Teaching Indoor Air Sciences: Can a Global Approach Work? INTRODUCTION

Transcription

1 Teaching Indoor Air Sciences: Can a Global Approach Work? by Lidia Morawska, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia, and Dietrich Schwela, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland INTRODUCTION Inadequate air quality and the risk to human health and well-being resulting from inhalation of airborne pollutants are listed among the top environmental risks in developed countries. The complexity of the indoor environment and the emergence of a range of specific indoor air quality (IAQ) issues necessitate the development of new approaches to indoor air risk assessment and management at both the technical and policy-making levels. This, in turn, requires that those responsible for the implementation of risk management strategies receive appropriate training and professional education. Training on indoor environment issues can usually be obtained through professional literature or, more effectively, through specialized courses and seminars. Courses are generally directed at specific professional and trade groups architects, engineers, industrial hygienists, medical professionals, building operators, and owners and describe their roles and responsibilities while providing hands-on experiences and successful solutions. Although developed countries have a host of IAQ programs and universities offering IAQ curricula, for a variety of social, economic, and political reasons, developing countries have not placed a similar emphasis on the need for such training. But as developing countries begin to tackle IAQ issues, the real challenge for educators will be finding ways of transferring programs and knowledge across international borders. In this article, we will address the universality of teaching and training in the area of indoor air quality (IAQ) science and the practice of IAQ management. Specifically, we will address the following two questions: 1. How universal are approaches to teaching and training in the field of science and the practice of IAQ? 2. Is it possible, practical, or desirable to transfer training courses or university degree programs from one geographical, cultural, social, or economic reality to another? We attempt to answer these questions from the broad perspective of drawing parallels between teaching in indoor air sciences and teaching in a general interdisciplinary area, as well as from our personal experiences conducting university and training courses in several locations around the world. This article further explores and extends concepts that were first 1

2 developed and presented by Morawska. 1. GENERAL TEACHING APPROACHES Let us begin by examining the universality of teaching programs in general. Would there be any difference in a university degree program in mathematical or physical sciences if it were taught in New York, Budapest, or Kuala Lumpur? There would not appear to be any reason for differences in the core units of the program; the only difference might relate to elective subjects, which are often outside the discipline of study. The same would apply, for example, to chemistry or any other natural science, even an interdisciplinary field like biogeochemistry. Ecology is a multidisciplinary approach that includes biology, chemistry, and physics as its core elements. The basic principles would be the same in any university program, although it would not make much sense to teach specific details of, for example, ecological systems of boreal and temperate climate forests in a tropical country. Likewise, an engineering program would be the same in most universities, except when covering the specific standards and norms used in different countries, or materials applied in different climates. In most law programs, the fraction of locally specific course units would be much higher than in engineering. Overall, it seems clear that while certain discipline curricula are universal, some differ too significantly to be considered transferable. Let us now consider a more complicated teaching area: ambient air quality. This is an interdisciplinary area that considers, among other things, emissions of chemical substances from anthropogenic and natural sources; pollutant dispersion; pollutant interaction with and effects on people and the environment; risk perception and public awareness; control action on sources; emission and air quality standards; technological capabilities; technology transfer; and cost/benefit analyses. Again, some standards (e.g., emissions, meteorology of dispersion, and effects on humans and the environment) are independent of the geographical area considered. Other areas, such as control actions and technological solutions, although transferable in principle, depend on economic capabilities and technological feasibility (including human resources). Air quality standards vary widely among countries, and applying cost/benefit estimates requires assessing the value of human life and the well-being of ecosystems, measurements that differ by economic, cultural, and social region. Teaching and training in science and IAQ presents an even more complicated case. Although similar to ambient air in that it is an interdisciplinary and applied field, IAQ is affected by the types of buildings in different geographical regions, the traditional and social 2

3 behavior of building inhabitants, and their awareness of indoor air problems. IAQ is also much less driven by governmental regulations. It is therefore unavoidable that although certain aspects of IAQ teaching and training programs are universal, other aspects are country- or area-specific. But how large a problem does this present, and are there solutions for the exchange of programs? IAQ TRAINING: UNIVERSAL VERSUS LOCAL Similarities and differences between levels of education and training in IAQ can be considered in three key areas: (1) content of the material, (2) organization of teaching and training, and (3) economic aspects possibilities and priorities. Content of the Material A key consideration of teaching and training programs in indoor air science is that it is an interdisciplinary field. Indoor air science involves construction physics; building material chemistry; contaminants from indoor sources; indoor/outdoor relationships; air conditioning and ventilation techniques; use and efficiency of burning materials; chimney construction techniques and use of open stoves; health effects such as sick building syndrome (SBS), building-related illnesses (BRI), multichemical sensitivity (MCS), and respiratory and cardiovascular diseases; risk assessment; and risk management techniques. While there is still no agreement as to whether indoor air science is an independent discipline, 2 for the purposes of this article we will not consider indoor air science a discipline in and of itself; rather, we will consider that it is an application of knowledge from many disciplines for the analysis and solution of indoor air and indoor environment problems (a modified definition of environmental science). Thus, at the completion of an educational program in this area, a student should be equipped with expertise in a specific discipline as well as in the broad field of indoor air science. We will introduce here the concept of a three-level teaching structure applicable to indoor air sciences. Level 1: Systems Approach. In teaching indoor air sciences, it is important to take a systems approach; the indoor environment must be seen as a system consisting of the components described above. As will be discussed, the indoor environmental system can differ in developed and developing countries. Investigations or control techniques must be approached first from a systems level before isolating a specific component for more detailed, often 3

