />
# Assessment system for hazard appraisal and measure rankin with regard to subsequent utilization (function-orientated risk assessment).<br />
# Guideline for monitoring and predicting the temporal and spatial behaviour of environmental aspects for cost-effective procedures based on the risk-related management of sites.<br />
# Evaluation study on sites risk assessments comparing national requirements versus the new harmonized procedures.<br />
'''EU and regulatory:'''<br />
# Technical guideline for the implementation of MNA for the management of multiple enviromental hazards.<br />
# Report on the applicability of existing protocols/guidelines for EU sites.<br />
# Protocol/technical guideline for the implementation on MNA (Demona).<br />
# Procedure for description of the legislative framework.<br />
'''‘maatschappelijke adviesgroep’ (MAG) and Delta committee:'''<br />
# Cost-estimation tool, CARO – Cost Analysis of Remediation Options Tool Description.<br />
# Comparative analysis of cost-efficiency.<br />
# Procedure for description of stakeholder's interest and commitment towards current and future use.<br />
# Procedure for listing research needs and site investigation requirements.<br />
<br />
'''Homework 6, part B:'''<br />
* How could the relevant participants be involved in the assessment in an effective way?<br />
# Continuous update of boundary conditions and discussions about the possible future strategy.<br />
# Approval and adjustments of conceptual model concept: discussion on receptors (what are the receptors?)<br />
# Decision about further IMS development<br />
* How can the quality of an assessment be assured if anyone can participate?<br />
# Make an overview of boundary conditions.<br />
# Build the conceptual model including the transfer pathways that are taken into account and the planes of compliance.<br />
# overview of objectives and interests as well as the current and possible future strategy for managing.<br />
* How can you prevent malevolent contributions where the purpose is to vandalise the process?<br />
# Build a process descriptions maintaining confidentiality and the provide clarity in way the results are presented.<br />
# Determine risks and derive local standards suggestions for clustering, including organizational arguments as basis for clustering (such as similarity of activities and the cooperation and synergy between neighboring locations).<br />
* How can you make the outcome converge to a conclusion, because all issues are uncertain and controversial?<br />
# Define risk management objectives while bearing in mind that discussion on objectives is ongoing. <br />
# Insure Intensive communication between the execution team and regulatory through designing clear orientation and workshops.<br />
# Prioritization and optimization of risk, while controlling the propositions in scenarios.<br />
* How can you ensure that the outcomes are useful for the users?<br />
# Build implementation plan that is clear and fortified with comments and open for improvement.<br />
# Insure that all parties involved understand and are committed to guidelines set for implementations.<br />
# Develop monitoring program built on indicators that provide practical considerations and synergy.<br />
# Medium-Long term process reviews with continuous commitment assured.</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40502User:Ehab Mustafa2017-04-24T15:00:01Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: </p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Helsinki, Espoo, Kauniainen and Vantaa<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 7''' =</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40501User:Ehab Mustafa2017-04-24T14:53:45Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 5 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Helsinki, Espoo, Kauniainen and Vantaa<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40500User:Ehab Mustafa2017-04-24T14:52:01Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 5 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
::Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.<br />
<br />
:3.1 ''Who are the decision makers?''<br />
<br />
:: Authorities of Helsinki, Espoo, Kauniainen and Vantaa<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
::Prevention of flood negative impacts that include injuries, fractures, and animal bites. Health risks also are associated with the evacuation of patients, loss of health workers, and loss of health infrastructure including essential drugs and supplies. <br />
<br />
::Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::The mentioned above obstacles and suggested solutions will impact the local population. In addition they are in global context that will impact a larger population<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::From health and environmental point of view, the intended policies will result in win-win situation. However, in financial regards, it is immediately win-lose situation when considering amount of money to be spent. When is accounted as an investment, planned policies are beneficial on long term.<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
::How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
:: It was mentioned in some parts in the assessment that the participations of some experts from different agencies were appreciated. However, It is not certain that everyone participated in the strategy understood all the aspects of the assessment material and the final strategy.</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40499User:Ehab Mustafa2017-04-24T14:07:42Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 5 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*'''Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*'''Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*'''Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*'''Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
::</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40498User:Ehab Mustafa2017-04-24T14:05:51Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 5 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
''':*Flood management'''<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
''':*Accessibility'''<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
