Assessment 2: Report - Environmental Risk Assessment PUBH6002

ASSESSMENT 2 BRIEF

Subject Code and Title

PUBH6002: Global and Environmental Health Issues

Assessment

Assessment 2: Report - Environmental Risk Assessment

Individual/Group

Individual

Length

2000 words (+/- 10%)

Learning Outcomes

The Subject Learning Outcomes demonstrated by the successful completion of the task below include:

a) Examine environmental factors from the local to the global levels that influence health and interpret the relevance to the health of populations.

b) Interpret and analyse the impacts of globalisation on the social, economic, and political determinants of global and local health.

c) Critically analyse ethical elements relevant to environmental health protections, policies, and industry practices, including identification of vulnerable groups.

d) Investigate the relationships between environmental risk factors and social, economic, and political determinants of illness and injury.

e) Critically apply frameworks and interventions to mitigate environmental health issues

Submission

Due Sunday following the end of Module 10 (Week 10) 11:55 pm AEST/AEDT

Weighting

40%

Total Marks

100 marks

4 Vulnerable population(s)

Identify and describe any vulnerable populations that are disproportionatelyaffected by the problem in the chosen region. (Approx. 100 words)

5Gaps in management and legislation

Research and discuss at least two gaps in management and legislation in different sectors (Government and non-government) that triggered the environmental health issue in the chosen region (based on your framework investigation). (Approx. 250 words)

6Stakeholders

Explain the role of existing health agencies, other agencies, and key stakeholders in addressing the environmental health issue, including community groups and critical infrastructure. (Approx. 150 words)

7 Recommendations

Based on your findings, review and analyse the literature related to the environmental health issue and propose 3-4 evidence-based recommendations addressing the gaps in current policy, regulation, and management in your chosenregion. (Approx. 200 words)

8 References (Not part of the word count)

Include at least 10 valid academic references. Use credible evidence to inform and support your point of view. Ensure that you appropriately reference the information you have found from academic sources by applying the APA referencing style.

9 Evidence of research (Not part of the word count)

Include evidence from academic literature research. Example:

Date

Database

Search terms, filters added and Boolean

Operators

Result

Papers extracted

12/03/2024

PUBMED

((Social determinants of health) AND (climate change)) AND (Australia) Filters: Full text, from

2013 - 2024

64 full-text peer- reviewed articles

(Patrick et al., 2023), DOI https://doi.org/10.1177/000486742211078

Assessment Attributes

0-49%

(Fail) Poor

50-64%

(Pass) Functional

65-74%

(Credit) Proficient

75-84%

(Distinction) Advanced

85-100%

(High Distinction) Exceptional

Grade description

Evidence of unsatisfactory

Evidence of satisfactory

Evidence of a good level of

Evidence of a high level

Evidence of an

achievement of one or

achievement of subject

understanding, knowledge

of achievement of the

exceptional level of

more of the learning

learning objectives, the

and skill development in

learning objectives of

achievement of

objectives of the subject,

development of relevant

relation to the content of

the subject

learning objectives

insufficient understanding

skills to a competent level,

the subject or work of a

demonstrated in such.

across the entire

of the subject content

and adequate

superior quality on the

areas as interpretation

content of the course

and/or unsatisfactory

interpretation and critical

majority of the learning

and critical analysis,

demonstrated in such.

level of skill development.

analysis skills.

objectives of the subject.

logical argument, use.

areas as interpretation and

Demonstration of a high

of methodology and

critical analysis,

level of interpretation and

communication skills.

logical argument,

critical analysis skills.

creativity, originality,

use of methodology

and communication skills.

Provides an appropriate introduction to the specific environmental issue and the population affected. (10%)

Limited or no introduction of the environmental issue affecting a specific population

Selected the incorrect Environmental Health issue and the region.

A basic overview of environmental issues impacting specific communities, with some academic evidence of health effects but primarily relying on general statements and assumptions.

Selected the correct

Environmental Health Issue

An acceptable introduction to the specific environmental issue and its impact on the affected population, supported by at least two pieces of academic evidence indicating the health effects, along with some assumptions not supported by evidence.

An appropriate introduction to the environmental health issue and the affected population, supported by three to four academic evidence indicators of the health effects and most assumptions supported by evidence.

A proficient introduction to the environmental health issue and the affected population, supported by four or more academic indicators of the health effects and all assumptions supported by evidence.

but the incorrect region.

