User:Ehab Mustafa
DARM, 2017 Homework
Contents
Homework 1
←--#: . Very good! --Jouni (talk) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence)
Homework 1a: Open policy practice
2. What is shared understanding?
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:
- Objective pursued
- considered decision options
- possible outcomes
- selected decision option
- consequence of policy implementation
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.
7. What is open assessment?
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?
8. What are the dimensions of openness?
| Dimension | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Scope of participation | Who are allowed to participate? |
| Access to information | What information is available? |
| Timing of openness | When are participants invited or allowed to participate? |
| Scope of contribution | To which aspects of the issue are participants invited or allowed to contribute? |
| Impact of contribution | How much are participant contributions allowed to have influence on the outcomes? In other words, how much weight is given to participant contributions? |
Homework 1b: Learn the terms in Quizlet
Done, It was really interesting to paly the flip-cards thing and taking knowledge assessment test as well.
Homework 1c: Introduction to critical thinking
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.
Homework 1d: Introduction to probabilities
Done, most of videos were watched. Most of exercises were performed.
Homework 2
Using templates
This is Just a demonstration of dealing with templates on opasnet.
t2b table and Opasnet Base Uploader
This is just a demonstration of using this skill on opasnet environment
| Obs | Month | Year | Average Temperature |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | June | 2001 | 22 |
| 2 | June | 2007 | 19 |
| 3 | June | 2010 | 17 |
| 4 | June | 2016 | 20 |
Homework 3
←--#: . Excellent! --Jouni (talk) 08:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence)
Task 1
- I think definition of convergence was not clearly stated, it would be great if we discuss more about it the lecture.
- 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;
- Binomial distribution
- Beta-binomial distribution
- Correlated binomial distribution
- Bernoulli distribution
- Gamma distribution
It will be appreciated if more information in this regard is offered.
Task 2
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.
Advantages of co-creation over traditional decision support process include:
- it builds trust among participants and outside observers
- it is an efficient way to ensure that all relevant issues are raised and handled properly
- it facilitates learning when all information is easily available to everyone
Facilitator is meant to handle the task of creating collaboration, facilitator usually helps any of possible participants to express their opinion.
A good facilitator should have following skills:
| Skill | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Enthusiasm | 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. |
| Textuality | A good facilitator should be capable of producing and converting information into practical textual formats. |
| Openness | A good facilitator should be accessible by participants with no restrictions. |
| Modelling | A good facilitator should have sufficient capabilities to use probabilities, statistics and different ways of modelling to |
| Web-workspaces supporting | A good facilitator should be satisfied by sufficient skills regarding dealing with different and updated tools of software. |
Homework 4
←--#: . Overall: excellent! Some detailed comments below. --Jouni (talk) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence)
Scope
Question
- 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?
Intended use and users
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.
Participants
- Rotterdam City Council
- Set boundaries to the assessment and action plans
- Supervision and evaluation of implemented measures
- Wide range of consultants from different business
- Assessment of placing the essential infrastructure and other frameworks adopted.
- Assessment of suggesting tool for measure the public awareness.
- Any possible stakeholders
- Ensure the assessment openness, acceptability, and effectiveness.
- Interest groups
- Consider environment and population
Boundaries
- Area: geographical area of Rotterdam City
- Time: Change Adaptation Strategy has been developed in October 2013 with the aim of making Rotterdam climate proof by 2025. [1]
- Noted factors:
- Water levels for outer-dike areas
- Water levels for dikes and inner-dike areas
- Extreme rainfall
- Drought
- High temperatures
Decisions and scenarios
----#: . 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? --Jouni (talk) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC) (type: truth; paradigms: science: comment)
There different scenarios for green adaptation for climate change that will simultaneously make surroundings of Rotterdam City more attractive and livable:
- Outer-dike flood protection
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:
- The robust system of protection, consisting of raising the elevation and closing the storm surge barriers during storm tides.
- 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.
- Inner-dike flood protection
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:
- If the current agreed standards are exceeded, then the first course is to reinforce the already existing primary dikes.
- For the regional dikes, there is also a system of outlets that can be closed in the event of any disaster.
- Protection against extreme rainfall
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:
- 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.
- 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.
- Effective measures in public areas include removing paving and planting trees and bushes along the streets and in open areas.
- Protection against drought
Longer periods of drought and groundwater deficits affect 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- Increasing the potential for sluicing is another robust measure
- Protection against waves of high temperature
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:
- 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.
- 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.
Timing
- 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
Answer
Results
- Outer-dike flood protection
- 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.
- Inner-dike flood protection
- 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.
- 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.
- Protection against extreme rainfall
- 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.
- Protection against drought
- 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.
- Protection against waves of high temperature
- 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.
Conclusions
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.
Rationale
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy
Stakeholders
- City of Rotterdam
- Citizens of Rotterdam City
- Enterprises e.g. construction companies and media
- Responsible city agencies e.g. environmental agencies, premises center and building supervision.
- Central government
Dependencies
----#: . 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? --Jouni (talk) 08:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC) (type: truth; paradigms: science: comment)
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.
