User:Amr Ebrahim

Homework 1

←--#: . Good. You have answered more questions than asked for. I have added some clarifications to the text. --Jouni (talk) 07:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence)

Homework 1a: Open policy practice 1. What is the main purpose of environmental health assessment?

• Studying the characteristics of our living environment and its impacts on human health by applying research to validate cause and effect relations.
• Improving plans using pragma-dilectic theory through knowledge sharing approaches, while taking in consideration complexity.
• Supply knowledge in regards to facilitating communication and implementation of assessment produced to assist governance to desired outcomes.

2.What is shared understanding?

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.

3. What are the main differences between regulatory and academic assessment approaches? Give examples of each.

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. ⇤--#: . 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. --Jouni (talk) 07:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack)

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.

4. What are co-creation skills? An amalgamating function that insures the execution , evaluation and management ( also referred to as international experience ⇤--#: . 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. --Jouni (talk) 07:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack)). 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. 5. What are the main differences between open assessment and most other assessment approaches?

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.

other open 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).⇤--#: . Question, answer, and rationale are typical for open assessments, not other assessments. Open participation is a key difference between open assessment and other approaches. --Jouni (talk) 07:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack)

6. What is benefit-risk assessment? 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. ⇤--#: . What you describe is a typical risk assessment. Benefit-risk assessment looks also at the benefits of the activity or product. --Jouni (talk) 07:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack) 7. What is open assessment?

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.

8. What different purposes are there for participation in assessment and/or decision making?

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.

9. What are the dimensions of openness?

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.

10. What relevant stakeholder roles are there in environmental health assessment and related decision making

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).

11.What is effectiveness' in the context of environmental health assessment and related decision making?

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.

12.What is the trialogical approach to knowledge creation and learning?

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.

13. What is decision support?

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.

14. What is a pragmatic knowledge service?

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.

15. What is collaboration?

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.

16. What are the properties of good assessment?

Informative, collaborative, coherent) in regards to content. (In regards to applicability (relevance, availability, usability and acceptability) and intra/inter - assessments in regards to efficiency.

17. What is the role of modelling in assessment and policy making?

It is the co-creation and facilitation category used to develop actual assessment models based on generic methods and case specifications.

18. What parts does the open policy practice consist of?

Intentionality, causality, critique, shared information objects, openness and reuse. ⇤--#: . 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. --Jouni (talk) 07:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack)

19. What does it mean that the results of assessments can be considered shared information objects?

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.

Homework 3: Basic concepts of open assessment and co-creation

Task A:

• Q1. HOw do we weigh the attributes in an assessment and link it to variables in decision making ?
• Q2. in climate change what is the applicable value of sensitivity analysis in decision making?

Task B:

Co-creation converts the market into a forum where dialogue among the consumer, the firm, consumer consumers are separate, with distinct, predetermined roles, and, consequently, that supply and demand are distinct, but mirrored, processes oriented around the exchange of products and services between firms and consumers. Adopting to a new experience-based view of economic theory where Dialog, access, risk benefits, and transparency (DART) emerge as the basis for interaction between the consumer and the firm. Co-creation is about joint creation of value by the company and the customer. Moving away from the traditional sense of dictating value and experiences to consumers and thinking on their behalf. Hence it is not that the firm trying to please the customer, rather allowing the customer to co-construct the service experience to suit their context. The notion of Joint problem framing and problem solving paves the path to creating an experience environment in which consumers can have active dialogue and co-construct personalized experiences; where services may be the same but customers can construct different experiences, variety of customization, converting the business as consumers do in real time Continuous dialogue, co-constructing personalized experiences and Innovating experience environments for new co-creation experience. In another realm knowledge is believed to have a strong role to play in any theory of decision making that is built on beliefs and values. The process of incorporating scientific knowledge into beliefs and values to better a bridge decision making process. Therefore co-creation in the case of knowledge consists of co-design, co-production and co-dissemination and that takes place with the involvement of various stakeholders. The understanding of knowledge in the process of decision making process while placing co creation as a process that needs to be met recently have shown the need to fulfill specific criteria’s:

1. Develop new processes and skills that meets the required Integration: between science and decision that requires strong communication , inter personal and entra personal capacity in facilitating outcomes.Simultaneously develop the needed organizational and managerial competencies through professional support or training.
2. Increased capability to deal with inertia to change: needed integration between decision, knowledge and co creation requires critical reflection on the role of science rather than traditional research that is limited on science only leaving the commercial side unattended.
3. Clarify roles, responsibilities and rules of engagement: Integration is research coordination, which spans the entire research process. Different actors will have different levels and forms of involvement in different parts of the process. This requires clarity about roles and responsibilities, about who makes decisions when, and about how to appropriately safeguard scientific integrity and relevant standards of quality.
4. Establish integrated institutions: The disciplinary based practices and structures of existing educational and research systems are not conducive to integrated efforts, and will need to be supplemented with new, integrated structures.
5. Develop support systems: The same is true for typical academic reward and career advancement systems, as well funding mechanisms — including selection and evaluation procedures. Integration calls for a critical review of such systems.
6. Remove persistent inequalities: In terms of access to power and resources, as well as research capacities, the world of science is plagued by persistent inequalities that pose a fundamental challenge to the deeper levels of collaboration that integration calls for.

