discuss a model for determining the likelihood of
air pollution concentration exceedances over
norms at intersections and other areas, where
exceedances are likely. The model provides the
opportunity to probabilistically manage air pollution on a very fine spatial scale by designing for a
minimization of exceedances. Models such as
those of Beckx et al. [139], Burke et al. [141]
and Gokhale and Khare [140] can provide means
for addressing some of the simplifying assumptions in air pollution monitoring. Since their
approaches primarily involve modeling, they
need not increase the cost of air pollution management excessively.
Monitoring More Effectively: Conclusion
There are a number of changes to air pollution
monitoring suggested in the literature and, in
many cases, already under way. These changes,
the development of multipollutant science, monitoring for consolidated metrics, improvements to
satellite-based monitoring, using monitoring network design methodologies, and dealing with
routine oversimplifications will improve the operation of the monitoring community and the quality
of results. Information, as a common first step
toward sustainability and a necessary support for
sustainability policy, will help the air pollution
community serve sustainability. Hopefully, these
changes will be only the first set of changes in a
more fundamental shift toward sustainability.
Conclusion
Air pollution is often seen as a negative but
unavoidable consequence of human activity.
While air pollutants are well classified and there
are a number of commonly recognized problems
they create, including negative impacts on human
health, environmental damage, and economic
losses, the establishments designed to mitigate
these problems often have a mandate to also pursue sustainability.
The recommendations made herein regarding
a shift toward sustainability are largely complimentary. Pursuing one of the goals described
would serve other sustainability goals. That
complementarity may be one of the most convincing arguments that these goals actually will promote sustainability. While sustainability is
difficult to define, it must connote that solutions
to one problem do not exacerbate other problems,
but contribute to other solutions.
Holism, then, must be an aspect of sustainability, and the lack of holism in the current air pollution monitoring community may underlie its
current shortcomings. Not only is there a need
for more holistic viewpoints encompassing ideas
from other intellectual disciplines, but there is a
need for air pollution mitigation to go beyond
promoting primarily technology-based solutions
to only the immediate impacts. Solutions offered
today do not address all aspects of the air pollution
problem.
To a very large extent, the lack of holism is not
a function of a failing of the air pollution monitoring community, but a result of that community
having strategically chosen battles in the past.
Dockery [44] shows how hard advocates of air
pollution mitigation were forced to struggle for
any political action on air pollution in the early
days of air pollution science, and how the battles
were won by presenting irrefutable, solely technical and solely scientific evidence proving the very
immediate and anthropocentric effects of air pollution. It is only now that less obvious, though
arguably more dire, effects on humans, the systems they rely on for sustenance, and on nonhuman stakeholders are gaining more than a
slight foothold within the political agenda.
Dockery [44] also shows the great extent to
which the burden of proof was on those trying to
defend people and ecosystems from the damages
of pollution, and not on the polluters. This burden
is still in place, and problems must be proven in
terms polluters cannot ignore, such as dollar figures and mortality. To a large extent, evidence will
need to continue to be in these terms, and monitoring must be expanded in volume, scope, and
abilities to continue to prove the damages from air
pollution in the normally accepted terms. However, the body of evidence will be more compelling and complete if the terms are expanded to
include goals discussed in this chapter. The terms
have been set as a reaction to refusals of those
Air Pollution Monitoring and Sustainability
417
air pollution concentration exceedances over
norms at intersections and other areas, where
exceedances are likely. The model provides the
opportunity to probabilistically manage air pollution on a very fine spatial scale by designing for a
minimization of exceedances. Models such as
those of Beckx et al. [139], Burke et al. [141]
and Gokhale and Khare [140] can provide means
for addressing some of the simplifying assumptions in air pollution monitoring. Since their
approaches primarily involve modeling, they
need not increase the cost of air pollution management excessively.
Monitoring More Effectively: Conclusion
There are a number of changes to air pollution
monitoring suggested in the literature and, in
many cases, already under way. These changes,
the development of multipollutant science, monitoring for consolidated metrics, improvements to
satellite-based monitoring, using monitoring network design methodologies, and dealing with
routine oversimplifications will improve the operation of the monitoring community and the quality
of results. Information, as a common first step
toward sustainability and a necessary support for
sustainability policy, will help the air pollution
community serve sustainability. Hopefully, these
changes will be only the first set of changes in a
more fundamental shift toward sustainability.
Conclusion
Air pollution is often seen as a negative but
unavoidable consequence of human activity.
While air pollutants are well classified and there
are a number of commonly recognized problems
they create, including negative impacts on human
health, environmental damage, and economic
losses, the establishments designed to mitigate
these problems often have a mandate to also pursue sustainability.
The recommendations made herein regarding
a shift toward sustainability are largely complimentary. Pursuing one of the goals described
would serve other sustainability goals. That
complementarity may be one of the most convincing arguments that these goals actually will promote sustainability. While sustainability is
difficult to define, it must connote that solutions
to one problem do not exacerbate other problems,
but contribute to other solutions.
Holism, then, must be an aspect of sustainability, and the lack of holism in the current air pollution monitoring community may underlie its
current shortcomings. Not only is there a need
for more holistic viewpoints encompassing ideas
from other intellectual disciplines, but there is a
need for air pollution mitigation to go beyond
promoting primarily technology-based solutions
to only the immediate impacts. Solutions offered
today do not address all aspects of the air pollution
problem.
To a very large extent, the lack of holism is not
a function of a failing of the air pollution monitoring community, but a result of that community
having strategically chosen battles in the past.
Dockery [44] shows how hard advocates of air
pollution mitigation were forced to struggle for
any political action on air pollution in the early
days of air pollution science, and how the battles
were won by presenting irrefutable, solely technical and solely scientific evidence proving the very
immediate and anthropocentric effects of air pollution. It is only now that less obvious, though
arguably more dire, effects on humans, the systems they rely on for sustenance, and on nonhuman stakeholders are gaining more than a
slight foothold within the political agenda.
Dockery [44] also shows the great extent to
which the burden of proof was on those trying to
defend people and ecosystems from the damages
of pollution, and not on the polluters. This burden
is still in place, and problems must be proven in
terms polluters cannot ignore, such as dollar figures and mortality. To a large extent, evidence will
need to continue to be in these terms, and monitoring must be expanded in volume, scope, and
abilities to continue to prove the damages from air
pollution in the normally accepted terms. However, the body of evidence will be more compelling and complete if the terms are expanded to
include goals discussed in this chapter. The terms
have been set as a reaction to refusals of those
Air Pollution Monitoring and Sustainability
417