''':*Adaptive buildings'''<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
''':*Urban water system'''<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
''':*Urban climate'''<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
::</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40497User:Ehab Mustafa2017-04-24T14:05:07Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 5 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*Flood management<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*Accessibility<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*Adaptive buildings<br />
<br />
:The expected sea level rise and the increased river discharge will enhance the risk of future flooding of the areas outside the levees. For Rotterdam, the development of the areas outside the levees is of significant importance. The current security strategy for the areas outside levees applied by the government, the water boards, and the municipality is focused predominantly on limiting the consequences of high water levels by strengthening levees and quays, overall heightening, and installing surge barriers and emergency water diversions.<br />
<br />
:As insecurity on the consequences of climate change increases, however, this strategy becomes vulnerable. C onfronting this insecurity requires a strategy that aims also to reduce the consequences of high tides. The concept of designing the areas outside the levees in a way that is resistant to high water levels is referred to as adaptive building.<br />
<br />
:Rotterdam has ambitious plans to build floating urban districts. The Stadshavens (city ports) district offers space for 1600 hectares of sustainable area development. Until 2040, some 13,000 climate change resilient homes will be built here, approximately 1,200 of which will be built on water. In these floating districts, people will live on the water, get their groceries, work and spend their leisure time, all on the water.<br />
<br />
:*Urban water system<br />
<br />
:Climate change already makes its impact felt in Rotterdam. Extreme downpours causing flooded streets and basements are occuring more common, and in the longer term, extended periods of drought can be expected as well. The capacity of the existing drainage systems and pumping stations is obviously insufficient to ‘keep our feet dry’ during extreme rainfall. Rotterdam has set up the Rotterdam Climate Proof climate adaptation programme in order to limit flooding in times of extreme weather events. The construction of additional water storage facilities and water plazas, and the provision of incentives for green roofs all help to preserve optimal quality of life in the city despite climate change.<br />
<br />
:These initiatives involve innovative alternatives for water storage, solutions for water collection during heavy downpours(emergency storage), and options to delay the discharge of rainwater. During heavy rainfall events, proposed green roofs are a highly valuable solution for temporary water storage. In addition, the City is studying possible locations for the construction of water plazas. These water plazas – a Rotterdam invention – fill up in a controlled manner during heavy rainfall, preventing surrounding streets from flooding. Furthermore, also in dry periods, Rotterdam should have sufficient water of sufficient quality. In dry periods, the plazas serve as children’s playgrounds. Other storage applications involve multifunctional car parks. The new car park near the Museumpark, for instance, will be equipped with an underground water storage facility. These and other projects are deployed by Rotterdam to increase the storage capacity of the existing sewerage system.<br />
<br />
:*Urban climate<br />
<br />
:The urban climate has an impact on the daily operations in the city. At the same time, the urban layout and design influence the urban climate. Themes that could serve as examples include heat stress during more frequent heat waves, the extra impact of particulate matter on public health in times of aridity, or the increased frequency of occurrence of insect infestations. The need for outflow areas, shaded places and cool areas in the open space increases as summers grow hotter. Public gardens and parks should be climate change resilient and can contribute to heat stress mitigation. These themes will become even more important as building density intensifies.<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
::</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40496User:Ehab Mustafa2017-04-24T13:29:51Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 5 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*Flood management<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*Accessibility<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*Adaptive buildings<br />
<br />
:<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
::</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40495User:Ehab Mustafa2017-04-24T13:28:58Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 5 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
:Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*Flood management<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*Accessibility<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*Adaptive buildings<br />
<br />
:<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
::</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40494User:Ehab Mustafa2017-04-24T13:27:52Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 5 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
::Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*Flood management<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*Accessibility<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by configuring networks and the infrastructure of a city in the form of subsidence to face for instance melting asphalt, low water levels, or congested tunnels and bridges during extreme rainfall and storms.<br />
<br />
:*Adaptive buildings<br />
<br />
:<br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
::</div>Ehab Mustafahttp://en.opasnet.org/en-opwiki/index.php?title=User:Ehab_Mustafa&diff=40470User:Ehab Mustafa2017-04-20T15:11:14Z<p>Ehab Mustafa: /* Homework 5 */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''DARM, 2017 Homework'''</big><br />