4 monodisciplinary, considerations. This is a principal requirement of teaching and training in this area, and as such is universal. Level 2: Mix of Disciplines. Another universal aspect of teaching indoor air sciences is the mix of disciplines required for a comprehensive approach to this field. Indoor air and environment experts are recruited with primary education backgrounds in science (physics, chemistry, and biology), engineering (mechanical, ventilation, and building), health (physicians, nurses, and occupational practitioners), management, law, and so on. A complete knowledge of the systems approach requires understanding the roles and contributions of individual expertise to the system. Level 3: Individual Disciplines. Differences in the content of course material become more pronounced at the third level of this teaching structure. But this relates to our assertion that while certain single-discipline teaching programs are universal, some differ too significantly to be transferable. As this is, however, the third level of the teaching structure, most of the program can be considered transferable. There should be a differentiation here between larger, more general programs (such as university postgraduate degrees) and more narrowly oriented training programs. Since university programs encompass all three levels of the teaching structure, they are much more transferable than some training programs, which relate to the third level of this structure. Organization of Teaching and Training The key issues to consider in organizing teaching and training are the target audience; the purpose of learning (e.g., knowing how to comply with regulations, broadening knowledge, professional requirements); local requirements for teaching and training; and local organization of teaching. For a training program to be transferable, the target audience and the purpose of learning have to be similar both where the training is to be offered and where it was developed. Thus, the developer of the training program has to consider the target audience, which is not necessarily the same as a target audience in his or her own country. A training program developed in the United States or Europe is transferable to countries of the same economic development status; the target audience will usually be of the same structure in developed countries. There are, however, limitations to a program s transferability, even under these 4

5 circumstances. For example, if a narrowly oriented training course is designed to show government managers in a particular country how to use a software package to estimate exposure risk for compliance purposes, there will be little value in offering this course in a different country. Different compliance regulations and procedures make training of this nature applicable only to the originating country. While there are many examples of unification and harmonization in regulations resulting in the integration of training programs such as the training program for the European Commercial Environment Expert, a program developed by the European Union to train those responsible for all aspects of the environmental agenda and who will act as a liaison between management, scientific experts, and regulatory agencies it is not feasible that worldwide or even regional unification will be achieved in the foreseeable future. The objectives of learning depend on the types of buildings to be considered in the training program: office buildings (OB), residential buildings of the rich population of a country (RBR), or residential buildings of the poor (RBP). For OB in urban areas, teaching principles can be very similar, as construction techniques and architecture are identical or quite similar in developed and developing countries. More primitive OB (governmental buildings, university buildings) are found in developed and developing countries alike and may bear similarities as well, although there will be exceptions due to funding limitations that prohibit the most elementary repairs (e.g., leaky roofs or dysfunctional ventilation). Similar considerations apply to RBR. Consequently, ventilation rates, building integrity, climatization, and health effects such as SBS, BRI, and MCS are at the center of study and training interest. However, RBP in developing countries (RBPdic) differ substantially from those in developed countries (RBPdec). RBPdec usually provide protection from heat, cold, and ambient air pollution and are few in number compared to the population. RBPdic are usually great in number, lack climatization, and elicit indoor air pollution due to (1) outdoor air pollution and (2) cooking and heating in open stoves, which leads to very high concentrations of CO, SO 2, NO x, fine particulate matter, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. 3-5 The design of RBPdec follows at least minimal ventilation and filtration requirements, and indoor air pollution is often not directly related to outdoor air pollution. Compounds of concern in RBPdec include NO 2 from gas stoves, radon emanations from soil, organic compounds from interior design and furniture, and particles, gases, and chemical compounds from cigarette smoking. In addition, fine particulate matter may play an important role if ambient air 5