Accordingly to meet the shift of combining decisions that are business operational with knowledge that meets co-creation consensus. The operation researcher is required to function more as a consultant, since intervention requires myriad of tasks performed by a facilitators to the client other than just analysis. The paradigm shift from expert mode towards the facilitation mode which is a holistic approach, to better move from traditional optimal objective solution to a useful cooperation that foster better implementation of modeling and analysis. The facilitator mode of involvement is more suitable to support complex problems. Therefore a clear set of functions should be provided in this approach that requires a set of abilities.

• The ability to frame problems in social constructs to help the management team to reach goals.
• Formulating problems into a developed structured model to help implementation.
• Define metrics that are objective driven for management specifications.
• Gathering scientific data that covers social and technical constructs client specifications.
• Evaluating options in an attributed modeling to help prioritizing and management.
• Present result in decision support and guidance.
• Assist with increased management commitment to the implementation of the chosen options.
• Set mile stones for problem leaning and implementations.

The facilitator role is majorly driven to assist with different Facilitation can be done at two levels: facilitating an individual, or facilitating a group. It typically requires involving with management team drawn from the client organization for better outcomes. The aim of the involvement is usually driven by developing a better activity or process flows, while maintain a close monitor to cause and effect relationships to better manage relationships between decision choices and their (deterministic or uncertain) consequences. Skills that should be available in a facilitator are:

• Active listening.
• Chart writing competence in writing style and speed, the use of appropriate formats and symbols and coding information.
• Managing group dynamics and power shift that allows him to cop during the process.
• Reaching closure allowing reaching agreements towards a pathway.
• Develop support systems: The same is true for typical academic reward and career advancement systems, as well funding mechanisms — including selection and evaluation procedures. Integration calls for a critical review of such systems.
• Remove persistent inequalities: In terms of access to power and resources, as well as research capacities, the world of science is plagued by persistent inequalities that pose a fundamental challenge to the deeper levels of collaboration that integration calls for.

Homework 6

Homework 6: Collaboration in climate policy assessment ( AMR, Ehab)

Homework 6, part A:

Questions about identifying roles and participation:

• Who are the relevant participants of the assessment? and their roles?
• Regulatory participants:

1. EU room for the river projects and altered discharge regimes at the German-Dutch border.
2. Delta Committee to parliament.
3. Regional board consisting of (municipalities, provinces, the waterboards.
4. ‘bestuurlijke tafels’ national governmental stakeholders.

• Execution Participants:

1. Port Rotterdam Company
2. Rotterdam Delta commissioner.
3. Deltares research institute.
4. Network Organisation for Quality of Environnment (NOK).
5. "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.
6. landscape architects under supervision of a national atelier.

• What kind of relevant knowledge they (may) have regarding the assessment?
• What needs and aims do they represent in the assessment?

'Deltares, Port Rotterdam and NOK:

1. GIS mapped megasites description: current and planned use, potential and actual risks
2. Boundary conditions for sustainable development: stakeholders interest, funding options and legislative framework (water quality targets set by water framework directive).
3. Management instruments and effects: risk-function relations and risk reduction measures.
4. Description of Management Options.
5. Option driven rehabilitation scenarios, technical feasibility tests and technical designs.
6. Cost-efficient management scenarios and selection of final project goals
7. Embedding principles and organizational models for implementation
8. Procedure for risk assessment and evaluating the proportionality of hazard prevention measures.
9. Assessment system for hazard appraisal and measure rankin with regard to subsequent utilization (function-orientated risk assessment).
10. 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.
11. Evaluation study on sites risk assessments comparing national requirements versus the new harmonized procedures.

EU and regulatory:

1. Technical guideline for the implementation of MNA for the management of multiple enviromental hazards.
2. Report on the applicability of existing protocols/guidelines for EU sites.
3. Protocol/technical guideline for the implementation on MNA (Demona).
4. Procedure for description of the legislative framework.

‘maatschappelijke adviesgroep’ (MAG) and Delta committee:

1. Cost-estimation tool, CARO – Cost Analysis of Remediation Options Tool Description.
2. Comparative analysis of cost-efficiency.
3. Procedure for description of stakeholder's interest and commitment towards current and future use.
4. Procedure for listing research needs and site investigation requirements.

Homework 6, part B:

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

1. Continuous update of boundary conditions and discussions about the possible future strategy.
2. Approval and adjustments of conceptual model concept: discussion on receptors (what are the receptors?)
3. Decision about further IMS development

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

1. Make an overview of boundary conditions.
2. Build the conceptual model including the transfer pathways that are taken into account and the planes of compliance.
3. overview of objectives and interests as well as the current and possible future strategy for managing.

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

1. Build a process descriptions maintaining confidentiality and the provide clarity in way the results are presented.
2. 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).

----#: . You could open up and clarify this point a bit. --Jouni (talk) 12:09, 28 May 2017 (UTC) (type: truth; paradigms: science: comment)

• How can you make the outcome converge to a conclusion, because all issues are uncertain and controversial?

1. Define risk management objectives while bearing in mind that discussion on objectives is ongoing.
2. Insure Intensive communication between the execution team and regulatory through designing clear orientation and workshops.
3. Prioritization and optimization of risk, while controlling the propositions in scenarios.

• How can you ensure that the outcomes are useful for the users?

1. Build implementation plan that is clear and fortified with comments and open for improvement.
2. Insure that all parties involved understand and are committed to guidelines set for implementations.
3. Develop monitoring program built on indicators that provide practical considerations and synergy.
4. Medium-Long term process reviews with continuous commitment assured.