2.6. LESSONS LEARNED
The section summarises a number of key project management issues commonly raised amongst many of the surveyed projects and applications. It differs, therefore, from previous sections in that it is structured by "issue," rather than according to telematics application priorities and specific applications.
Project Management
Project Preparation
Projects like TELEFLEUR, the Construction and Demolition Recyclables Exchange, SINDRA and IOZIP demonstrate the importance of reviewing needs and conducting user assessments prior to the implementation of the application. DEDICS, SNIRH and the Black Sea Web show how vital it is to clearly define goals and objectives. DEDICS, SNIRH and the Black Sea Web also teach the value of establishing an advisory panel, composed of different institutions involved, to support eventual deployment and adoption. Projects like COSIMA, IOZIP and JAMS outlined the need to review technical capacity, including infrastructures and data formats. It is also important to consider carefully how best to integrate these elements.
Project Development
Some projects - such as Danube AEWS, SINDRA, and the City of Vilnius - demonstrate the importance of ensuring the participation of various project team members. The definition of roles and responsibilities are considered important in realising the full potential of the application, as was learned in projects like the Black Sea Web. If one partner within an emergency warning system, like the Danube AEWS for instance, does not participate or provide the necessary information in the data supply chain, all parties involved have a harder time managing the trans-boundary impact of any pollution incident. Thus, one weak link effectively handicaps the entire system. Another lesson learned from the Black Sea Web project is that a cooperative atmosphere is essential to being ready for unforeseen problems.
The IOZIP and Vilnius case studies outlined the value of communication between institutions collecting environmental data and city administrations. Successful negotiation can lead to mutually beneficial cooperation. This will depend on the clear indication of benefits. This will help ensure participation of the key players, their resulting commitment (in some cases financial) and contribute to the overall value of the system. The benefits of any system must be illustrated from an early stage in development to users and senior management (according to SNIRH), while SINDRA indicated the value in relying on a presentation model.
User Acceptance
In order to facilitate the uptake of telematics tools, the value of training users, preferably by technical experts who developed the application is important, as is reliable documentation, and clear definition of responsibilities. The value of training and documentation was made clear during the development of several projects, especially DEDICS, IOZIP, COSIMA and SNIRH. It is important to earmark project resources for this purpose and vital to keep training aids easy to understand. Projects like SINDRA indicated the need to allow an adequate period for would-be users to become accustomed with the tools that will form part of their daily work. This is especially true because that project incuded many risks involved in implementing complex tools "overnight."
Before participating in any co-operative research and development activities, to strengthen technical capacity, to build up in-house knowledge and qualified manpower equivalent to the level of technical work being undertaken. This was the lesson learned from projects like HEIS-MUC and SNIRH. Poorly trained or ill-informed experts can hinder progress, which in turn can influence the profitability of any activity. Furthermore, relying on a small nucleus of devoted promoters of digital information systems, it is possible to convince internal administration of the benefits of such a system and win the necessary financial backing.
User Feedback
Finally, several projects (IOZIP, COSIMA, SNIRH) demonstrated the need to solicit feedback from users, in order to ensure needs are constantly met, and modifications are made where needed. The COSIMA project showed how a so-called "spiral" management model can assure that application development goes hand-in-hand with user-feedback.
Legislative Frameworks
Several projects brought home the importance of considering
legal requirements, because these can steer application
development or govern the implementation and actual use of any
application. The experience of those involved in IOZIP showed
the need to consider the background of national legislation,
such as the standards for monitoring or the requirements regarding
public access to environmental information.
Indeed, strengthening (and lobbying for) legal rules that govern
the provision of raw and processed data can further serve as
a driving force governing the development and implementation
of such applications. HEIS-MUC highlighted the need for legislation
that considers the recoverable costs for providing access to
environmental data. These projects also brought up issues of
ownership rights of processed environmental data as well as regulations
governing pollutant release and transfer registers. Further concerns
that arose involved widespread publication of detailed information
on the emissions of industry, by industry.
In fact, legislation governing public access is increasingly being adopted, while rules already exist on air and water quality standards and monitoring within the EU. The EU's Access to Environmental Information Directive 90/313/EEC entitles public authorities to recover the reasonable costs of providing environmental data to the public. Internationally, the recently adopted "Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decisionmaking and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters" (Denmark, June 1998) calls for the public availability of environmental status reports. The so-called Aarhus Convention also requires public authorities to take steps to establish a coherent, nationwide system of pollution inventories, increasingly in electronic form. The Convention will begin to be ratified by many European countries toward the end of 2000.
Telematics for Decision Support or Decision-making?
It is clear from the case studies presented that telematics
applications can significantly support the decision-making processes.
In emergency management, the applications can advise mitigation
strategies; in monitoring they can help define air quality management
policy and traffic routes; and in site remediation they can advise
on clean-up actions.
However, it is important to remember that these tools represent
only a support to the decision-maker, and are not intended to
substitute his/her role - or provide all necessary solutions
to environmental management. At the end of the day, it is the
environmental manager who represents the real expert in the field,
and who must decide on a given course of action. This principle
can be applied to all telematics tools, which are highlighted
in this guide as a means to support environmental management
and not to manage it directly.
Furthermore, it is vital to remember that, while many of the applications reviewed may be considered proven solutions that support decision-making, they nevertheless typically only offer a framework for aiding environmental management. Telematics applications must still be tailored to local circumstances, including data collection mechanisms, formats, standards, software and hardware. Any desire to implement such an application will require technical understanding, positive commitment, coordination, time and financial resources to ensure maximum benefit. It is hoped this guide has helped further improve understanding and clarify any questions decision-makers may have in deciding whether to allocate funds and financial resources for telematics tools.
Updated:
CET