<br />
= '''Homework 1''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Very good!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1a: Open policy practice ==<br />
<br />
'''2. What is shared understanding?'''<br />
<br />
A situation where all individual (assessors, managers, stakeholders) are able to correctly explain what the other thinks about a certain topic and why, including information on:<br />
<br />
* Objective pursued <br />
<br />
* considered decision options<br />
<br />
* possible outcomes<br />
<br />
* selected decision option<br />
<br />
* consequence of policy implementation<br />
<br />
This definition can be extended also to a larger group. Here shared understanding is a written description of the topic that covers the thinking and reasoning on the topic of all members.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''7. What is open assessment?'''<br />
<br />
Open assessment is a method that attempts to answer the following research question and to apply the answer in practical assessments: how can scientific information (based on information) and value judgments (based on individuals opinions) be organised for improving societal decision-making in a situation where open participation is allowed?<br />
<br />
<br />
'''8. What are the dimensions of openness?'''<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ ''' Dimensions of Openness'''<br />
|----<br />
! Dimension<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of participation<br />
| Who are allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Access to information<br />
| What information is available?<br />
|----<br />
| Timing of openness<br />
| When are participants invited or allowed to participate?<br />
|----<br />
| Scope of contribution<br />
| To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute?<br />
|----<br />
| Impact of contribution<br />
| How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions?<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet ==<br />
<br />
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
== Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities ==<br />
<br />
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 3''' =<br />
<br />
{{defend|# |Excellent!|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
== Task 1 ==<br />
<br />
# I think definition of '''convergence''' was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture. <br />
# I'm not an expert in statistics, it is not my area of specialty. In turn, I found it a bit difficult to understand the following terms;<br />
<br />
* Binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Beta-binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Correlated binomial distribution<br />
<br />
* Bernoulli distribution<br />
<br />
* Gamma distribution<br />
<br />
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.<br />
<br />
== Task 2 ==<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Co-creation''' is a process in which ''valued outcomes'' are produced by bringing different parties (e.g. companies and customers) all together. In context of business system, consumers appreciated when they are able to see their their influence not only in the exchange point of goods but also in designing products, developing production processes, crafting marketing messages, and controlling sales channels. In environmental risk assessment regard, it also involves that modelers help decision makers to get answers through performing quantitative risk assessment. It Emphasize on the Joint effort to collaboratively produce information, typically supported by facilitators and performed utilising online tools. <br />
<br />
''Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process'' include:<br />
<br />
# it builds trust among participants and outside observers<br />
# it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly<br />
# it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone<br />
<br />
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.<br />
<br />
A good facilitator should have following skills:<br />
<br />
{| {{prettytable}}<br />
|+ '''Skills of Good Facilitator'''<br />
|----<br />
! Skill<br />
! Explanation<br />
|----<br />
| Enthusiasm<br />
| A good facilitator should be able to motivate participants to express their opinions by helping participants with unfamiliar tools or letting them use their own tools and then translating the information into the workspace.<br />
|----<br />
| Textuality<br />
| A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats.<br />
|----<br />
| Openness<br />
| A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. <br />
|----<br />
| Modelling<br />
| A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to <br />
|----<br />
| Web-workspaces supporting<br />
| A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software.<br />
<br />
|----<br />
|}<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 4''' =<br />
{{defend|# |Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below.|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
== Scope ==<br />
<br />
=== Question ===<br />
<br />
*How city of Rotterdam will be climate-proof city and structurally take into account the long-term foreseeable climate change in different area of spatial development, while allowing for any associated uncertainties?<br />
<br />
=== Intended use and users ===<br />
<br />
The assessment is to serve the city of Rotterdam authorities indicating which measures can be implemented in the various parts of the city in order to combat the effects of climate change and discusses where opportunities lie. A number of instruments are available to support the implementation.<br />
<br />
=== Participants ===<br />
<br />
*Rotterdam City Council<br />
::*Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans<br />
::*Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures<br />
<br />
*Wide range of consultants from different business<br />
::*Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.<br />
::*Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.<br />
<br />
*Any possible stakeholders<br />
::*Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness. <br />
<br />
*Interest groups<br />
