MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_01D2F505.27694E20" This document is a Single File Web Page, also known as a Web Archive file. If you are seeing this message, your browser or editor doesn't support Web Archive files. Please download a browser that supports Web Archive, such as Windows¢ç Internet Explorer¢ç. ------=_NextPart_01D2F505.27694E20 Content-Location: file:///C:/2A659234/09_Marchant.htm Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="ks_c_5601-1987" 1st International Conference on Sustainable Lighting and Light Pollution, SLLP 2014

 

Why Lighting Claims Might Well Be W= rong

Paul M= archant1,*

[1]<= /a> 1Visit= ing Fellow in Statistics, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, United Kingdom LS1 3HE

 

 

Received 16 February 2017, Accepted 02 May 2017

Abstract

This paper gives some background to cl= aims of benefit from road lighting and why large beneficial claims may be suspec= t. It places this in the context of general concerns about the unreliability of claims in science using knowledge gained, particularly from investigations = in the field of health-care.

It points to the need to plan, proceed= and check science in unbiased and rigorous ways. It gives recommendations for m= ore transparency, asks for clear protocols to be produced in advance, that clear reports are written which follow appropriate reporting guidelines and that = the data is accessible.

 

Keywords: Scientific claims, Evidence, Bias, Statistical analysis, Public safety, Public lighting<= /p>

1. Introduction

In order to know whether any action is sustainab= le or indeed whether any intervention works, we need good untainted evidence. = We need sufficiently full, unbiased, transparent information. We need to know = what might be wrong with the evidence presented as well as what is good about it= .

The background to this paper is the first part o= f my oral contribution ¡°Does increasing road lighting increase road injuries?¡±= to ALAN2016, Artificial Light At Night, conference, Cluj-Napoca, Romania in September 2016. I spoke on assessing the effect of changing road lighting in two English cities, to white light, on injury road accidents. The work, to = be published, has found nothing like the tens of percent improvement due to new lighting that has been claimed. In fact, the work suggests any reduction in injury accidents, if it exists, is very much smaller; and indeed there is a suggestion of increased harm. It calls into question whether the such a relighting programme represents value for money.

Here I shall go through some issues in the scientific process that may mislead, despite how ¡®scientific¡¯ a claim mig= ht appear.

For example, my two batches of comments appended= to the Cochrane Systematic Review ¡®Street lighting for preventing road traffic injuries¡¯ [1] highlight some seriously problematic issues with that work. = The review, which contained extensive meta-analyses, claimed; ¡°The results from this systematic review suggest that street lighting may prevent road traffic crashes, injuries and fatalities¡±. The ¡®Plain Language Summary¡¯ and podc= asts are more positive about lighting benefit. The review cautioned against the policy, widespread in the UK, of reducing street lighting at night. My crit= ical comments on the other hand said that nothing could be claimed because the review was inherently seriously flawed. Perhaps the points made there expla= in why the ¡®LANTERNS project¡¯ to determine the eff= ect of reduced street lighting on road casualties and crime in England and Wale= s, found no detriment from implementing road lighting reductions despite invol= ving a large dataset from 62 local authorities [2].  

2. The wider background<= /o:p>

There is currently much concern about dubious and irreproducible claims made in science. Much of this examination and soul searching has taken place in the area of health-care, as in a one page Lanc= et editorial [3] which outlines problems discussed at a conference on the issu= e. As an outcome the Academy of Medical Sciences produced a number of document= s, of varying length and detail, attempting to address the problems identified [4].

Concerns about the reproducibility and reliabili= ty of scientific claims have reached the public media, such as BBC Radio4 [5, = 6] and the Economist magazine [7]. In January 2017, the United Kingdom (UK) Parliament, House of Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology launched an inquiry into research integrity to try to address the issue.

3. Transparency about Potenti= al Conflicts of Interest.

It is important that full disclosure of potential conflicts of interest is given in any scientific report. =

What I see to be my own potential conflicts of interest are:

 

The fact I am a lighting sceptic in that I have never seen good evidence that new road lighting enhances public safety from crime or traffic accidents ¡¦ (The evidence seen is not robust against a number of threats to scientific validity, which I have written about).

I have an interest in astronomy and I decided to look into the matter of the claimed benefits of lighting, years ago, because light pollut= ion spoils astronomy.

However I don¡¯t have financial interests.

 =

I have long been sceptical of claims of lighting benefiting public safety [8-14] so I am clear that I do have an additional potential conflict of interest as it is often painful change one¡¯s mind. <= o:p>

However, money would seem to be a major source of bias in research, whether that is through direct financial gain, or through potential gain, for example via a potential job promotion or securing repeat business for providing pleasing results to the paymaster.=

The matter of investigating the specific case of lighting, including issues around lack of transparency, is given in [12] &a= mp; [15].

