National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

PAPERBACK
price:$42.00
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Research Priorities for Airborne Particulate Matter: IV. Continuing Research Progress (2004)
Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology (BEST)

Citation Manager

. "2 Committee's Approach to Evaluation of Research Progress." Research Priorities for Airborne Particulate Matter: IV. Continuing Research Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2004.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
63
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Research Priorities for Airborne Particulate Matter: IV - Continuing Research Progress

CONSIDERATIONS IN INTERPRETING RESEARCH PROGRESS ON PARTICULATE MATTER

The committee notes that reduction of uncertainty, the overall goal of its research agenda, is never complete. EPA by the mandate of the Clean Air Act with regard to the NAAQS is inevitably making decisions in a background of scientific uncertainty. As it seeks to satisfy the requirements of the Clean Air Act to set standards to protect public health with an “adequate margin of safety,” its decisionmaking inherently involves PM concentrations at which effects do not occur with known probability or certainty. Additionally, the health effects of PM and their mitigation are a topic of evident complexity. Often, resolution of one uncertainty only highlights other uncertainties that still cloud decisionmaking. Furthermore, as the methods of scientific inquiry deepen, uncertainties that have seemingly been resolved may again become a focus of research as new methods facilitate resolution at a more profound level of inquiry.

Although the committee addressed a broad range of research topics in evaluating scientific process, it did not choose to judge one of its initial recommendations, the establishment of centers for research on PM. The EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) completed an evaluation of the centers in 2002 (EPASAB 2002).

Page
63