Turvallinen koulu? : Helsinkiläisten peruskoulujen turvallisuuskulttuurista ja siihen vaikuttavista tekijöistä

Objectives. This study concentrated on the aspect of physical safety in the learning environment of primary and secondary schools in Helsinki. Taking a broad perspective, the study analysed the safety culture of Helsinki schools, ranked them with a point rating system, and thoroughly investigated reasons behind their differences. Safety culture in educa-tional institutions has not been studied previously although research related to safety culture in business is abundant and some studies have considered safety culture in the healthcare sector. The study focused on the attitudes and practices of teachers concerning safety. The main research question is as follows: "What factors related to safety culture distinguish schools with an exceptional safety culture from those weaker one?" Research methods. The study used a mixed-methods approach. It s quantitative part charted the safety attitudes, values and expertise of employees in selected schools. The study also analysed physical safety in selected schools through specific safety inspections. The 14 schools in the study were selected randomly, two from each district. Altogether 388 of 475 employees returned a Webropol questionnaire (N= 475, 81,68 %). The qualitative part of the study analysed the reasons behind perceived differences in school s safety cul-ture using theme interviews with school principals. Elements of a phenomenographic research approach were also used. Results and conclusions. According to the study the distinctive features of good safety cultures in the Helsinki schools included a well-developed understanding of safety hazards and the requirements of basic safety, good safety management practices, a developed understanding of the systematic nature of safety, an appreciation of safety evidenced through everyday practices and open and communal safety-related work. The study offers result-based safety culture improvements for teachers, those responsible for school safety, principals, educational administrators, teacher educators and authorities.

The roles of nitrification and nitrate reduction pathways in nitrogen cycling of Baltic Sea

The Baltic Sea is one of the largest brackish water bodies in the world. Primary production in the Baltic Sea is limited by nitrogen (N) availability with the exception of river outlets and the northernmost phosphorus limited basin. The excess human induced N load from the drainage basin has caused severe eutrophication of the sea. The excess N loads can be mitigated by microbe mediated natural N removal processes that are found in the oxic-anoxic interfaces in sediments and water column redoxclines. Such interfaces allow the close coupling between the oxic nitrification process, and anoxic denitrification and anaerobic ammonium oxidation (anammox) processes that lead to the formation of molecular nitrogen gas. These processes are governed by various environmental parameters. The effects of these parameters on N processes were investigated in the northern Baltic Sea sediments. During summer months when the sediment organic content is at its highest, nitrification and denitrification reach their maximum rates. However, nitrification had no excess potential, which was probably because of high competition for molecular oxygen (O2) between heterotrophic and nitrification microbes. Subsequently, the limited nitrate (NO3-) availability inhibited denitrification. In fall, winter and spring, nitrification was limited by ammonium availability and denitrification limited by the availability of organic carbon and occasionally by NO3-. Anaerobic ammonium oxidation (anammox) was not an important N removal process in the northern Baltic Sea. Modeling studies suggest that when hypoxia expands in the Baltic Sea, N removal intensifies. However, the results of this study suggest the opposite because bottom water hypoxia (O2< 2 ml l-1) decreased the denitrification rates in sediments. Moreover, N was recycled by the dissimilatory nitrate reduction to ammonium (DNRA) process instead of being removed from the water ecosystem. High N removal potentials were found in the anoxic water column in the deep basins of the Baltic Proper. However, the N removal in the water column appeared to be limited by low substrate availability, because the water at the depths at which the substrate producing nitrification process occurred, rarely mix with the water at the depths at which N removal processes were found. Overall, the natural N removal capacity of the northern Baltic Sea decreased compared to values measured in mid 1990s and early 2000. The reason for this appears to be increasing hypoxia.

Helsingin lämpösaareke ajallisena ja paikallisena ilmiönä

The urban heat island phenomenon is the most well-known all-year-round urban climate phenomenon. It occurs in summer during the daytime due to the short-wave radiation from the sun and in wintertime, through anthropogenic heat production. In summertime, the properties of the fabric of city buildings determine how much energy is stored, conducted and transmitted through the material. During night-time, when there is no incoming short-wave radiation, all fabrics of the city release the energy in form of heat back to the urban atmosphere. In wintertime anthropogenic heating of buildings and traffic deliver energy into the urban atmosphere. The initial focus of Helsinki urban heat island was on the description of the intensity of the urban heat island (Fogelberg 1973, Alestalo 1975). In this project our goal was to carry out as many measurements as possible over a large area of Helsinki to give a long term estimate of the Helsinki urban heat island. Helsinki is a city with 550 000 inhabitants and located on the north shore of Finnish Bay of the Baltic Sea. Initially, comparison studies against long-term weather station records showed that our regular, but weekly, sampling of observations adequately describe the Helsinki urban heat island. The project covered an entire seasonal cycle over the 12 months from July 2009 to June 2010. The measurements were conducted using a moving platform following microclimatological traditions. Tuesday was selected as the measuring day because it was the only weekday during the one year time span without any public holidays. Once a week, two set of measurements, in total 104, were conducted in the heterogeneous temperature conditions of Helsinki city centre. In the more homogeneous suburban areas, one set of measurements was taken every second week, to give a total of 52.The first set of measurements took place before noon, and the second 12 hours, just prior to midnight. Helsinki Kaisaniemi weather station was chosen as the reference station. This weather station is located in a large park in the city centre of Helsinki. Along the measurement route, 336 fixed points were established, and the monthly air temperature differences to Kaisaniemi were calculated to produce monthly and annual maps. The monthly air temperature differences were interpolated 21.1 km by 18.1 km horizontal grid with 100 metre resolution residual kriging method. The following independent variables for the kriging interpolation method were used: topographical height, portion of sea area, portion of trees, fraction of built-up and not built-up area, volumes of buildings, and population density. The annual mean air temperature difference gives the best representation of the Helsinki urban heat island effect- Due to natural variability of weather conditions during the measurement campaign care must be taken when interpretation the results for the monthly values. The main results of this urban heat island research project are: a) The city centre of Helsinki is warmer than its surroundings, both on a monthly main basis, and for the annual mean, however, there are only a few grid points, 46 out of 38 191, which display a temperature difference of more than 1K. b) If the monthly spatial variation is air temperature differences is small, then usually the temperature difference between the city and the surroundings is also small. c) Isolated large buildings and suburban centres create their own individual heat island. d) The topographical influence on air temperature can generally be neglected for the monthly mean, but can be strong under certain weather conditions.