4. Publication Bias

A huge problem is the fact that not all results = are published so that the evidence available is only a subset of all the investigations that were done. This issue of ¡®publication bias¡¯ is known = to be still a major problem in the area of health-care. It should be remembered t= hat health-care research is regulated. For example, before a clinical trial tak= es place a detailed protocol is produced for approval, in advance of collecting any data. It should also be publicly registered so that there is a record of it, which helps to ensure that trials can be followed-up and do not disappear f= rom the scientific record.

The question must therefore arise, ¡°How much bi= gger is the problem in an unregulated research-area, such as investigating the effects of lighting?¡± It would seem unlikely that the problem would be sma= ller and indeed it would seem likely that it might be considerably larger.<= /o:p>

The Cochrane Handbook [16] produced by the Cochr= ane Collaboration, which organises systematic reviews of treatments in health-c= are, has material on the subject of ¡®bias¡¯. Bias is the statistical term for assessments homing in on the wrong answer, because of systematic, as oppose= d to random, errors. The searchable online Handbook is a useful reference for the issue of what makes reliable science.

A major problem is that there is a strong possibility that studies ¡®go missing¡¯ or publishing occurs very late beca= use of their ¡®uninteresting¡¯ or ¡®unwelcome¡¯ findings. Such absence may be asso= ciated with the funder. The Handbook gives evidence for this.

That publication bias remains a problem in the regulated world of clinical trials is recognised by the United Nations in t= he report of the United Nations Secretary-General¡¯s High-level Panel on acces= s to Medicines [17]. The recommendations section (4.3.5) concerning clinical tri= als on page 37 of the report are:

Governments should require that the unidentified data on all completed and discontinued clinical trials be made publicly available in an easily searchable public register established and operated by existing mechanisms such as the WHO Clinical Trials Registry Platform, clinicaltrial= s.gov or in peer reviewed publications, regardless of whether their results are positive, negative, neutral or inconclusive.

To facilitate open collaboration, reconstruction and reinvestiga= tion of failures, governments should require that study designs and protocols, d= ata sets, test results and anonymity-protected patient data be available to the public in a timely and accessible fashion. Those undertaking clinical trials must not prevent researchers from publishing their findings.

 =

An example highlighting the deficiency is the critical report [18] of the UK House of Commons Public Accounts Committee on its investigation into the transparency and completeness of the evidence on which hundreds of millions of UK-pounds had been spent on an anti-influenza drug.

It was to ensure that full disclosure applies to clinical trials that the AllTrials campaign [19] was set up under the banner ¡®All Trials Registered, All Results Reported¡¯.

Publication bias seems likely to be large in pol= icy ¡®trials¡¯, especially when something routine like lighting is introduced a= nd there is no registration or protocol in advance. It is not even clear that = all such studies are done as experiments. It may only be after implementation t= hat it is decided to prepare a report; once an indication of the result becomes available. A public registry of protocols of planned research would be a valuable contribution to making research on lighting more reliable. Note too that the Cochrane Handbook is critical of Non-Randomised Studies (NRS). The= se are the kind of studies routinely used to make claims about lighting benefit.

The protocol history for the Beyer and Ker work itself [1] is given on page 56 of the review but there is no mention of the= re being any protocols of the included studies, despite the critical feedback raising the issue of protocols.

The LANTERNS project [2] has its required protoc= ol available on the website of its funder, the National Institute of Health Research, Public Health Research, See [20]. The full report of the project,= Perkins et al [21], is available there for examination also.

5. Statistical Issues

It must be remembered that it is not very diffic= ult to get a result out of a piece of statistical software. The difficult thing= is to make sure that a result properly addresses a real world problem, and does not arrive at a wrong conclusion and thereby promote a false solution.=

In any study through time, there is a need to account for the underlying temporal change, because it is important not to confuse the change which would happen due to the passage of time with that = of the effect of the intervention. Therefore an adequate control needs to be u= sed.

When making a comparison of bright road lighting with dim road lighting, it is important to ensure that the comparison made = is fair and ¡®like is being compared with like¡¯. The beauty of the Randomised Cont= rol Trial (RCT) is, that because of the random allocation of individual units to the treatments being compared, the treatment groups are statistically equivalent at the start. Therefore, any departure from statistical equivale= nce detected at the end point of the trial indicates that there has been a difference of effect of treatments.

Beyer and Ker [1] set inclusion criteria for the= ir Cochrane Review. Studies were searched for as described in the review repor= t. The search identified 1308 relevant studies, out of which 17 met the inclus= ion criteria. These were all controlled before after studies; no RCTs were foun= d. The characteristics of studies are given in the report.

In observational studies, i.e. those without randomisation, there may be important initial differences between the groups being compared which may lead to a wrong conclusion.

