Dataset Information

We're only in it for the knowledge? A problem solving turn in environment and health expert elicitation.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The FP6 EU HENVINET project aimed at synthesizing the scientific information available on a number of topics of high relevance to policy makers in environment and health. The goal of the current paper is to reflect on the methodology that was used in the project, in view of exploring the usefulness of this and similar methodologies to the policy process. The topics investigated included health impacts of the brominated flame retardants decabrominated diphenylether (decaBDE) and hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD), phthalates highlighting di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP), the pesticide chlorpyrifos (CPF), nanoparticles, the impacts of climate change on asthma and other respiratory disorders, and the influence of environment health stressors on cancer induction.

Methods

Initially the focus was on identifying knowledge gaps in the state of the art in scientific knowledge. Literature reviews covered all elements that compose the causal chain of the different environmental health issues from emissions to exposures, to effects and to health impacts. Through expert elicitation, knowledge gaps were highlighted by assessing expert confidence using calibrated confidence scales. During this work a complementary focus to that on knowledge gaps was developed through interdisciplinary reflections. By extending the scope of the endeavour from only a scientific perspective, to also include the more problem solving oriented policy perspective, the question of which kind of policy action experts consider justifiable was addressed. This was addressed by means of a questionnaire. In an expert workshop the results of both questionnaires were discussed as a basis for policy briefs.

Results

The expert elicitation, the application of the calibrated confidence levels and the problem solving approach were all experienced as being quite challenging for the experts involved, as these approaches did not easily relate to mainstream environment and health scientific practices. Even so, most experts were quite positive about it. In particular, the opportunity to widen one's own horizon and to interactively exchange knowledge and debate with a diversity of experts seemed to be well appreciated in this approach. Different parts of the approach also helped in focussing on specific relevant aspects of scientific knowledge, and as such can be considered of reflective value.

Conclusions

The approach developed by HENVINET was part of a practice of learning by doing and of interdisciplinary cooperation and negotiation. Ambitions were challenged by unforeseen complexities and difference of opinion and as no Holy Grail approach was at hand to copy or follow, it was quite an interesting but also complicated endeavour. Perfection, if this could be defined, seemed out of reach all the time. Nevertheless, many involved were quite positive about it. It seems that many felt that it fitted some important needs in current science when addressing the needs of policy making on such important issues, without anyone really having a clue on how to actually do this. Challenging questions remain on the quality of such approach and its product. Practice tells us that there probably is no best method and that the best we can do is dependent on contextual negotiation and learning from experiences that we think are relevant.

SUBMITTER: Keune H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3388440 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

We're only in it for the knowledge? A problem solving turn in environment and health expert elicitation.

Keune Hans H Gutleb Arno C AC Zimmer Karin E KE Ravnum Solveig S Yang Aileen A Bartonova Alena A Krayer von Krauss Martin M Ropstad Erik E Eriksen Gunnar S GS Saunders Margaret M Magnanti Brooke B Forsberg Bertil B

Environmental health : a global access science source 20120628

<h4>Background</h4>The FP6 EU HENVINET project aimed at synthesizing the scientific information available on a number of topics of high relevance to policy makers in environment and health. The goal of the current paper is to reflect on the methodology that was used in the project, in view of exploring the usefulness of this and similar methodologies to the policy process. The topics investigated included health impacts of the brominated flame retardants decabrominated diphenylether (decaBDE) an ...[more]

PMID: 22759503

Similar Datasets

Project description:Infection with the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) induces the coronavirus infectious disease 19 (COVID-19). Its pandemic form in human population and its probable animal origin, along with recent case reports in pets, make drivers of emergence crucial in domestic carnivore pets, especially cats, dogs and ferrets. Few data are available in these species; we first listed forty-six possible drivers of emergence of COVID-19 in pets, regrouped in eight domains (i.e. pathogen/disease characteristics, spatial-temporal distance of outbreaks, ability to monitor, disease treatment and control, characteristics of pets, changes in climate conditions, wildlife interface, human activity, and economic and trade activities). Secondly, we developed a scoring system per driver, then elicited scientific experts (N = 33) to: (a) allocate a score to each driver, (b) weight the drivers scores within each domain and (c) weight the different domains between them. Thirdly, an overall weighted score per driver was calculated; drivers were ranked in decreasing order. Fourthly, a regression tree analysis was used to group drivers with comparable likelihood to play a role in the emergence of COVID-19 in pets. Finally, the robustness of the expert elicitation was verified. Five drivers were ranked with the highest probability to play a key role in the emergence of COVID-19 in pets: availability and quality of diagnostic tools, human density close to pets, ability of preventive/control measures to avoid the disease introduction or spread in a country (except treatment, vaccination and reservoir(s) control), current species specificity of the disease-causing agent and current knowledge on the pathogen. As scientific knowledge on the topic is scarce and still uncertain, expert elicitation of knowledge, in addition with clustering and sensitivity analyses, is of prime importance to prioritize future studies, starting from the top five drivers. The present methodology is applicable to other emerging pet diseases.

