Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution Climate Change
LaurenClimate change, the exact wording, is not noted. Climate change in ideas is neither noted.
Climate change, the exact wording, is not noted. Climate change in ideas is neither noted.
The reference section of this article tells us about the type and number of sources that information from this article was drawn from. This article's research was drawn from a mix of online and print sources, consisting of international policy, agency reports, previous peer reviewed research articles, and news reports.
The bibliography suggests this article was produced through analysis of historical events and other works without any new experimentation or data collection.
The article was produced using research that was current to the topic at hand, but at the same time using research that provides why attempts at getting a response team was trying and the attempts made in the past 15+ years, supporting articles to why the argument is correct. The article was produced in response to the lack of preperation at nuclear events.
The author uses a wide variety of news and journal sources to make their point. Everything from the New York Times to East Asian Science. It also cites many volumes on disaster preparedness. For example, “The Chernobyl Accident: a Case Study in International Law Regulation State Responsibility for Transboundary”. The sources tell me that the article was developed around the news at the time and works that dealt with handling of disasters from the past. For me, this furthers the case that the author is making: that the way we have been doing things in the past is not working.
The author uses a wide variety of news and journal sources to make their point. Everything from the New York Times to East Asian Science. It also cites many volumes on disaster preparedness. For example, “The Chernobyl Accident: a Case Study in International Law Regulation State Responsibility for Transboundary”. The sources tell me that the article was developed around the news at the time and works that dealt with handling of disasters from the past. For me, this furthers the case that the author is making: that the way we have been doing things in the past is not working.
It is clear from the bibliography as well as the notes, that Schmid is very educated in this field. She has done immense amounts of research (including citing herself), which shows that this is being written by an expert, and not a random scientist with an opinion. She provides information within her notes that help point someone seeking further information in the right direction. She also cites multiple sources form the same author, showing knowledge of other colleagues or experts within the field who may provide good insight and information.
Based off the references, it is clear that a very extensive amount of research was done with well over ~70 references. Based off the bibliography, a lot of data was collected from articles and reports on nuclear safety efforts. Also many of the references analyzed historical events and past nuclear disasters and emergency response regulations. The bibliography, which includes some of her other works shows she is an expert in the field and cited other experts as well.
The references list for this article shows a wide variety of resources that were used to write the paper. They vary in topics, some directly looking at nuclear energy, others at the risks society takes, regulations, and organizational structures.