User:Jukka Hirvonen

Homework 1

Question 1

Purpose of environmental health assessment is to provide information for policy making. This is done using information obtained from environmental health research and considering how environmental-health relationship is affected by different actions and decisions. Environmental health assessment quides and offers plans for decision making to achieve the ideal outcome.

Question 2

Pragmatism means that theory and practice are not separated or be seen as detached concept but instead of that they are seen compined subject which is strongly intertwined. For environmental health assessment this means that it through theory and to practice society's health and well being is improved.

Question 8

There can be many different purposes in participation regarding to environmental health assessment. Few main purposes for participation can be: influence assessment and their outputs, influence policy decisions and influencing policy making from outside the policy making structures. These are just few main purposes and in reality there often is many sub-purposes inside these. Different ways of participation are not often exclusive, but instead they interact with each other.

Homework 2

Question: I would like to know more about Training costs, and how do you define different cost variables in an assessment. Is there some basic values/numbers for different variables that can be used if there is no specific information about some variables? Is there some advices how costs should be divived betweem differet variables when doing environmental health assessment.

Homework 3

Done with Sami Rissanen in his user page: http://en.opasnet.org/w/User:Sami_Rissanen

Homework 4

The Helsinki Metropolitan Area Climate Change Adaptation Strategy Material link:http://www.hsy.fi/tietoahsy/Documents/Julkaisut/11_2012_Helsinki_Metropolitan_Area_Climate_Change_Adaptation_Strategy.pdf

Q: What are the aims/goals of the strategy/program, i.e. what are the desired impacts and outcomes striven for?

A: Strategy concentrates on the adaptation of the built and urban environment to the changing climate. The vision is climate proof city.

The strategy aims to

1) assess the impacts of climate change in the area,

2) prepare for the impacts of climate change and to extreme weather events and

3) to reduce the vulnerabilities of the area to climate variability and change.

Possible impacts of climate change which has to be taken into account are climate variation, extreme weather, sea level rise and warming climate. Aim is to reach better working city even in extreme weather coditions. There need to be a flood control against sea lavel rise.

----#: . You could try to be a bit more specific and consider what does it mean to "prepare for the impacts..." and "reduce the vulnerabilities...". --Mikko Pohjola 20:43, 24 January 2013 (EET) (type: truth; paradigms: science: comment)

Q: Who are those that benefit if the aims/goals of the strategy/program are reached? How?

A: Citizens, because the target is to secure well-being.

Q: What are the actions that are needed/intended to take in order to progress towards the aims/goals?

A: Land use: keep enough green areas in city, pay attention to flood control and biodiversity. Traffic and technical networks: attention to public transport. Flood control especially in challenging places like roads under bridges and other lowland places are important. Flood can be caused by melt water or sea level rise during storm. Snowing heavily can cause problems too. Buildings and the climate proof local environment: Many buildings may be under danger against flood. Water and waste management: when flood comes what happens to waste water canals?

----#: . Again, you could try to be a bit more specific and consider e.g. what changes in land use, traffic and technical networks, water and waste management etc. are needed to realize to make the Helsinki region more "prepared" and less "vulnerable". You can focus on some that seem most relevant from the health impacts of climate program point of view (remember, the assignment says: "Consider that you are given an assignment to assess the direct or indirect health impacts caused by a climate (adaptation) strategy or program.". --Mikko Pohjola 20:43, 24 January 2013 (EET) (type: truth; paradigms: science: comment)

----#: . By looking at how the needed change can be realized, also the following questions on what actions/decision and by who probably become easier to grasp. --Mikko Pohjola 20:43, 24 January 2013 (EET) (type: truth; paradigms: science: comment)

Q: Who are those that actually realize these actions?

A: -Land use: Cities (city planning, technical services, environment centre), Forestry Development Centre Tapio Uudenmaan liitto

-Traffic and technical networks: HSL, Cities (responsible for public transport), Partners in co-operation: Cities (city planning, technical services), The Finnish Transport Agency, The Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment Companies

-Building and the climate proof local environment: Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Ministry of the Environment, Ministry of Transport and Communications, Finnish Meteorological Institute, Finnish Environment Institute, Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment, STUK, City of Pori, City of Helsinki, HSY, Cities (city planning, building control), Finnish Environment Institute

-Water and waste management: HSY,Partners in co-operation: Cities (preparedness planning, city planning, technical services), Water Protection Association of the River Vantaa and Helsinki Region, Water treatment plants in the area of the River Vantaa

-Rescue services and safety: Cities (administration and management, preparedness planning, health care and social services), Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, Partners in co-operation: Rescue departments, network of preparatory operations, HSL, companies (such as maintenance companies), HSY, Rescue departments, relevant organisations, Ilmasto-info

-Health care and Social services: Cities (all sectors), Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, police, rescue services, defence forces, HSY, Ilmasto-info Partners in co-operation: Organisations (patient and customer organisations, neighbourhood associations), housing associations (people responsible for rescue), Regional State Administrative Agency Hospital District of Helsinki and Uusimaa, Finnish Meteorological Institute

-Co-operation in the production and distribution of information: HSY, cities, Turku, Lahti, Finnish Meteorological Institute, University of Turku, National Institute of Health and Welfare, many partners from reseach area

Q: What are the decisions that are needed to make in order to enable/promote the actions?

