[92], and like improvements concerning the
acceleration of learning.
Chow and Watson [92] and Folke et al. [116] are
effectively calling for continual improvement in
capacity to learn on the job. In doing so, they are
highlighting two essential components of sustainability: learning and continual improvement. Routine monitoring must cease to focus solely on
compliance. It must ensure that research and
improvement in the capacity for research are served.
Clearly, development of best practices to ensure
sustainability needs to be a priority in this learning.
Expansion of Goals: Conclusion The conventional goals of air pollution monitoring influence
monitoring practice. Practices thus serve these
goals more than others. There is a need to expand
the set of goals and expand practices accordingly.
Monitoring to understand impacts on natural capital is not only essential to sustainability but will
improve the economic future of humanity. Resilience is a concept the air pollution monitoring
community can study and apply further. The environmental injustice of air pollution’s distribution
must be addressed for the sake of justice and for
the health of younger populations. Given the
strong links between air quality and urban form,
air pollution issues should not be ignored in the
design of cities nor urban form ignored in pollution studies. Acceleration of learning and research
have the potential to increase the efficiency of
monitoring as well as improve understanding of
air pollution’s effects and optimal concentrations.
All of these goals must be adopted if air pollution
monitoring is to holistically pursue sustainability,
and sustainability will continue to be elusive if
approaches are not holistic.
Multidisciplinary Work Attitudes fostering
sustainable levels of air pollution in the coming
decades will value contributions from intellectual
disciplines other than air pollution science. Urban
planning work can mitigate exposure to air pollution, and it is clear that improved energy efficiency will reduce emissions from fossil fuels
[54, 74]. Folke et al. [116] call for consultations
with communities with local ecological knowledge [116] such as neighborhoods and Aboriginal
networks. Yi et al. [54] comment that sustainable
consumption and production will reduce air pollution, which suggests collaboration with business. Agricultural practices are major sources of
air pollution [74], suggesting collaboration opportunities with the agricultural sector. Further, collaboration between air pollution and climate
change mitigation efforts can deal with major air
pollutants that are also contributors to imbalanced
radiative forcing [14, 74] while discouraging the
implementation of climate strategies that increase
air pollution [74]. Failing to collaborate will make
air pollution research more difficult and less
rewarding, while collaborating will open new
areas that will inform monitoring priorities.
Public Involvement Public involvement and
consultation with the general public can be of substantial benefit to science but are rarely taken advantage of. At some levels, there is an aversion to such
involvement as illustrated by a survey taken by the
British Royal Society which showed that 20% of
scientists believed that those scientists seen to
engage with the public were less well regarded by
their peers [128]. Much value is overlooked when
air pollution scientists do not engage with communities they intend to monitor, including sophisticated understanding of local sources of air
pollution, how local air pollution changes with
weather, and health effects being experienced
(even if the sophistication of the knowledge is not
of the same kind that air pollution scientists generally regard as sophistication) [120]. Citizens often
have or believe they have information that monitoring bodies do not have and, even if this information
is incorrect, it may affect the ability to implement
policy based on results from air pollution monitoring [129]. Thus, it is a good idea to at least understand how a community feels about its local air
pollution before policy, and possibly even monitoring campaigns are designed. When communities do
take air quality problems seriously, opportunities
for progress on air quality issues arise [14].
Yearly [129] performed two case studies on air
pollution and public involvement that illustrate the
value of community input. The first was in Sheffield, UK, where the local government had
implemented a computer model to study the local
412
Air Pollution Monitoring and Sustainability
acceleration of learning.
Chow and Watson [92] and Folke et al. [116] are
effectively calling for continual improvement in
capacity to learn on the job. In doing so, they are
highlighting two essential components of sustainability: learning and continual improvement. Routine monitoring must cease to focus solely on
compliance. It must ensure that research and
improvement in the capacity for research are served.
Clearly, development of best practices to ensure
sustainability needs to be a priority in this learning.
Expansion of Goals: Conclusion The conventional goals of air pollution monitoring influence
monitoring practice. Practices thus serve these
goals more than others. There is a need to expand
the set of goals and expand practices accordingly.
Monitoring to understand impacts on natural capital is not only essential to sustainability but will
improve the economic future of humanity. Resilience is a concept the air pollution monitoring
community can study and apply further. The environmental injustice of air pollution’s distribution
must be addressed for the sake of justice and for
the health of younger populations. Given the
strong links between air quality and urban form,
air pollution issues should not be ignored in the
design of cities nor urban form ignored in pollution studies. Acceleration of learning and research
have the potential to increase the efficiency of
monitoring as well as improve understanding of
air pollution’s effects and optimal concentrations.
All of these goals must be adopted if air pollution
monitoring is to holistically pursue sustainability,
and sustainability will continue to be elusive if
approaches are not holistic.
Multidisciplinary Work Attitudes fostering
sustainable levels of air pollution in the coming
decades will value contributions from intellectual
disciplines other than air pollution science. Urban
planning work can mitigate exposure to air pollution, and it is clear that improved energy efficiency will reduce emissions from fossil fuels
[54, 74]. Folke et al. [116] call for consultations
with communities with local ecological knowledge [116] such as neighborhoods and Aboriginal
networks. Yi et al. [54] comment that sustainable
consumption and production will reduce air pollution, which suggests collaboration with business. Agricultural practices are major sources of
air pollution [74], suggesting collaboration opportunities with the agricultural sector. Further, collaboration between air pollution and climate
change mitigation efforts can deal with major air
pollutants that are also contributors to imbalanced
radiative forcing [14, 74] while discouraging the
implementation of climate strategies that increase
air pollution [74]. Failing to collaborate will make
air pollution research more difficult and less
rewarding, while collaborating will open new
areas that will inform monitoring priorities.
Public Involvement Public involvement and
consultation with the general public can be of substantial benefit to science but are rarely taken advantage of. At some levels, there is an aversion to such
involvement as illustrated by a survey taken by the
British Royal Society which showed that 20% of
scientists believed that those scientists seen to
engage with the public were less well regarded by
their peers [128]. Much value is overlooked when
air pollution scientists do not engage with communities they intend to monitor, including sophisticated understanding of local sources of air
pollution, how local air pollution changes with
weather, and health effects being experienced
(even if the sophistication of the knowledge is not
of the same kind that air pollution scientists generally regard as sophistication) [120]. Citizens often
have or believe they have information that monitoring bodies do not have and, even if this information
is incorrect, it may affect the ability to implement
policy based on results from air pollution monitoring [129]. Thus, it is a good idea to at least understand how a community feels about its local air
pollution before policy, and possibly even monitoring campaigns are designed. When communities do
take air quality problems seriously, opportunities
for progress on air quality issues arise [14].
Yearly [129] performed two case studies on air
pollution and public involvement that illustrate the
value of community input. The first was in Sheffield, UK, where the local government had
implemented a computer model to study the local
412
Air Pollution Monitoring and Sustainability