Cense: A tool to assess combined exposure to environmental health stressors in urban areas

Vlachokostas, Christos; Banias, G.; Athanasiadis, Antonios; Achillas, Ch.; Akylas, V.; Moussiopoulos, Ν.

doi:10.1016/j.envint.2013.10.014

Cited by 26 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Underlying complexity and scientific evidence on whether different environmental factors have synergistic, additive or interactive effects and different pathways, through which multiple environmental factors together with social vulnerability may affect human health, still remain incomplete and in a formative stage (Su et al, 2009;Vlachokostas et al, 2014). Therefore, our approach assumes a simplistic viewpoint of the existence of multiple environmental factors simultaneously at the same place and the same time with social vulnerability as an "effect modifier".…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, our approach assumes a simplistic viewpoint of the existence of multiple environmental factors simultaneously at the same place and the same time with social vulnerability as an "effect modifier". Furthermore, where composite scores can be useful in many situations, a major limitation is that it leads to loss of information about how the different factors that make up the integrated index interact with each other and contribute to the index score (Vlachokostas et al, 2014). In this regard we want to emphasize on what is referred to as the "danger of simplistic policy conclusions" (Commission, 2008) in (Lakes et al, 2014).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All these methods are specifically being used to assess geographical areas at a regional and national level where the unit of analysis is a strict administrative boundary, except for the work of Sadd et al (2011), who used the neighborhood scale unit, and Vlachokostas et al (2014), who used the activity space of people as a unit of analysis. We argue that these methods are insufficient to provide a small-scaled assessment of multiple burdens and benefits across the social vulnerability of the population.…”

Section: Assessment Of Multiple Environmental Burdens and Social Vulnmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both methods produce meaningful results in the case indicators are normalized before aggregation as these become dimensionless (Zhou et al, 2006). Nonetheless, aggregating indicators arithmetically based on equal weights implies that variables are perfect substitutes, which means that a low value in one variable can be compensated by a sufficiently high value in another (Nardo et al, 2005;Vlachokostas et al, 2014). An implicit assumption of the additive approach is that variables are preferentially independent and non-interactive.…”

Section: Aggregation Of Indicators Into Indexmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The use of EU standards supports agencies to identify areas exceeding the threshold and to develop targeted interventions. The aggregation of indicators into one index entails loss of information and creates the risk of equalization of different distinct spatial patterns (Vlachokostas et al, 2014). The multiplicative approach minimizes such compensation to some extent.…”

Section: Strengths Limitations and Sensitivity Of Integrated Index Omentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Interactive map-based support systems

Shrestha¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social learning and knowledge co-production Social learning is described as learning in and with social groups through interaction (Siebenhüner, 2005), which occurs when participants share their experiences, ideas and environment with others during a group activity (Armitage et al., 2008). It is a re-iterative process of assimilation through the interpretation of issues in terms of existing mental models and accommodation through changing of the mental models to make sense of the issues. When participants engage in deliberation within a collaborative dialogue, they learn as individuals and as a group about the problem, their goals, perspectives of other The key process components include: facilitation, diversity of participants and a democratic structure (Daniels & Walker, 2001; Mostert et al., 2007). Skilled facilitation is a prerequisite of any participatory process as a facilitator ensures that all participants feel comfortable to share their ideas, remain focussed to the objective of the task and prevent domination of one participant (Daniels & Walker, 2001; Johnson et al., 2012). Having a diverse group of participants ensures that greater breadth of worldviews, mental models and experiences are included in the process (Jones et al., 2011; Rinner, 2001). A democratic structure Researchers have now started to shift their focus from user-friendliness to the usefulness of such tools on improving the quality of the planning practice. Te Brommelstroet (2017) argues that user-friendly PSS are means rather than a goal and suggests to focus on the actual goal of improving the quality of planning practice. Traditionally, the added value of these tools was seen as improving the outcome of the process. However, in the last decades, the focus of most researchers have shifted towards improving the planning process and therefore,  How can approaches of interactive map-based support systems support social learning and knowledge co-production processes? Research methodology In this study a sociotechnical view has been adopted to explore the usefulness of interactive map-based support systems for engendering social learning and knowledge co-production. A sociotechnical view draws on design research * This chapter is based on the article:

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%