Presentation on theme: "On the AQA WG Executive Summary A description and rationale for the content and form of the AQA WG Report to the OTAG Policy Group Summarized for to the."— Presentation transcript:
On the AQA WG Executive Summary A description and rationale for the content and form of the AQA WG Report to the OTAG Policy Group Summarized for to the OTAG AQA Workgroup by R. Husar April 1997
Background and Outline Structure: Oranized By Air Quality Issies and Questions Contents: Purpose, Problem, Issues, Recommendations Methodology: Using Weighed Evidence The AQA Executive Summary Report has been evolving since late 1996 based on the input and feedback from the Workgroup. A key aspect of concensus building is transparency of Workgroup activities. These notes describe the design rationale for the report structure, methodology and content including:
Report Structure: Organization by AQ Issues/Questions The technical knowledge on atmospheric ozone is organized either by processes, (e.g. transport, transformation) or by observations. Air quality management addresses air quality by issues, e.g. what is magnitude of regional ozone at boundaries; how far is the impact. Hence, the air quality knowledge has been re-mapped and organized by issues or key policy-relevant questions. The AQA WG Exec Summary has to be packaged into a form/structure that is suitable for use by the Policy Group.
Report Contents: Purpose, Problem, Issues, Recommendation Purpose of the Executive Summary Description of the Workgroup Statement of the ozone problem - AQA perspective Issue statements backed by weighed evidence Recommendations Outline of the report contents:
Purpose of the Report Mandate given in OTAG charter Need to inform all stakeholders - ?? Be a companion to modeling - ?? The AQA WG needs to supply the Policy Group with ‘actionable’ knowledge (i.e. insights useful for policy making) regarding atmospheric ozone based on AQ-related observations. [Alternative]. The AQ WG Ecec Summary has to provide technical information that will help the Policy Group making more informed policy decisions. The report’s purpose is based on: ( is this fair?)
Description of the Workgroup The people or groups involved ( agents). EPA, state, industry, consultants, academia... Things they were doing (acts). Analysis, review, leadership, observation... Reasons for doing them (purposes). Regulating, protecting interests,...should we spell it out? Methods they employ (agencies). WG methods, analysis methods, listening/reputing, reading... Surrounding Circumstances (scene). OTAG, space, time, political context. The AQA WG has to identify and describe itself. It has to be ‘situated’. The ‘situation’ may be desribes as:
Statement of the OTAG Ozone Problem: AQA Perspective Can this problem statement be supported by AQA ? Illustrate problem here? Need supporting evidence here or later in the report ‘body’? From the OTAG Backround Document: Some nonattainment areas (e.g. NE corridor, Lake Michigan) experience considerable influx of ozone across their boundaries and they can not demostrate nonattainment by local measures only. Significant ozone reductions at their boundaries will also be necessary.
Statements of Technical AQ Issues Problem statement Stakeholder presentations WG members The AQA WG has had difficulty extracting policy-relevant AQA issues from the Policy Group, possibly since the PG has it’s memers representat states with varied interests and there is no common ‘policy-relevant’ list of questions. The list of AQ issues originated from:
Report Methodology: Based on Weight of Evidence Weight of evidence is a methodology for aiding decisions when knowledge is incomplete, uncertain or inconsistent - all three seem to be applicable to regional ozone. It is based on statements and evidence. A statement about a topic is supported if there is compelling evidence for it and there is no such evidence for a counter-statement Evidence must be acceptable, valid, and relevant. A task of the methodology is to organize the evidence - as in the discipline of law. Statements are to be weighed based on the strength of the evidence
Types of Statements: Statement of fact. Is there a background ozone outside of OTAG? Statement of description. What is the nature of ozone transport? What are the concentration pattern? Statement of definition. Is ozone composed of urban, regional and tropospheric? Statement of contrast. Is OTAG a well defined ozone control region, while OTC is not? Statement of principle. Does AQA uses multiple, weighed evidence approach? Statement of causality. Do weekend emissions cause less ozone than weekdays? Claims are declarative statements and they can be of many types. Statements are usually answers to questions.
Types of Evidence Facts - any observed or verifiable piece of information Statistics - a numerical information derived from other facts Example - specific concrete example that is representative and compelling Quotation - an authoritative literature source Testimony - opinion provided by experts. The types of admissible evidence in AQA WG include:
In Summary The AQA WG Executive Summary is intended to support OTAG policy development. It needs to withstands both technical and ‘legal’ (?) scrutiny. [Beet them laweres at their own game - :) RH] The report structure is based on Air Quality Issiues and Questions. The report contents includes the problem statement, specific tehnical AQ issues and recommendations. These technical issues are presented using ‘weight of evidence’ methodology.