Project description:In this paper we argue that a synthesis of findings across the various sub-areas of research in complex problem solving and consequently progress in theory building is hampered by an insufficient differentiation of complexity and difficulty. In the proposed framework of person, task, and situation (PTS), complexity is conceptualized as a quality that is determined by the cognitive demands that the characteristics of the task and the situation impose. Difficulty represents the quantifiable level of a person's success in dealing with such demands. We use the well-documented "semantic effect" as an exemplar for testing some of the conceptual assumptions derived from the PTS framework. We demonstrate how a differentiation between complexity and difficulty can help take beyond a potentially too narrowly defined psychometric perspective and subsequently gain a better understanding of the cognitive mechanisms behind this effect. In an empirical study a total of 240 university students were randomly allocated to one of four conditions. The four conditions resulted from contrasting the semanticity level of the variable labels used in the CPS system (high vs. low) and two instruction conditions for how to explore the CPS system's causal structure (starting with the assumption that all relationships between variables existed vs. starting with the assumption that none of the relationships existed). The variation in the instruction aimed at inducing knowledge acquisition processes of either (1) systematic elimination of presumptions, or (2) systematic compilation of a mental representation of the causal structure underpinning the system. Results indicate that (a) it is more complex to adopt a "blank slate" perspective under high semanticity as it requires processes of inhibiting prior assumptions, and (b) it seems more difficult to employ a systematic heuristic when testing against presumptions. In combination, situational characteristics, such as the semanticity of variable labels, have the potential to trigger qualitatively different tasks. Failing to differentiate between 'task' and 'situation' as independent sources of complexity and treating complexity and difficulty synonymously threaten the validity of performance scores obtained in CPS research.

Project description:BackgroundThe EU 6th Framework Program (FP)-funded Health and Environment Network (HENVINET) aimed to support informed policy making by facilitating the availability of relevant knowledge on different environmental health issues. An approach was developed by which scientific agreement, disagreement, and knowledge gaps could be efficiently identified, and expert advice prepared in a way that is usable for policy makers. There were two aims of the project: 1) to apply the tool to a relevant issue; the potential health impacts of the widely used plasticizers, phthalates, and 2) to evaluate the method and the tool by asking both scientific experts and the target audience, namely policy makers and stakeholders, for their opinions.MethodsThe tool consisted of an expert consultation in several steps on the issue of phthalates in environmental health. A diagram depicting the cause-effect chain, from the production and use of phthalates to potential health impacts, was prepared based on existing reviews. This was used as a basis for an online questionnaire, through which experts in the field were consulted. The results of this first round of consultation laid the foundation for a new questionnaire answered by an expert panel that, subsequently, also discussed approaches and results in a workshop. One major task of the expert panel was to pinpoint priorities from the cause-effect chain according to their impact on the extent of potential health risks and their relevance for reducing uncertainty. The results were condensed into a policy brief that was sent to policy makers and stakeholders for their evaluation.ResultsThe experts agreed about the substantial knowledge gaps within the field of phthalates. The top three priorities for further research and policy action were: 1) intrauterine exposure, 2) reproductive toxicology, and 3) exposure from medical devices. Although not all relevant information from the cause-effect chain is known for phthalates, most experts thought that there are enough indications to justify a precautionary approach and to restrict their general use. Although some of the experts expressed some scepticism about such a tool, most felt that important issues were highlighted.ConclusionsThe approach used was an efficient way at summarising priority knowledge gaps as a starting point for health risk assessment of compounds, based on their relevance for the risk assessment outcome. We conclude that this approach is useful for supporting policy makers with state-of-the-art scientific knowledge weighed by experts. The method can assist future evidence-based policy making.

Dataset Information

We're only in it for the knowledge? A problem solving turn in environment and health expert elicitation.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

We're only in it for the knowledge? A problem solving turn in environment and health expert elicitation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets