On the AQA WG Executive SummaryOn the AQA WG Executive Summary

A description and rationale for the content and form of A description and rationale for the content and form of the AQA WG Report to the OTAG Policy Groupthe AQA WG Report to the OTAG Policy Group

Summarized for to the OTAG AQA Workgroup by R. Husar

April 1997

Background and OutlineBackground 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: Report Structure: Organization by AQ Issues/QuestionsOrganization 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:Report Contents:Purpose, Problem, Issues, RecommendationPurpose, 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 ReportPurpose 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 WorkgroupDescription 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 AQA WG has to identify and describe itself. It has to be ‘situated’. The ‘situation’ may be desribes as: The ‘situation’ may be desribes as:

Statement of the OTAG Ozone Problem:Statement of the OTAG Ozone Problem:AQA PerspectiveAQA 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 IssuesStatements 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:Report Methodology:Based on Weight of EvidenceBased 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: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 EvidenceTypes 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 SummaryIn 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.