We need a standardized framework to track city-level air pollution
We need a standardized framework to track city-level air pollution | Mint Mint
sdgtalks
Global Air Pollution Report: City Rankings and the Need for Standardization
Introduction
A global air pollution report, World Air Quality Report 2023: Region and City PM2.5 Ranking, has highlighted the alarming air pollution levels in India. The report features 83 Indian cities in the top 100 most polluted cities in the world. However, it is important to assess the measurement framework used for ranking cities to ensure unbiased results.
Data Collection and Monitoring
The report combines data from regulatory air-quality monitors and low-cost sensors. While this approach has its merits, the study’s weak link lies in the spatial and temporal extent of the monitoring. For instance, the yearly average for Delhi is based on readings from 40 locations across the city, while other cities like Siwan and Gurugram have data from a single location or a few locations. The number of monitoring locations and their uptime need standardization to accurately calculate city averages and rankings.
Parameters for City-Level Air Pollution Rankings
There are three critical parameters for city-level air pollution rankings: spatial coverage, temporal coverage, and pollutants measured. While ranking cities based on PM2.5 levels is sufficient, a more nuanced ranking would consider levels of other pollutants like NO2, O3, and CO.
Data Sources and Reliability
The report reveals that 15 cities had no public or government-backed air-quality data, indicating the use of privately run sensors for tracking their annual levels. Additionally, data for 52 other cities is sourced from only one government-owned monitoring station. Relying on a single monitor for an entire city’s air quality can lead to biased results. A standardized framework for reporting city-level pollution levels is essential for ranking reliability and policy-making.
The National Clean Air Programme (NCAP)
The NCAP, launched in 2019, relies on data from manual air quality monitors to allocate its budget for non-attainment cities. However, the lack of a standardized framework poses challenges in accurately assessing air quality and making informed decisions.
FAIR Data Principles for Rankings
Any ranking should adhere to globally-accepted ‘FAIR’ data principles. These principles include findability, affordability, interoperability, and reproducibility. By following these principles, rankings can provide valuable records of air quality trends and allow for meaningful comparisons between cities.
Guidelines for City-Level Air Quality Representation
To effectively compute city-level air quality rankings, Indian authorities need to release guidelines on adequate spatial and temporal coverage. A combination of manual air samplers, continuous ambient air quality monitoring stations (CAAQMS), and sensor-based monitors can create a comprehensive approach to track air-quality data.
Conclusion
It is crucial to standardize the measurement framework for city-level air pollution rankings in India. By doing so, we can ensure reliable and unbiased results that aid in policy-making and understanding the current situation. Adhering to FAIR data principles will enable us to compare air quality data across cities and eventually cover the entire country.
SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis
1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?
- SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being – The article discusses air pollution and its impact on public health.
- SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities – The article highlights the need for standardized frameworks and guidelines for measuring air pollution in cities.
2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?
- SDG 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water, and soil pollution and contamination.
- SDG 11.6: By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air quality and municipal and other waste management.
3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?
- Indicator for SDG 3.9: Number of deaths and illnesses attributed to air pollution.
- Indicator for SDG 11.6: Air quality index or levels of pollutants such as PM2.5, PM10, NO2, CO, SO2, etc.
Table: SDGs, Targets, and Indicators
| SDGs | Targets | Indicators |
|---|---|---|
| SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being | Target 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water, and soil pollution and contamination. | Indicator: Number of deaths and illnesses attributed to air pollution. |
| SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities | Target 11.6: By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air quality and municipal and other waste management. | Indicator: Air quality index or levels of pollutants such as PM2.5, PM10, NO2, CO, SO2, etc. |
Behold! This splendid article springs forth from the wellspring of knowledge, shaped by a wondrous proprietary AI technology that delved into a vast ocean of data, illuminating the path towards the Sustainable Development Goals. Remember that all rights are reserved by SDG Investors LLC, empowering us to champion progress together.
Source: livemint.com
Join us, as fellow seekers of change, on a transformative journey at https://sdgtalks.ai/welcome, where you can become a member and actively contribute to shaping a brighter future.