Regression towards the Mean (RTM), also known as Regression to the Mean and originally called Regression to Mediocrity when = it was first discover by Francis Galton, is one source leading to a biased estimate of effect in studies [22]. It would be wrong to run a ¡®controlled= ¡¯ before and after study to estimate the effect of increased lighting if this compared areas with a higher crime-rate and given an increase in lighting w= ith other ¡®control¡¯ areas with lower crime rates and unchanging lighting. The biasing effect of RTM increases with the size of starting difference between the groups being compared. It is also greater in a situation where the correlation between the baseline and outcome measurements is weaker and it depends on the form of the bivariate distribution. The likely size of the biasing effect may be estimated [23].

It is worth noting that the website ¡®Understand= ing Uncertainty¡¯ [24] of the team associated with David Spiegelhalter (FRS, Professor of Public Understanding of Risk), independently also criticises w= ork [1] on the basis of RTM and potential publication bias. <= /p>

It should be remembered that basic statistical theory develops from the assumption that observations of a random variable = are independent and identically distributed (IID). That is the observations on a given variable come from the same probability distribution and that each ¡®realisation¡¯ of it is unaffected by any other ¡®draw¡¯. However, in rega= rd to that last assumption of independence, in the real world what happens before= may influence what happens later; that is the observations may be clustered [8]. For a positive association this will increase the variance of an estimate (= and is therefore said to be over-dispersed). This is essentially because the non-independence reduces the effective sample size. The issue of over-dispersion is likely to be influential in studies of crime, as crime is clustered within criminals due to repeat offending, and not important in the occurrence of road collisions as these are more likely to occur in an independent fashion. As stated, criminal behaviour is not independent but clustered, causing higher variability than independence would predict. This= is because any criminal may have prolific activity. Therefore, such a person starting and stopping criminal activity will give marked fluctuations in the number of crimes committed. The clustering relates to the fact that the cri= mes are clustered within each criminal. (The count of crimes in a given area and period will be the sum of all such activity). Contrast this with the situat= ion of repeatedly counting, in a fixed time period, the products of radioactive decay of a piece of long-lived radioactive material. Each radioactive nucle= us neither knows nor cares about decaying, it just has the same probability of decaying in each time period. This leads to the counts forming a Poisson distribution. This has defined properties, all characterised simply by its mean.

A further issue is that if the desire is to comb= ine the results of different studies, as in a meta-analysis, it is necessary to ascribe study weights, which determine the magnitude of the contribution th= at a study gives to the pooled result. These weights are inversely proportional = to the variance, which measures the uncertainty around each study¡¯s estimate = of effect, and the over-dispersion may well be different, and indeed not well-= known, in different studies. This will give rise to additional uncertainty in the pooled estimate of effect.

6. Post-Implementation Surveillance.

There is a need to evaluate what actually has happened after a policy has been implemented. In clinical research this practise is given the name ¡®Phase IV trial¡¯ in which, after a treatment h= as been approved and it is in routine use, its long-term effects are studied o= ver a lengthy period. By this means rare, important side effects can be picked = up, as well as seeing how effective the treatment is in routine use.=

In my view there ought to be a requirement to ch= eck results as a matter of routine for all public policy implementations. Note = the ¡®roll out¡¯ of the policy should be designed so as to make its evaluation,= after implementation, straightforward, with the criteria set in advance. The proc= ess should be supervised by independent statisticians and scientists. Again unintended effects of the policy might be picked up. As with all science, transparency is important and so open access to data must be required here = too. Such checking ought always to be done after large sums of money have been spent, as for example on implementing new road lighting. It is important to know whether the money spent has produced the effects in terms of public sa= fety that it was supposed to. Perhaps the large sums of public money spent on ro= ad lighting could have been differently and better used in the pursuit of enhancing public safety, without the environmental impact of more artificial light. High quality checking can be done at a small fraction of the cost of= the policy implementation.

The LANTERNS project for investigating the effec= t of lighting reduction was funded, possibly due to a strong belief that road lighting is essential to public safety. Therefore, if the belief is true a reduction in lighting would be expected to have a negative effect on safety; yet no such effect was found.

In contrast to LANTERNS, as yet no project has b= een set up specifically to evaluate the wide implementation of new road lightin= g in the UK to see whether it has fulfilled the expectations promised. Such an evaluation might consider the issue of ¡®value for money¡¯ using the eviden= ce it obtained.

 

7. Science and Society

There is a big difference between true science a= nd public relations:

   Science: Get as close as possible to truths about the world. (A balanced process)

   Public Relations: Promote a position in the most favourable way. (A selective proc= ess)

 

It is concerning that academic research seems to= be getting more public relations minded.

We need to avoid what Nobel laureate physicist Richard Feynman called ¡®Cargo Cult Science¡¯ [27] by for example trying ¡°= to give all of the information to help others to judge the value of your contributi= on; not just the information that leads to judgment in one particular direction= or another¡±.