::*Consider environment and population<br />
<br />
=== Boundaries ===<br />
<br />
*Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City<br />
*Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. <ref> Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy [http://www.rotterdamclimateinitiative.nl/documents/2015-en-ouder/Documenten/20121210_RAS_EN_lr_versie_4.pdf] </ref><br />
*Noted factors:<br />
**Water levels for outer-dike areas<br />
**Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas<br />
**Extreme rainfall<br />
**Drought<br />
**High temperatures<br />
<br />
=== Decisions and scenarios ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could try to identify alternatives: now the text sounds like an implementation plan. But if everything has been decided, why would Rotterdam need this assessment? Note that you can here deviate from the actual situation, because this is an exercise: even if this had been decided already, you can assume in this homework that it is not. Then, you can think of issues that possibly would change the decision and e.g. stop one of these activities. What issues could they be, and what information is needed to find out whether it is a good or bad idea to implement these plans?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
There different scenarios for '''green adaptation''' for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels, which will increase the likelihood of flooding. The higher elevation of the outer-dike areas limits the extent and depth of the flooding there. The consequences of flooding will mainly be limited to an increased risk of economic losses and environmental damage. In the outer-dike areas the strategy focuses on a combination of prevention and adaptation:<br />
::*The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.<br />
::*Augmentiton with measure such as adaptive building and the redevelopment of outer-dike properties, construction of floating buildings and the adaptive design of outdoor areas including roadways, utility infrastructure, wilderness areas and parks.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
Climate change will lead to higher sea and river levels. This will place more pressure on the dikes and the agreed safety standards at a number of places in Rotterdam will be exceeded. The strategy is aimed at preventing flooding using a system of strong dikes and storm surge barriers, with a focus on prevention through:<br />
::*If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.<br />
::*For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
The changing climate will lead to more frequent extreme rainfall and heavier downpours. This will increase the risk of disruption and damage caused by flooding, particularly in areas that already have a water storage capacity deficit and densely built-up, paved urban areas. The drainage and storage capacity of the urban water system is being adapted to deal with extreme rainfall through:<br />
::*maintaining and where necessary improving the urban water system so that in the future the city will become less vulnerable to flooding, for example by increasing the storage and drainage capacity.<br />
::*taking some of the pressure off the water system. Where possible, in all parts of the city, rainwater must be captured and retained where it falls and drainage delayed. Where necessary, rainwater should be used to augment the groundwater and to irrigate the flora of the city.<br />
::*Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect<br />
the water table and can also lead to lower river levels. Lower groundwater levels in turn affects the peat ground drying out and sinking. This poses a risk to wooden pile foundations. Drying out can also cause peat dikes to subside and threatens the urban flora. Climate change will only increase these risks. In order to make the city less vulnerable to the effects of drought and rainfall shortage, Rotterdam is focusing on retaining rainwater and replenishing the (ground)water where possible: The current robust water system is being maintained and strengthened by, for example, making more room for water in ditches, canals, waterways and lakes, controlling water levels and sluicing with relatively high-quality water.<br />
::*An effective robust measure is to create extra surface water in the city where necessary and possible. Examples here include the expansion of existing or the creation of new lakes, canals, waterways and ditches.<br />
::*On a city-wide scale, this can be achieved by extending existing green blue networks and constructing new ones, such as in the south of Rotterdam. These networks are also known as ‘climate buffers’ and can be linked to the regional water network.<br />
::*Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
Climate change will lead to longer, more frequent periods of high temperatures. The Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect will compound the effects of heat in the city. In the summer, the most important consequences of this warming will be health problems and increased levels of mortality, a reduction in the thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, higher energy consumption, lower productivity, reduction in air quality, reduction in water quality and biodiversity and malfunctioning infrastructure. The task is to reduce the vulnerability of the city and its inhabitants to heat stress through:<br />
::*incorporate more flora in the city, especially in its paved, densely built-up areas. This is being done at all levels in the city, from pavements to city parks. In those places where it is not possible to incorporate greenery, other adaptation measures will be included in the design and maintenance plans.<br />
::*At the same time, use is being made of the opportunities provided by a warmer city. More parks and gardens create a more attractive environment, a richer urban biodiversity and extra activities in the field of recreation and tourism.<br />
<br />
=== Timing ===<br />
* The assessment should be made as soon as possible to reach a decision to agree on the best possible measure that enable to face climate change in Rotterdam City<br />
<br />
<br />
== Answer ==<br />
<br />
=== Results ===<br />
<br />