Exhibits knowledge and understanding of evidence-based approaches to environmental risk assessment by applying a critical analysis of the DPSEEA framework causal link, including an appropriate summary. (30%)

Limited understanding of required concepts, knowledge/understanding of the use of the DPSEEA framework, the causal chain of events, and understanding of health challenges of a specific environmental health issue.

Key components of the assignment are not addressed.

Limited or no summary of the cause and effect of environmental health issues.

Selected the incorrect Environmental Health issue and the region.

Demonstrates a functional Knowledge/understanding of the use of the DPSEEA framework, the causal chain of events and understanding of health challenges of a specific environmental health issue.

Often conflates/confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by evidence from the research/subject materials.

Resemble a recall or summary of key concepts of the cause and effect of environmental health issues.

Selected the correct Environmental Health Issue but the incorrect region.

Demonstrates thorough knowledge/understanding of using the DPSEEA framework, the causal chain of events, and understanding of health challenges of a specific environmental health issue.

Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/subject materials.

Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts of cause and effect of environmental health issues.

Demonstrates advanced knowledge and a highly developed understanding of the use of the DPSEEA framework, the causal chain of events, and the health challenges of a specific environmental health issue.

Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.

Well-demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts of the cause and effect of environmental health issues.

Demonstrates exceptional knowledge and a sophisticated understanding of the use of the DPSEEA framework, the causal chain of events and understanding of health challenges of a specific environmental health issue.

Systematically and critically discriminates between personal opinion assertions and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.

Exceptional capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts about the cause and effect of environmental health issues.

Appropriate graphic visualisation of the DPSEEA framework analysis findings.

Graphic visualization of the DPSEEA framework analysis findings is limited

A basic graphic visualization of the DPSEEA framework analysis findings with some

concepts missing or not

An appropriate graphic visualization of the DPSEEA framework analysis findings

with very few concepts

A clear graphic visualization of the DPSEEA framework analysis findings with all

concepts aligned

A clear graphic visualization of the DPSEEA framework analysis findings with all

concepts aligned

(5%)

or missing

aligned appropriately.

missing or not aligned appropriately.

appropriately but some links (arrows) are missing.

appropriately and not missing links (arrows).

Critical discussion of the vulnerable population affected.

(5%)

Limited or no discussion of the population most affected by the environmental issue in the chosen area.

A basic discussion of the population most affected by the environmental issue in the chosen area with some arguments not appropriately evidenced

An appropriate discussion of the population most affected by the environmental issue in the chosen area with at least two sources of evidence from the literature appropriate to the discussion.

An advance discussion of the population most affected by the environmental issue in the chosen area with at least three sources of evidence from the literature appropriate to the discussion and at least one comparing population groups

A sophisticated discussion of the population most affected by the environmental issue in the chosen area with more than two sources of evidence from the literature and a proficient comparison of population groups supported by evidence from multiple sources.

Critical analysis of the legislative/procedural/policy gaps that lead to the environmental health issue (15%)

Critical analysis of the relationship between the above gaps and how they drive health crises.

Limited or no analysis and reasoning of the legislative, procedural and policy gaps that lead to the environmental health issue.

Limited or no analysis and limited reasoning of the relationship between the above gaps and how they drive health crisis, particularly in vulnerable population groups

An acceptable analysis and reasoning of the legislative, procedural and policy gaps that lead to the environmental health issue missing some links between the gaps and the issue.

An acceptable analysis and reasoning of the relationship between the above gaps and how they drive health crises shows some limitations in the analysis.

A proficient analysis and reasoning of the legislative, procedural and policy gaps that lead to the environmental health issue missing some links between the gaps and the issue.

A proficient analysis and reasoning of the relationship between the above gaps and how they drive health crises, particularly affecting vulnerable population groups, shows some limitations in the analysis.

An advanced analysis and reasoning of the legislative, procedural and policy gaps that lead to the environmental health issue.

An advanced analysis and reasoning of the relationship between the above gaps and how they drive health crises, particularly affecting vulnerable population groups. It shows some limitations in the analysis.

An exceptional analysis and reasoning of the legislative, procedural and policy gaps that lead to the environmental health issue.

A sophisticated analysis and reasoning of the relationship between the above gaps and how they drive health crises and a proficient analysis of the impacts on vulnerable populations.