A:It must be decided how and which ways capital city region is going to prepare and adapt it's infrastructure, service systems and networks toward climate change. Then it can be decided what kind of actions or action options are needed and amount/type of resources to enable these actions.

Q: Who are the decision makers?

A:Decision makers are the same participants as before: the Helsinki Region Environmental Services Authority (HSY), which is coordinating strategy preparation. Other participants are Helsinki, Espoo, Vantaa and Kauniainen cities and their experts, regional emergency services, Ministry of Environment and Helsinki Transport Authority

´

Cities

Q:What direct or indirect health impacts, positive or negative, these decisions and actions (may) have?

A: The intended decisions and actions are divided in different categories based on different sectors in society and every area has own planned adaptation policy, so also the health impacts are assessed to each sector as individual. Also each sector may have more than one action options and then health impacts are assessed to all different options. Only such options are mentioned in this homework where health impacts are assessed. Most impacts are direct but there is some indirect effects also (t.ex guidances that improves public health in future aspect)

-Land use.

Action option 2. Secure collective green areas. Green and natural areas have positive effects to peoples living environment and in studies it is showed that it affects positively to mental and physical well being. Natural areas can also increase opportunities for exercise and so they support positive health impacts associated to exercise.

-Traffic and technical networks.

Action option 1. Public transport adaptation plan. By supporting public transport and light transportation, exercises positive impacts on health are supported. Adaptation plan also advances traffic safety and can decrease accident risks in exceptional situations. It also can decrease injury risks from people who use light- or public trasportation.

Action option 2. Readiness plan: risks for traffic- and technical networks. By ensuring electric- and data networks reliability hospitals performance is secured and well working traffic network increases ambulance services performance.

-Building and climate proof local environment.

Action option 1. Building hights. For future aspect this option can reduce negative health effects attributed to buildings humidity and indoor air quality problems.

-Water and waste management.

For overall health impacts that this sector decisions can have, it is mentioned that floods and defunctioning waste water treatment exposes to diseases that travel in sewer's waste waters.

-Rescue services and safety.

Action option 1. Readiness plan. Successful risk management is advances controlling and reducing negative health impacts from climate change in municipal healthcare. Examples from such negative impacts are exceptional warm decades, changes in amount of pollen and algae and diseases that can infect by animals or entrantspecies becoming more common. Also readiness plan decreases possible stress in healthcare system when exceptional situations are faced.

Action option 2. Safety situation centers. Ensuring enough resources to rescue work and healtcare system improves ability to prevent negative health impacts arising from exceptional situations.

Action option 3. Leading- and readiness rehearsals. Leading and readiness rehearsals improve rescue works ability to prevent negative health impacts associated to exceptional situations caused by extreme events.

Action option 4. Citizens self-prepare. Instructions for self-preparing to exceptional situations can improve citizens safety and health and it decreases the stress that extreme events cause to rescue work.

-Health care and social services.

Action option 1. Readiness plan. Better preparing increases patientsafety t.ex. through properly allocated resources and considering the risks can help to predict possibly disease cases.

Action option 2. Recognizing vulnerable groups. Patient safety is improved when vulnerable groups are recognized and taken into consideration when allocating and defining resources. If needed, extra precautions are allocated to recognized groups.

Action option 3. Urban survival -scheme. Urban survival scheme can at it's best can help to reduce stress carecenters and rescue work. Scheme can advance national health and it can decrease number of disease cases if it includes guidance for these subjects.

-Co-operation in the production and distribution of information.

Action option 1. Network for distributing information. Creating network for information distribution can improve research attributed to national health and arising of new information.

Action option 2 & 3. International survey for good policies & national co-operation networks. If survey includes mapping of actions related to national health, this action option can improve national health work related to climate change and it's impacts.

Q:Where and how do these impacts take place, who are those that face these health impacts in practice?

A: In this climate change adaptation strategy the assessed health impacts take mostly place in capital city region. In practise every citizen in that region faces these health impacts. Also people who work in city area face these impacts (t.ex. prevented indoor air quality problems in offices etc. buildings.) These health impacts also reflect to health care system, rescue work and ambulance services if need for their services is increased. People in city planning and decision making also face these impacts so, that they might need to improve preparement and actions to prevent negative health impacts associated to climate change. As how impacts take place: t.ex. new structure building planning, increased resources to healthcare system and rescue work, new city planning to green and natural areas and communicational and traffic networks, new waste and waste water management planning all produces these intended positive health impacts.

Q:Are the health impacts big or small in relation to other impacts (e.g. economical, social, climate, other environmental, ...)?