*Outer-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads to the minimization of possible damaging effects because of flooding in the outer-dike areas offering protection to private properties as well as public ones.<br />
*Inner-dike flood protection<br />
::*Proposed strategy leads not only to protect the city against the water catastrophes; but also to be a part of the spatial structure of the city and frequently interwoven into the urban fabric.<br />
::*In some places the dikes are green and recreational, but elsewhere, such as the Boompjes, they are an integral part of the urban infrastructure. In addition to their protective function, the dikes have other functions such as major access roads or recreational cycle routes.<br />
*Protection against extreme rainfall<br />
::*The ‘waterproof city’ is robust and resilient (grey and green-blue) with a mix of paving and vegetation. The focus is on adaptive measures whereby the rainwater is captured and drainage is delayed.<br />
*Protection against drought<br />
::*Inhabitants, businesses and visitors can all benefit from reinforcing the green-blue network in Rotterdam, both in the immediate vicinity of their homes and neighborhoods (green roofs and façades) and in the city itself (water squares and lakes, green-blue network). Furthermore, the measures provide an attractive context for the transformation of the existing city.<br />
*Protection against waves of high temperature<br />
::*Even with the changing climate, the urban climate in Rotterdam will remain pleasant and healthy, both indoors and outdoors where there are enough cool places such as shady parks or water features.<br />
<br />
=== Conclusions ===<br />
With the proposed improvements listed above it might be possible to minimize climate changes impact on Rotterdam city significantly. The measures will be a drain on resources but doing nothing would be even more costly.<br />
<br />
== Rationale ==<br />
<br />
[[File:HW4_Overview.png|400px]]<br />
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy<br />
<br />
=== Stakeholders ===<br />
* City of Rotterdam<br />
* Citizens of Rotterdam City<br />
* Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media<br />
* Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.<br />
* Central government<br />
<br />
=== Dependencies ===<br />
{{comment|# |Here you could list issues that are important information for decision making. So what things must be known before an informed decision about climate actions can be taken. Also: how can this assessment help clarifying those issues?|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] ([[User talk:Jouni|talk]]) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)}}<br />
<br />
In addition to the nowadays state of suitability of waterproof protective measures, the current levels of water river and lakes in the city have to be assessed. Regular and precise recoding in the change of temperature and rain gauge should be followed. Through out the implementation process costs (money, time, work force) have to be calculated, while health and environmental imapacts have to be monitored.<br />
<br />
=== Analyses ===<br />
<br />
=== Indices ===<br />
<br />
=== Calculations ===<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
== Keywords ==<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
== Related files ==<br />
<br />
= '''Homework 5''' =<br />
<br />
Me and [[User:Amr Ebrahim|Amr]] used these two reports to go through homework 5:<br />
<br />
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/0/05/2011_09_06_KORT_Jaarversl_RCI_over10_EN_DEFINITIEF.pdf] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [http://opasnet.org/en-opwiki/images/4/4b/RCP_ENG_def.pdf]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
1. ''What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?''<br />
<br />
::Full climate change resilience for the entire region. The central focus of the programme is to create extra opportunities to make Rotterdam a more attractive city in which to live, work, relax – and invest.<br />
<br />
:1.1 ''Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?''<br />
<br />
::Citizens of Rotterdam and City municipality authorities to meet their goals. The strategy represents a boost for the global trend aiming at tackling climate change.<br />
<br />
2. ''What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?''<br />
<br />
Rotterdam has decided to leverage Rotterdam Climate Proof in a proactive approach to fight the consequences of climate change. The programme consists of five substantive themes which focus on knowledge development and implementation:<br />
<br />
:*Flood management<br />
<br />
:The Rotterdam region is a delta area where vast numbers of people live and work both inside and outside the levees. The city and the region are protected by a network of water defenses. Tackling flood that might be provoked by climate change can be through for instance innovative primary water defenses in an urban context; levees that offer both protection and room for residential or recreational purposes. Yet another example concerns the installation of flexible flood defenses with a lock off valve to secure the Rijnmond region in times of heavy storms, while at the same time boosting the economic development of the areas outside the levees.<br />
<br />
:*Accessibility<br />
<br />
:Enhancing the functionality of freight transport and passenger transport by road, water and rail which is crucial to the further development of the port, industry and services sector by <br />
<br />
:2.1 ''Who are those that actually realize these actions?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
3. ''What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
4. ''What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.1 ''Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.2 ''Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
:4.3 ''Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
5. ''Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.''<br />
<br />
::<br />
<br />
6. ''Extra question: In what ways your answers do or do not represent "shared understanding"? (The climate program/strategy can be considered a compilation of contributions by many experts and attempting to reflect the views and needs of different decision makers and stakeholders).''<br />
<br />
::</div>Ehab Mustafa