Talk:Health Impact Assessment
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] HIA Page Conventions
""a HIA" vs. "an HIA" Should we refer to an individual health impact assessment as "an HIA" or as "a HIA"? "An" sounds more natural in verbal speech but "a" seems more correct if we consider the words that make up the acronym. Your thoughts? - Ben Harris-Roxas
Ooh! These issues are always tricky. I agree with you that "a HIA" would be the correct grammatical form and for consistency this is the form that will work whether HIA is spelled out fully or used as an abbreviation. Salim Vohra
Health concern since accidental spill of hydrobromide concentrate in fine powder form that has affected eyes, upper body, legs. Happen in enclosed mixing room. Weight of powder 2600 Lbs +. Has become difficult to erradicate. Accident date June 13-2006 - Any suggestions, Thanks benrrodriguezcs@yahoo.com Posted November 25, 2006.
I wonder if there might be a more appropriate forum for discussion of your personal situation elsewhere - such as http://www.tifaq.com/information/supportgroups.html. Best of luck with recovering from your accident. Ben Harris-Roxas 06:14, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] HIA Page Contents
Contemporary Debates To what extent do you think this page should reflect some of the contemporary debates in HIA? For example should we include a section explaining that some practitioners have differing opinions about the methods and data that should be used in a HIA, the role of community participation, etc. The other alternative is that we keep it generic enough for it to be agreeable to all contributors. Your thoughts? - Ben Harris-Roxas
Yes I think it would be good to have a section on contemporary debates, in fact I think it's crucial. One example would be the values of HIA e.g. equitable, democratic, sustainable, ethical use of evidence or is it objective and neutral; the second whether it is community-led and expert-informed (HIA as community advocacy and decision-influencing)or community-informed and expert-led (HIA as decision-support). The examples given are presented as dichotomies/opposites but I think maybe the differences are more of nuance and emphasis rather than radical differences. I don't have enough of a feel about the whole range of practitioner views to be certain of this. Salim Vohra
[edit] HIA seeker of truth?
In the overview there is a sentence which I have difficulty with
"The main objective of HIA is not to seek a "truth" or to generate original scientific information."
1. I think the first part of this sentence could be misleading. Here's why, my sense is that you mean by the above statement that HIA is not research and therefore does not seek universal truths about health impacts. That is true but HIA does aim to apply research findings and more 'universal/general truths' to local contexts to produce 'local truths' about potential local health impacts.
2. I think the second part should be caveated with 'generally' as research is not embedded in HIA because of time and resource constraints not because the approach/philosophy restricts it.
I don't know if I've completely missed the point or the issues I raise are reasonable. Salim Vohra
I have now made some changes to this paragraph as no one has posted any discussion comments disagreeing with the points I raised a month ago 8th Sep 2006. Salim Vohra
The additions have improved the section - much better than before. Ben Harris-Roxas 06:23, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] UK Health Legislation
Does anyone else find it strange that when considering the exact letter of the law, there is more legislative requirement to assess the health and wellbeing of badgers then there is for people? (Andrew Buroni) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Buronia (talk • contribs) 11:36, 15 January 2007 (UTC).
