Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38077725›Full record

ArticlePublic health action2023

The importance of public participation in framing air pollution policy: outcome of a judicial review in New Delhi, India.

R Singh, A Frank

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Public health action, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

R SinghDepartment of Architecture, School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi.
A FrankPublic Health, (Environmental and Occupational Health), Dornsife School of Public Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

settingAir pollution, including particulate matter, causes health problems for residents of major cities around the world, including New Delhi, India. Public participation is important in framing policies related to such public health issues.

objectiveTo study how the public's comments on air pollution, which had been collected on the orders of the Indian Supreme Court, influenced air pollution policy in New Delhi.

designWe filed a Right to Information Act, 2005 application with the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) to obtain a copy of the comments. These were compiled and compared with key major areas identified in the policy released by the regulatory authority.

resultsThere were a wide range of comments from experts, residents and resident associations. In total, 115 comments were compiled and studied, and several recurring themes were found to have been incorporated into the policy. This included the need to switch to green public transport and cycling, the use of alternative fuels and reduced agricultural crop residue burning.

conclusionOur study revealed that the public and experts have indeed influenced the CAQM air pollution policy. This is important, as it highlights a democratic, inclusive and stakeholder-based approach. Nonetheless, a future concern lies in how this policy is translated into actionable regulations with effective implementation in the field.

Indexed as

ambient air pollutionenvironmental legislationIndiapolicy interventionspublic participation

Identifiers

PMID38077725
PMCPMC10703133

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.