A global survey addressing sustainability of pollen monitoring

Abstract

Background: Contemporary airborne pollen records underpin environmental health warnings, yet how pollen monitoring networks are sustained is poorly understood. This study investigated by whom and how pollen monitoring sites across the globe are managed and funded.

Methods: Coordinators listed in the Worldwide Map of Pollen Monitoring Stations were invited to complete a digital questionnaire designed to survey the people and organisations involved, types, and duration of funding sources, as well as uses, purpose, and sharing of pollen information. Quantitative data were analysed by descriptive statistics and open text responses were examined by qualitative thematic analysis.

Results: Eighty-four of 241 (35%) coordinators from 37 countries responded. Universities (42%) and hospitals/health services (29%) were most commonly responsible for monitoring. Most sites involved employees (87%) in pollen monitoring, of whom many were part-time (41%) or casual (11%), as well as students (29%) and volunteers (6%). Pollen monitoring was additional to core duties for over one-third of sites (35%), and 25% reported pollen monitoring was an in-kind contribution. Whilst funding for pollen monitoring was often sourced from government agencies (33%), government research grants (24%), or non-government grants (8%), 92% reported more than 1 funding source, and 99% reported dependence on "partnerships or grants requiring co-contributions", indicating a complex resourcing structure, of short duration (median 3 years). Common reasons why airborne pollen was monitored included clinical allergy, population environmental health, aerobiology and forecasting. Climate change, research, and social duty were also referenced.

Conclusions: Aerobiological monitoring is currently sustained by complex, insecure, and insufficient resourcing, as well as reliance on volunteerism. There are multiple direct, health-related, and other important uses of aerobiology data, that are aligned to multiple dimensions of sustainability. Evidence from this study can be used to inform the design of strategies to sustain the generation of aerobiology data.

Keywords: Aerobiology; Allergy; Pollen monitoring; Sustainability.

Fig. 1

Features of pollen monitoring networks coordinated by study participants. a) the number and duration of sites operated, b) number and percent of involvement in regional and/or national networks, c) number and percent of responses by type of organisation managing sites (solid bars), with number and percent of sub-options shown (light hashed bars), d) type(s) of instrument used, and e) period of monitoring

Fig. 2

Distribution of workload of involved in pollen monitoring. a) frequency of sample collection from site, b) number of people involved as sample collectors and pollen counters, c) number and percent of people involved by role, d) for sites involving employees (solid colour), the number and percent of staff employed by status (light hashed bars), e) for sites involving students (solid colour) the number and percent of students by degree type (light hashed bars), and f) role of pollen monitoring with respect to usual duties of people involved (number and percent of responses).

Fig. 3

Dissemination and uses of pollen monitoring information. a. routes of sharing pollen information, and b. research uses of airborne pollen data. Respondents (n = 84) selected multiple response options. Data shown as number and percentages of responses

Fig. 4

Funding to support pollen monitoring activities. a) number and percent of responses receiving various sources of funding, b) for sites with government funding (solid colour), the number and percent by agency (light hashed bars), c) types of grants supporting pollen monitoring (number and percentage of responses), and d) duration of funding from different sources. Respondents (n = 84) selected multiple response options.