A: Health impacts are at least moderate or even large related to most other impacts. Sometimes social impacts or economical impacts seem to be assessed as remarkable as health impacts. Also other environmental impacts, such affecting to land use, structure building planning and traffic/communicational networks are seen big impacts also. In overall, it seems that health impacts are seen most concerning impact group related to others in assessment, so health impacts can be seen big.

Q:Do the intended policies result in win-win, win-lose, lose-win, or lose-lose situations with regard to health and other impacts?

A: In assessment it seems that all the action options are considered so, that there will be very minor nor any negative health impacts. So it seems to be allways win-x situation regarding to health vs. other impacts. Mostly there seems to be win-win situation but sometimes, t.ex. there is temporary negative social impacts in specific are from construction work, such as noise and emissions, negative economical impacts as rising costs or negative environmental impacts such as increased GHG emissions. So sometimes there is win-lose situations too. In some options there is both negative and positive options so then you could say that result is win-"balanced".

Formulate a plausible and meaningful specific assessment question that takes account of (some of) the aspects considered in above questions.

A: How could we find the most cost efficient way to execute these actions and should there be some kind of classification system for each impact and their magnitude, or is every impact seen equal regarding it's magnitude.

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)

A: I think that answers do not represent real shared understanding. They represent the suggestions, needs and opinions from experts and capital city area decision makers. Citizens and companies living and working in capital city area are not directly included in decision making. There also seems to be many different action options, so maybe shared understanding is not very clear even among experts and city area decision makers.

Homework 5

part A: Questions about identifying roles and participation: Q:Who are the relevant participants of the assessment?

A: Relevant participants are the ones having authority to make action plans and decisions. These are: the Helsinki Region Environmental Services Authority (HSY), which is coordinating strategy preparation. Other participants are Helsinki, Espoo, Vantaa and Kauniainen cities and their experts, regional emergency services, Ministry of Environment and Helsinki Transport Authority. Also some smaller regional organizations are included.

Q:What roles the different participants (may) take in the assessment?

A: Cities own environmental experts, HSY and Ministry of Environment may take expert roles and source of information about environmental and health issues. Cities itself and their representatives may take decision maker roles. Regional emergency services may take role as source of information and also decision maker regarding to emergency and rescue services. Smaller regional participants may take role as a source of information.

Q:What kind of relevant knowledge they (may) have regarding the assessment?

A: HSY, Ministry of Environment and cities experts may have knowledge about health issues, environmental issues and environmental planning. Cities and their representatives have information about city planning, functions, city resources, demands and needs for adapting to climate change. Regional emergency services have information regarding emergency and rescue work and their functioning and their needs so that they are able to adapt and prepare in climat change. Smaller regional participants have information for smaller pieces and their needs.

Q:What needs and aims do they represent in the assessment?

A: HSY, Ministry of Environment and cities experts. Aims: to find convenient solutions and options how to make capital city region adabted to climate change. Also prevent negative health impacts and advance positive. Needs: Information and data about cities functionalities, resources etc. affecting to option planning. Cities and their representatives. Aims: to protect and adapt cities infrastructure toward climate change, to protect and improve citizens health and prevent negative health impacts and in future do city planning in a way that climate change adaptation is taken into account. Needs: Scientific information and possible/reasonable action options. Regional emergency services. Aims: To be able to offer emergency and rescue services and maintain functionality and prepareness in exceptional situations and to have enough resources allowing this. Needs: information about possible action options and how the needs of emergency services have considered in decision making.

Homework 5

part B: Consider also the following questions about facilitating collaboration:

Q:How could the relevant participants be involved in the assessment in an effective way?

A: There needs to be many meetings arranged and it should be compulsory that there is at least one representative for each participant, so that in every meeting every participant knows where assessment is going and can also express own needs, ideas and information they may have to make assessment better. Also questions and data collection from each participant would be good idea to get information from all participants.

Q:How can the quality of an assessment be assured if anyone can participate?

A: There could be ranking system to each participants opinions and suggestions, so that more remarkable participans like HSY, Ministry of Environment and cities decision makers have bigger value in decision making then smaller institution, like emergency services and small regional participants. Most value should probably put to experts opinions and suggestions based on their scientific knowledge and expertise on this kind of assessments. There could also be citizens opinions icluded but they would only be used as proposal or additional information, not as directly to support decision making.

Q:How can you prevent malevolent contributions where the purpose is to vandalise the process?

A: It might be good the check participants expertise and knowledge about environmental issues and assessments. Also there should be survey to each participant about their goals and purposes in assessment and what ways they see best suitable for achieving it. Also there should be all the time open discussion and every participants opinions and actions should be openly seen and discussed among all participants from time to time, so if some participants actions or hole participation looks suspicious or harmful to assessment process, that participant could be excluded.

Q:How can you make the outcome converge to a conclusion, because all issues are uncertain and controversial? Q:How can you ensure that the outcomes are useful for the users?

Homework 5

part C: Prepare following tables from the climate programme of your selection. Instructions for table structures can be found at Training assessment.

Decisions table Endpoints table