Analyses
Regional adaptation measures proposed for the 1st phase (Rijnmond-Estuary area). These are the following adaptation measure(s): 1) Dike reinforcement 2) Water storage Grevelingen 3) Room for the River measures 4) Channel deepening 5) Full closure with dams and sluices
Indices
Calculations
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:
- Casualities
- People affected
- Property damages (residential properties including vehicles, businesses)
- Infrastructure
- Agriculture
- Utility companies
- Loss of added value due to (temporary) closure of businesses
- Indirect damages
See also
Keywords
References
Related files
Homework 5
Me and Amr used these two reports to go through homework 5:
Rotterdam Climate Initiative [2] ,and Rotterdam Climate proof Adaptation Programme 2010 [3]
1. What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?
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.
- 1.1 Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached?
- 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.
2. What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?
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:
- Flood management
- 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.
- Accessibility
- 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.
- Adaptive buildings
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- Urban water system
- 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.
- 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.
- Urban climate
- 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.
- 2.1 Who are those that actually realize these actions?
- The concerned authorities in the city and other stakeholders.
3. What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?
Basically the action are based on investment in the infrastructure if the city.
- 3.1 Who are the decision makers?
- Authorities of Rotterdam and Dutch government.
4. What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?
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.
- Prevention of heat waves negative impacts that include the increase of respiratory and cardiovascular deaths especially between the elderly.
- 4.1 Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?The community,the citizens,
- 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
- 4.2 Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?
- In the scale of Rotterdam city, economical and environmental impact are more significant.
- 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?
- 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.
5. Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.
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?
- ----#: . 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. --Jouni (talk) 10:47, 28 May 2017 (UTC) (type: truth; paradigms: science: comment)
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).
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.
Homework 6
Homework 7
Homework 8
Homework 9
Task A: Evaluation of assessment draft by Tine and Tamara
| Attribute | Characterization |
|---|---|
| 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. |
| 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. |
| 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. ⇤--#: . Problem owner is typically the person or organisation that commissions the assessment to get answers, rather than people that are affected by the impacts studied. --Jouni (talk) 08:34, 14 June 2017 (UTC) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack) |
| 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. |
| Interaction | The participant of the assessment were identified (see scope of participation below). However, the way how they could interact was lacking. |
| Dimension | Characterization |
|---|---|
| Scope of participation | Government of Singapore, Citizens of Singapore, and Different working groups. |
| Access to information | Not identified. |
| Timing of openness | Not identified. |
| Scope of contribution | The way and extent how different participants could contribute in the assessment were not well stated. |
| Impact of contribution | 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. |
| Category | Evaluation (1-5) | Reasoning | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quality of content: Specificity, exactness, correctness of information. | 4 | The aim of the assessment was clear and the offered information was varied by the solely used reference. | |
| Applicability | Relevance: Correspondence between output and its intended use | 1 | Results of the assessment are poorly stated in its right place under the subtitle Results. They rather briefly mentioned under Decisions and scenarios section. |
| Availability: Accessibility of the output to users | 4 | It seems that the results and outcomes of the assessment are available to everyone not exclusive to a specific group of the participants. | |
| Usability: Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s) | 4 | Taking into account the overwhelming number of the participant, the assessment sounds to be comprehensive and potential to generate useful information to everyone. | |
| Acceptability: Potential of the output being accepted by its users. | 5 | The output should be accepted by the users when the broad scope of the participation is considered. | |
| Efficiency: Resource expenditure for assessment | 1 | The cost is seems to very high when considering all those participants to be brought on one table for performing the assessment. | |
Suggestions for improving the quality of the assessment: 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.
Task B: Evaluation of benefit-risk assessment of cinnamon
| Attribute | Characterization |
|---|---|
| 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. |
| Causes | Inconsistency in the market authorization of cinnamon and its product in different state in the EU. |
| Problem owner | Pharmaceutical firms, medical agencies, health authorities and final consumers |
| 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. |
| 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. |
| Dimension | Characterization |
|---|---|
| Scope of participation | Committee on Herbal Medicinal Products (HMPC) is the main entity in performing the assessment |
| Access to information | The assessment is mainly based on scientific literature that was published in accessible journals ⇤--#: . This should be about who can access what information during and about the assessment. It is not so much about what information the assessment uses. --Jouni (talk) 08:34, 14 June 2017 (UTC) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack) |
| Timing of openness | The access for sources of scientific information used in the assessment is valid as long as the publishing journals exist ⇤--#: . Again, this is about the timing when the assessment process is open for reading and commenting. --Jouni (talk) 08:34, 14 June 2017 (UTC) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack) |
| Scope of participation | 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. ⇤--#: . To what parts can people participate? --Jouni (talk) 08:34, 14 June 2017 (UTC) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack) |
| Impact of participation | The diversity of the committee guaranteed a comprehensive assessment of a good quality |
| Category | Evaluation (1-5) | Reasoning | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quality of content: Specificity, exactness, corectnss of information. | 5 | The purpose of the assessment was well stated. Peer-reviewing of the used scientific data guaranteed its reliability. | |
| Applicability | Relevance: Correspondence between output and its intended use | 3 | The implementation of the assessment outcomes was not identifies. However, the quality of the assessment content makes it helpful in different ways |
| Availability: Accessibility of the output to users | 5 | The assessment conclusions were well identified in the report of the assessment. The assessment report is freely available on the internet. | |
| Usability: Potential of the information in the output to generate understanding among its user(s) | 5 | 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. | |
| Acceptability: Potential of the output being accepted by its users | 3 | 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. | |
| Efficiency: Resource expenditure for assessment | 3 | 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. | |
