Development and evaluation of RAMP I – a practitioner’s tool for screening of musculoskeletal disorder risk factors in manual handling

RAMP I is a screening tool developed to support practitioners in screening for work-related musculoskeletal disorder risk factors related to manual handling. RAMP I, which is part of the RAMP tool, is based on research-based studies combined with expert group judgments. More than 80 practitioners participated in the development of RAMP I. The tool consists of dichotomous assessment items grouped into seven categories. Acceptable reliability was found for a majority of the assessment items for 15 practitioners who were given 1?h of training. The usability evaluation points to RAMP I being usable for screening for musculoskeletal disorder risk factors, i.e., usable for assessing risks, being usable as a decision base, having clear results and that the time needed for an assessment is acceptable. It is concluded that RAMP I is a usable tool for practitioners.     

Quantifying the impact of vegetation-based metrics on species persistence when choosing offsets for habitat destruction

Developers are often required by law to offset environmental impacts through targeted conservation actions. Most offset policies specify metrics for calculating offset requirements, usually by assessing vegetation condition. Despite widespread use, there is little evidence to support the effectiveness of vegetation-based metrics for ensuring biodiversity persistence. We compared long-term impacts of biodiversity offsetting based on area only; vegetation condition only; area × habitat suitability; and condition × habitat suitability in development and restoration simulations for the Hunter Region of New South Wales, Australia. We simulated development and subsequent offsetting through restoration within a virtual landscape, linking simulations to population viability models for 3 species. Habitat gains did not ensure species persistence. No net loss was achieved when performance of offsetting was assessed in terms of amount of habitat restored, but not when outcomes were assessed in terms of persistence. Maintenance of persistence occurred more often when impacts were avoided, giving further support to better enforce the avoidance stage of the mitigation hierarchy. When development affected areas of high habitat quality for species, persistence could not be guaranteed. Therefore, species must be more explicitly accounted for in offsets, rather than just vegetation or habitat alone. Declines due to a failure to account directly for species population dynamics and connectivity overshadowed the benefits delivered by producing large areas of high-quality habitat. Our modeling framework showed that the benefits delivered by offsets are species specific and that simple vegetation-based metrics can give misguided impressions on how well biodiversity offsets achieve no net loss.     

A Watershed-based Cumulative Risk Impact Analysis: Environmental Vulnerability and Impact Criteria

Swine Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) have received much attention in recent years. As a result, a watershed-based screening tool, the Cumulative Risk Index Analysis (CRIA), was developed to assess the cumulative impacts of multiple CAFO facilities in a watershedsubunit. The CRIA formula calculates an index number based on: 1) the area of one or more facilities compared to the area of the watershed subunit, 2) the average of the environmental vulnerability criteria, and 3) the average of the industry-specific impact criteria. Each vulnerability or impact criterion is ranked on a 1 to 5 scale, with a low rank indicating low environmental vulnerability or impact and a high rank indicating high environmental vulnerability or impact. The individual criterion ranks, as well as the total CRIA score, can be used to focus the environmental analysis and facilitate discussions with industry, public, and other stakeholders in the Agency decision-making process.     

普通车床工件工具飞出伤人事故树分析

针对普通车床常见、多发的工件、工具飞出伤人事故,采用事故树分析事故原因,并提出安全对策措施.     

Pesticide Impact Rating Index – A Pesticide Risk Indicator for Water Quality

Pesticide users, natural resource managers, regulators, government agencies and many others are concerned about the off-site impact of pesticides on the environment. Systematic methods of the assessment of potential risk of pesticides to environmental components can serve as valuable tools in decision making and policy formulation. Simple risk indicators have been developed which cover a range of scenarios such as toxicity to organisms, health of farm workers, consumer health, and residues in harvested produce. The authors have developed a software package named Pesticide Impact Rating Index (PIRI) that outputs an improved pesticide risk indicator for water quality. PIRI is a standalone, user-friendly, platform-independent program. It can be used to (i) rank pesticides in terms of their relative pollution potential to groundwater or surface water, and (ii) to compare different land uses in a catchment or at a regional scale in terms of their relative impact on water quality. It is based on pesticides use; the pathway through which the pesticides are released to the water resources (drift, runoff, erosion, leaching) and the value of the water resources threatened. Each component is quantified using pesticide characteristics (including toxicity to organisms at different trophic levels, i.e. fish, daphnia, algae, etc.), environmental and site conditions (e.g. organic carbon content of soil, water input, slope of land, soil loss, recharge rate, depth of water table, etc.). This paper describes two case studies of the application of PIRI in Australia. The comparison of the risk assessment by PIRI on these revealed that PIRI correctly estimated the pollution potential of pesticides in greater than 80% of cases. A GIS version of PIRI is described in a companion paper in this volume. An erratum to this article is available at .     

