CHAPTER 1 Contextual Background and Objectives

1

Contextual Background and Objectives

This report was produced as part of a program of analytical work conducted under the framework of the World Bank’s multidonor-funded Pollution Management and Environmental Health program. The objectives of this report are to improve knowledge regarding the following:

• How satellite measurements can best be used to enhance air-quality (AQ) monitoring, and thus improve human exposure assessment, in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and • How satellite measurements can be brought into closer agreement with ground-level monitoring data, considering the shortcomings and advantages of satellite and ground-level measurements.

This report summarizes the findings of the three tasks: (1) a literature review of approaches used to combine satellite observations with ground-level monitoring measurements of particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 2.5 microns (PM2.5), (2) the effort to develop and evaluate methods for converting satellite aerosol optical depth readings into ground-level PM2.5 estimates in individual cities (Accra, Ghana; Delhi, India; Lima, Peru; and Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia), and (3) evaluation of the application of these methods to nine LMIC cities to identify geographic patterns in the performance of the satellite estimates.

Based on this work, recommendations are made for LMICs regarding how best to incorporate satellite data into their monitoring plans using the following proposed typology based on the country’s level of engagement in AQ monitoring:

• Type I: Countries with no existing measurements and no history of any kind of routine measurements of atmospheric composition. Some anecdotal measurements or one-time sampling may have taken place. • Type II: Countries with some information on atmospheric composition available (perhaps PM10—particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to 10 microns—or total suspended particulates) but of variable quality without rigorous quality assurance procedures.

• Type III: Countries that possess reliable information but with poor spatial or temporal coverage; for example, monitoring may exist in only one city or routine monitoring may exist for a year or two but is no longer being collected because of equipment malfunction and/or lack of repairs. • Type IV: Good, reliable AQ monitoring underway or being established. • Type V: routine, long-term AQ monitoring.