Can portable air quality monitors protect children from air pollution on the school run? An exploratory study

Abstract

With air quality issues in urban areas garnering increasing media attention, concerned citizens are beginning to engage with air monitoring technology as a means of identifying and responding to the environmental risks posed. However, while much has been written about the accuracy of this sensing equipment, little research has been conducted into the effect it has on users. As such, this research deploys coping theory to explore the specific ways in which portable air quality sensors influence user behaviour. This is done using a qualitative exploratory design, targeting parents and carers of children on the school run. Drawing from survey and interview responses, the article illustrates the decision-making pathways underpinning engagement with monitors and the ways in which they influence beliefs and behaviours around air pollution. The study demonstrates that personal environmental monitors can play a role in protecting children from air pollution on the school run. They can raise awareness about air pollution and disrupt misconceptions about where it does and does not occur. They can also encourage the public to change their behaviour in an attempt to mitigate and manage risks. However, the findings additionally reveal that sensor technology does not generate a simple binary response among users, of behavioural change or not. When attempts at behavioural change fail to reduce risk, resulting negative feelings can lead to inaction. Hence, the relationship between the technology and the individual is entwined with various social circumstances often beyond a parent or carer's control. Thus, top-down support aimed at tackling air pollution at source is essential if this bottom-up technology is to fulfil its full potential.

Impacts of Personalized Sensor Feedback Regarding Exposure to Environmental Stressors

“…Although some studies relied solely on sensor measurements [42, 43, 45, 46 and 89] more studies combined sensor measurements with interviews [61,62] or questionnaires [44, 48, 63 and 64]. Eight studies applied only qualitative methods (e.g., interviews, focus groups or analyses of journal entries [39,55,[65][66][67]). Nine studies combined qualitative and quantitative methods to assess the outcome/s of exposure feedback (i.e., mixed methods approach) [62,[68][69][70].…”

“…For some participants, the feedback increased their confidence, e.g., to talk to others about the topic or to reduce their exposure [39, 49, 73 and 74]. In other cases, however, participants reported that their increased awareness was uncomfortable due to feelings of powerlessness and low selfefficacy to control their exposure [65]. Apart from knowledge gains, receiving feedback about smoking at home and its health impacts also led to a significant increase in risk perception and concern regarding health impacts [55, 62, 74 and 76].…”

“…One person reported sadness [66] and some reported fear in reaction to the feedback [51,60]. Heightened threat could also lead to feelings of powerlessness and resignation [65]. On the other hand, some participants found their experimentation with the sensors fun and informative [44,68].…”

Public engagement with air quality data: using health behaviour change theory to support exposure-minimising behaviours

“…For example, communicating personal vulnerability via personalised air quality data has been found to help individuals revisit their prior perceptions about air pollution and demonstrate the impact individual actions have on personal exposures [50]. In another study, providing participants with personal sensors on the commute to school resulted in the majority identifying air pollution as a 'threat', caused many to perceive air pollution as a greater 'problem' on the school commute than previously thought and resulted in the majority of participants taking protective action in response to the monitoring data [51].…”

The effectiveness of personalised versus generic information in changing behaviour: Evidence from an indoor air quality experiment

“…Some studies suggest that micro-monitors detecting ambient PM2.5 may help change behaviour but these studies do not use rigorous experimental methods (N Klepeis, S. Hughes, et al 2013;Wong-Parodi et al 2018;Heydon et al 2020;Iribagiza et al 2020). …”