6 pollution is high and the ventilation and filtration system does not use appropriate filters. Indoor air quality in RBPdec is determined to a much lesser degree by open stove cooking and heating because they have primarily central heating and electrical or gas boilers. Biomass burning does not play a decisive role in RBPdec. An exception to this rule may be seen in the extensive use of open fires with sufficient ventilation through chimneys, which creates an outdoor air problem in locations with unfavorable valley topography and meteorology. In developed countries, an IAQ training course may address the principles of compliance testing with reference to the country s specific regulations. The regulatory base in relation to indoor air in developing countries is usually very limited. In these cases, it may be that social and cultural inheritance and traditions play a decisive role, and little or no part of the training template or advice may be transferable without looking into social-traditionalcultural attitudes. Examples can be found in African countries where, in rural and slum areas, chimneys are constructed according to ancestral principles. These chimneys end 1 2 m below the roofs of the huts, discharging smoke emissions into the room. Often no chimneys are used at all. Two important issues can affect training courses aimed at addressing these problems: (1) lack of awareness of the building inhabitants about emissions risks, and (2) distrust of building inhabitants with respect to nontraditional solutions. Assistance or advice from national Ministries of Health or the World Health Organization (WHO) is useful and accepted only if people are fully aware of the health risks associated with smoke from biofuel burning. Such awareness can take time to achieve and must be established through a set of IAQ training courses. Raising awareness in developing countries, especially in very poor populations and rural areas, is of utmost priority. It is also important to provide incentives for changing human behavior, a unique feature of training courses in indoor environment science in developing countries. A final consideration in IAQ program transferability regards the administrative aspects of teaching and training, which often relate to what is required after completion of the program. Examples of requirements for a graduate to fulfill local professional criteria include a degree (with, for example, a required number of credit points), a completed exam, and a certificate of attendance. While these aspects are usually of a more administrative and organizational nature, they could create real obstacles in program transfer. For example, transferring credit for a course or degree program from one university to another can take 6

7 many months, even years. Economic Aspects: Possibilities and Priorities Economics can play a key role in training and teaching programs, affecting whether and how an IAQ program should be conducted and, more fundamentally, whether it is even considered an area of concern. In many developing countries, where there are shortages of food, water, shelter, and medical care, IAQ assumes a comparatively low level of priority. There would clearly be no point in transferring a training course on filtration and ventilation system maintenance where the indoor environment consists of a tent or thatched hut. An irony here is that technological solutions to significantly improve air quality in such environments exist and are often very simple. However, there is often no basic awareness that IAQ is a problem in the first place and, even if there were, the cost of the solution (e.g., a properly ventilated stove) might be prohibitive in developing countries. But even in developed countries, where cost might not be an issue, IAQ would not be a priority without regulations that mandate acceptable standards or guidelines. In both cases, the key aspect of training would not be to focus on what to do or how to do it, but on the need to do it. How to provide guidance on setting priorities regarding issues such as poverty, water and food shortages, shelter, medical care, ambient air, indoor air, and noise needs to be considered in any training course. Poverty reduction and economic development are often the first priorities in developing countries. Water and air pollution, however, can impede economic development through increased health costs and loss of human resources. The issues listed above are part of the overall environmental system and, consequently, the principles of a systems approach should be applied. Indoor air science training cannot be successful without considering this wider system. The benefits of clean air and water to economic development must be elucidated in a training course, as is done in the training courses of the Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute. 6 Solutions for Exchange of Education and Training Programs Rising Awareness. In general terms, training programs can be classified as what to do, how to do it, and need to do it. Whereas what to do indicates programs that focus on building design, maintenance, and operational aspects, as well as which air quality parameters to target, how to do it implies a focus on technical, instrumental, or design options available 7

8 for application, and need to do it means providing a rationale for controlling air quality. Most how to do it education and training programs are transferable between countries and regions, unless the program s focus is too narrowly linked to local regulations or approaches. But not all how to do it knowledge is transferable, because some solutions may not fit into the cultural and traditional background or may be too expensive. Need to do it programs are not considered transferable, but can be tailored to a specific area or country by the program designer. The most important aspect of what to do or how to do it programs is the systems approach to learning and the more general the program, the easier it is to implement this approach. The transfer of university programs, therefore, presents mainly organizational and administrative problems, while transferring more narrowly oriented courses presents different problems, such as the need for content modification. Although the what to do and the need to do it are both heavily dependent upon each country s politicians, an international organization such as WHO can include in its training courses guidance on all three elements the need, the what, and the how. WHO cannot tell countries that there is a need, per se, but it can make politicians aware of a potential need by pointing out the health effects and the economic consequences of taking no action. At least an incentive can be given to governmental managers to consider the need for action. The guidance on the how and the what will be accepted and applied only if the need is agreed upon. 8