TUGAI: An Integrated Simulation Tool for Ecological Assessment of Alternative Water Management Strategies in a Degraded River Delta

The development of ecologically sound water allocation strategies that account for the needs of riverine ecosystems is a pressing issue, especially in semiarid river basins. In the Aral Sea Basin, a search for strategies to mitigate ecological and socioeconomic deterioration has been in process since the early 1990s. The Geographic Information System–based simulation tool TUGAI has been developed to support the policy determination process by providing a simple, problem-oriented method to assess ecological effects of alternative water management strategies for the Amudarya River. It combines a multiobjective water allocation model with simple, spatially explicit statistical and rule-based models of landscape dynamics. Changes in environmental conditions are evaluated by a fuzzy habitat suitability index for Populus euphratica, which is the dominant species of the characteristic riverine Tugai forests. Water management scenarios can be developed by altering spatiotemporal water distribution in the delta area or the amount of water inflow into the delta. Outcomes of scenario analysis are qualitative comparisons of the ecological effects of different options for a time period of up to 28 years. The given approach utilizes different types of knowledge, from quantitative hydrological data to qualitative local expert knowledge. The main purpose of the tool is to integrate the knowledge in a comprehensive way to make it available for discussions on alternative policies in moderated workshops with stakeholders. In this article, the modules of the tool, their integration, and three hypothetical scenarios are presented. Based on the experience gained when developing the TUGAI tool, we propose that the general framework can be transferred to other areas where tradeoffs in water allocation between the environment and other water users are of major concern. The potential for a simulation tool to structure and inform a complex resource management situation by involving local experts and stakeholders in the development of possible future scenarios will become increasingly valuable for transparent and participatory resource management.     

Footprints for Sustainability: The Next Steps

The concept of an ecological footprint is based on the understanding that every individual human appropriates a share of the productive and assimilative capacity of the biosphere. An ecological footprint corresponds to this exclusive biologically productive area that a defined population uses for all its resource requirements and wastes, and is expressed in terms of bioproductive space, with world-average productivity. Humanity's footprint or its aggregate ecological demand can only temporarily exceed the productive and assimilative capacity of the biosphere without liquidating and weakening the natural capital on which humanity depends fundamentally. Therefore, accounting tools for quantifying humanity's use of nature are essential for overall assessments of human impact as well as for planning specific steps towards a sustainable future.This paper discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the ecological footprint as an ecological accounting method, points out research needs for improvement of the analysis, and suggests potential new applications. The paper identifies ten new applications of the tool to make it applicable at various geographic scales and for a number of analytical and didactic purposes. Then nine methodological improvements are suggested that could refine the currently applied method, making assessments more sensitive to a larger number of ecological impacts. It concludes that many crucial questions pertinent to building a sustainable society can be addressed by current ecological footprint research. By making the method more complete, this tool could evolve from being largely of pedagogical use to become a strategic tool for policy analysis.     

A critical review of building environmental assessment tools

Since the field of environmental assessment tools for buildings is vast, the aim of this study is to clarify that field by analysing and categorising existing tools. The differences between the tools are discussed and the current situation within the tools is critically analysed. However, the comparison of the tools is difficult, if not impossible. For example, the tools are designed for assessing different types of buildings, and they emphasise different phases of the life cycle. In addition to environmental aspects, sustainable building includes economic and social aspects. The shift from green building to sustainable building and the future requirements are challenging for building environmental assessment tools. Furthermore, the benefits of using the tools should be analysed — how the tools and their results have affected decision making?     

Evaluation of a healthcare safety climate measurement tool

Problem

Psychometrically validated measurement tools are needed to evaluate an organization's safety climate. In 2000, Gershon and colleagues published a new healthcare safety climate measurement tool to determine its relationship to safe work behavior (Gershon, R., Karkashian, C., Grosch, J., Murphy, L., Escamilla-Cejudo, A., Flanagan, P., et al. (2000). Hospital safety climate and its relationship with safe work practices and workplace exposure incidents. American Journal of Infection Control, 28, 211-21). The present study evaluated the psychometric properties of the Gershon tool when modified to address respiratory rather than bloodborne pathogen exposures.

Method

Medical practitioners, nurses, and nurse aides (n = 460) were surveyed using the modified Gershon tool. Data were analyzed by factor analysis and psychometric properties of the tool evaluated.

Results

Eight safety climate dimensions were extracted from 25 items (Cronbach's alpha range: 0.62 - 0.88). Factor extractions and psychometric properties were reasonably consistent with those of the Gershon tool.

Impact on Industry

The Gershon safety climate tool appears to have sufficient reliability and validity for use by healthcare decision makers as an indicator of employee perceptions of safety in their institution.     

Does the Temporal Resolution of Precipitation Input Influence the Simulated Hydrological Components Employing the SWAT Model?

This study aimed to evaluate the influence of sub‐daily precipitation time steps on model performance and hydrological components by applying the Green and Ampt infiltration method using the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT). Precipitation was measured at a resolution of 0.1 mm and aggregated to 5‐, 15‐, 30‐, and 60‐min time steps. Daily discharge data over a 10‐year period were used to calibrate and validate the model. Following a global sensitivity analysis, relevant parameters were optimized through an automatic calibration procedure using SWAT‐CUP for each time step. Daily performance statistics were almost equal among all four time steps (NSE ≈ 0.47). Discharge mainly consisted of groundwater flow (55%) and tile flow (42%), in reasonable proportions for the investigated catchment. In conclusion, model outputs were almost identical, showing simulations responded nearly independently of the chosen precipitation time step. This held true for (1) the selection of sensitive parameters, (2) performance statistics, (3) the shape of the hydrographs, and (4) flow components. However, a scenario analysis revealed that the precipitation time step becomes important when saturated hydraulic conductivities are low and curve numbers are high. The study suggests that there is no need in using precipitation time steps <1 h for lowland catchments dominated by soils with a low surface runoff potential if daily flow values are being considered. Editor's note : This paper is part of the featured series on SWAT Applications for Emerging Hydrologic and Water Quality Challenges. See the February 2017 issue for the introduction and background to the series.