Multi-country analysis of sewage treatment plants on rivers, Draft 1

This topic submitted by Ryan Lazowski ( LAZOWSRD@muohio.edu ) on 1/24/03. [ Rivers Team: Ryan Lazowski-Section: Garrison/Green]

My general topic of interest for this lab project is to make a comparative, multi-country analysis of river management. More specifically, I would like to focus on the issue of sewage treatment facilities on Four Mile Creek and on a river(s) in China and possibly other countries. My general research question would be: how have cultural, social and scientific considerations converged and interacted in having a sewage treatment facility(s) on the river(s)?

The cultural component would focus on peopleÕs perceptions of the riverÕs aesthetic and/or intrinsic qualities. The natural science component would focus on knowledge of the natural scientific health of the river and knowledge of how the sewage treatment facility affects it. The social science component would focus on the planning process and debate over creating the sewage treatment facility and over managing the facility.

Here are some questions I have connecting these three components. This is just in a brainstorm format, a list of ideas, to be later molded, adapted, etc.:

What were peopleÕs perceptions of the riverÕs aesthetic and/or intrinsic value of the river before, during, and after the debate over and construction of the facility? Did these perceptions vary according to different groups involved in the planning process/debate? If these perceptions changed, why?
In the planning process and debate over construction of the river, did certain groups have more access to information concerning the river (i.e. water quality) and the facilityÕs possible effects upon it? Did cultural perceptions affect how different groups acted, constructed rhetoric, etc. in the debate over the facility? Have any of these conditions changed since the facility was constructed, especially with regards to management of the facility?
If different groups involved in the debate over the river had more or less access to scientific information about the river, why? Since the facility was constructed, have different groups been able to access more information?

Here at four mile creek, research into the water quality of the river upstream and downstream of the facility should be straightforward. The Peer Science Center should provide the necessary testing kits. Research into the social policy surrounding the facility will take place in the library, especially King libraryÕs archive room, and also interviews with persons involved in the debate if it occurred recently enough in the past. Library research into archival materials and interviews with local residents should provide the evidence regarding cultural perceptions. For the multi-country comparative analysis component, evidence for each of the three categories (cultural, social scientific, natural scientific) may be found in traditional library research (sitting down and looking through books, newspapers, etc.), but there would probably be an emphasis/reliance on internet research.

As a side note, I am interested in the topic of sewage treatment facilities, but it is not the most important aspect of the project for me. I am really interested in doing a multi-country analysis, especially with China. The project may look other human influences on the river(s), such as dams. Even with such a change in subject, the foci of the three components (cultural, social scientific, natural scientific) and the questions concerning the relationship among these three components should still apply.

Next Article
Previous Article
Return to the Topic Menu