4 Peter Bobrowsky IPGC January2012 by hY7s1p0X


									                                  4th I.P.G.C
                                  January 23, 2012

A successful strategy for developing best practice
“guidelines” for professional geoscientists

P. Bobrowsky, H. Crow, R. Couture, D. Boteler and J. Hunter

 Professionals in all disciplines frequently rely on specialized
  documentation that provides examples of “best practice” for
  its practitioners.
 Occasionally such documents are prescriptive, regulatory
  and obligatory in the legal sense (= legislated standards).
 More frequently they are timely and extensive compilations
  (guidelines or recommended procedures) by the peer
  community that illustrate current philosophies of practice,
  successful examples of application and consensus opinions
  on various methods and techniques relevant to the
  discipline in question.

Guidelines Project

 Government of Canada through Natural Resources Canada
  (Geological Survey of Canada) will soon release a a series of
  national hazard related “guidelines” that address topics of
  relevance to the health and safety of Canadians.
 The aim of each volume is to provide a state of the art
  synthesis of the particular hazard including, where applicable,
  lexicons of specialized terminology, reviews of methods and
  techniques for hazard identification and monitoring, analyses
  of the contributing and triggering factors, descriptions of
  mitigative options and many other aspects.
 This presentation examines the strategy adopted by the GSC
  to develop this series of national guidelines.

Guidelines Project

The following “guidelines” will be released during the next year:

   Technical Guidelines for Canadian Landslide Hazards;
   Guidelines for Shear Wave Investigations for Seismic Site
    Characterization in Canada;
   Space Environment Effects on Satellites;
   Geomagnetic Effects on Power Systems;
   Geomagnetic Effects on Pipelines;
   Ionospheric Effects on Radio Communications.

Phase One

 Scientists from the Geological Survey of Canada embarked
  on a series of personal engagements (face to face meetings,
  telephone calls, email communiqués) with potential partners,
  contributors, sponsors, document users/clients and others
 Focus on representatives from academia (geology and
  engineering departments), consulting companies (small and
  large firms), regulatory bodies (e.g. APEGBC), learned
  societies (e.g. CGS) and professional organizations (e.g.
  Geoscientists Canada)
 Discussions addressed issues surrounding the document
  content, structure, specific needs, schedule, time table,
  responsibilities, endorsements, and financial support

Consultation Example

                       56 Individuals

Consultation Example

Consultation Example

Extensive Consultation with Industry:
   • Participate in North American Electricity Reliability Council
   (NERC) Geomagnetic Disturbance Task Force
   • Collaboration with Canadian Power Utilities (Hydro One,
   Manitoba Hydro, Hydro Quebec, Yukon Electric Power)
   • Collaboration with Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI)
   • Collaboration with TransCanada Pipelines
   • Collaboration with Colt Engineering (Mackenzie Valley
   • Discussions with Canadian Standards Association
   • Discussions with Telesat
   • Participate in Aviation Industry Cross Polar Working Group
   • Participate in ICAO/FAA Working Group on Space Weather
 Phase Two

 Development of an “advisory panel” (6 – 10 knowledgeable,
  well respected, technically diverse, senior professionals)
  whose aim is to provide arms length approval of decisions,
  sanction product and give ongoing advise (voluntary role)
 Appointment of external “scientific moderator” (part time paid
  consultant) to harmonize efforts and products to common
  language and look - feel
 Generate a preliminary or draft table of “topics” for discussion
  with the advisory panel
 Iterative process to develop a working outline for the table of
  contents: series of stand alone chapters
 Review of existing international guidelines
Advisory Panel Example

Review of existing guidelines

Chapter Example

 Phase Three
 Identification of Chapter Leaders (1 – 3 individual champions
  per chapter that will coordinate multiple external authors)
  (nominal honorariums for non-government champions)
 Bilingual website for “public” interaction and input, updates;
  Open File downloads; FTP site for all authors
 Revisions to contents of individual chapters, identification of
  multiple chapter authors (e.g. 40 for the Landslide chapters)
 Series of national and international conference presentations
 Initiation of written contributions for each chapter
 Publication and release of Open File reports as they are finished
 Mid project workshop held for Chapter Leaders

           Schedule of Deliverables

                2010                                               2011                                            2012                         2013
  A   M    J   J    A   S    O   N   D   J   F   M   A    M   J    J   A   S   O   N   D   J   F   M   A   M   J   J   A   S   O   N   D   J     F   M

Consultation                                     GeoHazardsV
  Advisory                                                             Engeo-Pro
     Panel                                                                 64th CGS                        ISL-NASL
  Prospectus                                                               & PanAm
          Website                                        Website
                ToC draft
                Chapter Leads
               Two chapters completed
                  Intro. & Terminology
                            Detailed ToC draft
                               Detailed ToC revised
   Comments on published Chapters
                                                         Remaining chapters draft
                                                 Revision of remaining chapters
                                                         Final version of chapters and translation
                                                                                                                   Publication of Bulletin (F/E)

  Lessons Learned
• The importance of extensive consultation before project
  embarkation cannot be overstated

• A “bottom – up” approach to developing the content and
  structure of the guideline documents is critical for eventual
  adoption by the professional community at large

• The integration of a paid scientific editor reduces the
  impression of government regulations

• Hierarchical responsibilities (e.g. Chapter Leads or
  champions) distributes the workload and delivery pressures

• Creation of an “advisory panel” provides essential
  technical/professional credibility
  Lessons Learned
• Contributions should be multi-authored, multi-sectoral
  products with representation from the entire professional

• The prompt publication of individual chapters as completed
  (and eventual publication of a total volume) is preferred over
  the delayed release of a total volume only

• Some financial compensation to the private sector
  contributors is essential and ensures product delivery
  (cannot rely entirely on voluntary efforts)

• Endorsements by national learned societies, professional
  bodies, etc. is needed for professional “buy in” and help in
  post publication information dissemination

To top