Analysis and application with synthesis of new knowledge of the environmental health

Limited synthesis and analysis of the literature related to the

Demonstrated some analysis and synthesis of new knowledge of the

Well-developed analysis and synthesis of the literature related to the

Thoroughly developed and creative analysis and synthesis of the literature

Highly sophisticated and creative analysis and synthesis of the literature

issue and the roles of the specific stakeholders. (10%)

environmental health issue and the specific roles of key stakeholders. Stakeholders are irrelevant to the case.

literature related to the environmental health issue and the roles of key stakeholders, but only sometimes specific. Some stakeholders are irrelevant to the case.

environmental health issue and most of the specific roles of the key stakeholders.

related to the environmental health issue and the specific roles of key stakeholders.

related to the environmental health issue and the specific roles of the key stakeholders were analysed thoroughly.

Understanding of current policies, regulation, and management of the issue, and use of evidence to make recommendations for improvements.

(10%)

Limited synthesis and analysis of the literature related to the environmental health issue and proposed no evidence-based recommendations or limited evidence and not addressing the specific gaps in current policy, regulation, and management in your chosen region.

Demonstrated analysis and synthesis of new knowledge of the literature related to the environmental health issue and proposed 1-2 evidence-based recommendations with some evidence and sometimes addressing the gaps in current policy, regulation, and management in your chosen region.

Well-developed analysis and synthesis of the literature related to the environmental health issue and proposed 3-4 evidence-based recommendations, with most addressing the gaps in current policy, regulation, and management in your chosen region.

Thoroughly developed and creative analysis and synthesis of the literature related to the environmental health issue and proposed 3-4 evidence- based recommendations

addressing the gaps in current policy, regulation, and management in your chosen region.

Highly sophisticated and creative analysis and synthesis of the literature related to the environmental health issue and proposed 3-4 evidence- based recommendations addressing the gaps in current policy, regulation, and management in your chosen region.

Recommendations are justified based on the analysis/synthesis.

Substantiation/research (10%)

Demonstrates inconsistent use of decent quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas.

The report does not discriminate personal opinion and information

Demonstrates consistently using credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas, but these are only sometimes explicit or well- developed.

The report shows some things that could be improved between

Demonstrates consistent use of high quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas.

The report discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information

substantiated by

Consistently demonstrates expert use of good quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop appropriate arguments and statements. Shows evidence of reading beyond the key reading.

The report discriminates between assertion of

Demonstrates expert use of high-quality, credible, and relevant research sources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows extensive evidence of reading beyond the key reading.

The report systematically

and shows limited or no evidence of independent research.

The academic literature research table is missing or inconsistent with the assessment.

Less than 8 references included

assertion of personal opinion and information with some evidence from independent research.

The academic literature research shows only one database search with some mistakes and is difficult to replicate.

Between 8 and 10 references relevant to the topic are included.

evidence from independent research.

The academic literature research shows two database searches with few mistakes and can be replicated easily.

Between 10-12 references relevant to the topic are included.

personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from independent research.

The academic literature research shows three database searches with few mistakes and can be replicated easily.

Between 12 to 15 references relevant to the topic are included.

and critically discriminates between personal opinion assertions and information substantiated by robust evidence from independent research.

The academic literature research shows three or more database searches with no mistakes and can be replicated easily.

More than 15 references relevant to the topic are included.

Grammar and referencing (5%)

Poorly written, does not adhere to the academic genre and has spelling, grammar, sentence, and paragraph construction errors.

There are mistakes in using the APA style.

Written according to academic genre and has accurate spelling, grammar, sentence, and paragraph construction.

There are some mistakes in using the APA style.

Appropriately written adheres to the academic genre (e.g., with introduction, conclusion, or summary) and has accurate spelling, grammar, sentence, and paragraph construction.

There are no mistakes in using the APA style.

Very well-written, adheres to the academic genre and has accurate spelling, grammar, sentence, and paragraph construction.

There are no mistakes in using the APA style.

Expertly written, adheres to the academic genre and has accurate spelling, grammar, sentence, and paragraph construction.

There are no mistakes in using the APA Style.

The following Subject Learning Outcomes are addressed in this assessment

SLO a)

Examine environmental factors from the local to the global levels that influence health and interpret the relevance to the health of populations.

SLO b)

Interpret and analyse the impacts of globalisation on the social, economic, and political determinants of global and local health.

SLO c)

Critically analyse ethical elements relevant to environmental health protections, policies, and industry practices, including identification of vulnerable groups.

SLO d)

Investigate the relationships between environmental risk factors and social, economic, and political determinants of illness and injury.

SLO e)

Critically apply frameworks and interventions to mitigate environmental health issues