9 Teaching Considerations. When teaching a systems approach to indoor air, it is important to ensure that students obtain a strong background in a specific area while obtaining a broader knowledge of the entire field. This approach is not unique to teaching in indoor air science and practice, and can apply to any interdisciplinary teaching. A good example can be seen in the environmental science major program for undergraduates offered by the Queensland University of Technology in Brisbane, Australia. Students in this program are strongly urged to pair their environmental science major with a double major or a minor in mathematics, physics, chemistry, earth sciences, or life sciences. The environmental science major program has four units that are the same for all environmental science students, and four other units that are closely related to and strengthen the areas of direct significance for environmental applications (e.g., an extended program in fluid mechanics and transport theory for environmental science/physics majors). 2 Another important aspect of interdisciplinary programs is that the systems approach must be broad enough to be applied to systems and situations other than those considered the focal areas for the students. For example, a training course might focus on the IAQ risks within a country s building stock (excluding the possible occupational risks). The types of buildings considered might include OB, RBR, and RBP. The fundamental IAQ questions to be addressed would include general information on indoor air pollution and its potential impacts on health: combustion products generated indoors, including tobacco smoke and emissions from building materials, equipment, and furnishings; outdoor air pollutants; moisture and biological agents; principles of ventilation requirements and thermal comfort; capacities, designs, and maintenance of ventilation systems; balancing of the IAQ air exchange and energy conservation; and indoor air- and building-related health problems. Additional issues that might be addressed include setting IAQ standards and approaches to achieving those standards, including applicable rules and regulations; general approaches to IAQ monitoring techniques, including the use of practical field test equipment; symptom evaluation techniques for building occupants; and options for IAQ management including building codes, equipment permits, material labeling, user instruction and training, and IAQ guidelines and standards. Important global aspects of education and training in indoor air sciences, as discussed above, are clearly defined objectives and target audiences for the program. Programs that clearly identify both aspects are much easier to transfer, if the requirements on the receiving 9

10 end are similar. But how should the differences of more narrowly oriented programs, such as training courses, be addressed? The systems approach component and global aspects of the program should be taught by the program designer or provider; and The area or country specific aspects should be taught by or in collaboration with a local expert. Examples of this approach are the Indoor Air Quality Assessment courses 7 in Sydney, Australia, of which about two-thirds were taught by a Canadian expert and one-third by Australian experts. The component presented by the Australian experts consisted mainly of case studies related to Australian climatic conditions and compliance requirements. Another example is Indoor Air in a Hospital Environment, a training course organized by the Department of Health and the Industrial Technology Research Institute and presented in May 1998 by one of the authors of this article to a large audience of engineering and medical practitioners from health care facilities in Taipei, Taiwan. About three-quarters of the course was the author s presentation on general and hospital-specific aspects of indoor air, with a focus on particle pollution. The remainder of the course was presented by Taiwanese researchers and practitioners, and consisted of a report from a project on air quality in hospital isolation rooms conducted in several hospitals in Taiwan. Another example is a broader training course, Indoor Air Quality Training, offered by several experts from different countries, representing the International Society of Indoor Air Quality and Climate ( The course has already been presented in Sweden (June 1998) and the United States (October 1998), where it included presentations focused on both countries, and has been attended by many whose professional duties require a broad knowledge of global trends and approaches to IAQ and the environment. In all three examples, the courses were given the highest ratings by the participants. CONCLUSION The transfer of knowledge and technology in teaching in the area of indoor air sciences is possible and desirable. The success of program transfer depends on the understanding of the philosophy of teaching in this area as well as on understanding local needs, requirements, and limitations. The globalization of education and training requires continuous upgrades of teaching programs to follow technology developments, as well as the ever-changing social and economic conditions and requirements of countries and regions. 10

11 REFERENCES 1. Morawska, L. Knowledge and Technology Transfer in Teaching in Indoor Air Sciences. In Education and Training in Indoor Air Sciences; Boschi, N., Ed.; Kluwer Academic Publishers, in press. 2. Morawska, L. Science and Practice of Indoor Environment: Where Are They Going? Clean Air 1998, 32(4), World Health Organization. Indoor Air Pollution from Biomass Fuel; WHO/PEP/92.3A; Geneva, Switzerland, World Health Organization. Health and Environment in Sustainable Development Five Years after the Earth Summit; Geneva, Switzerland, Schwela, D. Health Effects and Exposure to Indoor Air Pollution in Developed and Developing Countries. In Indoor Air 96: Proceeedings of the 7th International Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate; 1996; Vol. 1, Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute. Air Quality Management and Technology; SMHI Training Programme: Norrköping, Sweden, Indoor Air Quality Assessment training course organized by the University of Sydney with the support of the Clean Air Society of Australia and New Zealand; presented April 1996 and November About the Authors Lidia Morawska is an associate professor in the School of Physical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology. She can be reached at phone: ; fax: ; or l.morawska@qut.edu.au. Dietrich Schwela works at the World Health Organization in Geneva, Switzerland. 11