A cultural shift is needed towards thinking what might reasonably be wrong with research as opposed to blindly accepting the frenzied generation of more research findings of dubious correctness. We ne= ed to value the quality of the scientific basis of a study, rather than whethe= r it gives an impressive result which may be erroneous.

There is concern that the current academic system encourages the thriving of bad science at the expense of the good by a proc= ess of natural selection [28]. There are some suggestions of how to improve mat= ters [29]. Concerns about dubious claims are not that new [30].

Francis Bacon more than 400 years ago wrote [31]= of the practice that those making claims present them in a way that might best believed, and those receiving them are not sufficiently diligent in their scrutiny.

¡°For as knowledges are now delivered, there is a = kind of contract of error between the deliverer and the receiver. For he that delivereth knowledge desireth to deliver it in such form as may be best believed, and not as may be best examined; and he that receiveth knowledge desireth rather present satisfaction than expectant inquiry; and so rather = not to doubt, than not to err: glory making the author not to lay open his weakness, and sloth making the disciple not to know his strength.¡±.

8. Conclusion

Much has become clear about the ways that science can produce incorrect answers. There are some safeguards against this probl= em in place in some areas of study. However, the problems causing erroneous results need to be more generally known. Measures to combat these faults ne= ed to be extended to other areas of study, including research on lighting, as outlined above. Doing this should help maintain a good reputation for scien= ce and scientists.

The ultimate safeguard against policies that do = not do what they are supposed to is that everyone understands and becomes more aware of the issues and is critical of any poor work done; especially that = done in the public¡¯s name and expense.

References<= /b>

[1] Beyer, F. R., & Ker, K. (2009). Street lighting for preventing road tra= ffic injuries. The Cochrane Library.

[2] Steinbach, R., Perkins, C., Tompson, L., Johnson, S., Armstrong, B., Green,= J., Edwards, P. et al. (2015). The effect of reduced street lighting on road casualties and crime in England and Wales: controlled interrupted time seri= es analysis. Journal of epidemiology and community health, jech-2015.

[3] Horton, R. (2015). Offline: What is medicine¡¯s 5 sigma. The Lancet, 385(99= 76), 1380. Available from: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(15)60696-1/f= ulltext?rss%3Dyes.

[4] Academy of Medical Sciences. Reproducibility and reliability of biomedical research. [Internet]. Acmedsci.ac.uk. 2016 (cited 8 December 2016). Availab= le from: http://www.acmedsci.ac.uk/policy/policy-projects/reproducibility-and-reliab= ility-of-biomedical-research/.

[5] Saving Science from the Scientists - - BBC Radio 4 (cited 8 December 2016). Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0742nzq/episodes/player. <= o:p>

[6] Science Betrayed - - BBC Radio 4 (cited 8 December 2016). Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/ programmes/b00znb98/episodes/player.

[7] The Economist. Trouble at the lab (cited 8 December 2016); Available from: http://www.economist.com/ news/briefing/21588057-scientists-think-science-self-correcting-alarming-de= gree-it-not-trouble.

[8] Marchant, P. R. (2004). A demonstration that the claim that brighter lighti= ng reduces crime is unfounded. British Journal of Criminology, 44(3), 441-447.=

[9] Marchant, P. (2005). Evaluating areawide crimereduction measures. Significance, 2(2), 62-65.<= o:p>

[10] Marchant, P. (2005). Shining a light on evidence-based policy: street light= ing and crime.

[11] Marchant, P. (2005). What works? A critical note on the evaluation of crime reduction initiatives. Crime Prevention & Community Safety, 7(2), 7-13.=

[12] Marchant, P. (2006). Investigating whether a crime reduction measure works. Radical Statistics, 91, 41. Available from: http://www.radstats.org.uk/no091/Marchant91.pdf.

[13] Marchant, P. (2010). What is the contribution of street lighting to keeping= us safe? An investigation into a policy. Radical Statistics, 102, 32-42. Avail= able from: http://www.radstats.org.uk/no102/Marchant102.pdf. <= /p>

[14] Marchant, P. R. (2010). Have new street lighting schemes reduced crime in London. Radical Statistics, 104, 32-42. Available from: http://www.radstats.org.uk/no104/Marchant2_104.pdf.

[15] Private Eye. (2005). Conflicts of Interest: Let there be light.1142.28.

[16] Higgins, J. P., & Green, S. (Eds.). (2011). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions (Vol. 4). John Wiley & Sons. Availa= ble from: http://handbook.cochrane.org.

[17] Wilkins, H. (2006). United Nations Secretary-General's High Level Panel on System Wide Coherence and the environment: incremental change or UN reform?. International journal of global environmental issues, 6(4), 285-300. Availa= ble from: http://www.politico.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/HLP-Report-FINAL-Se= pt-2016.pdf. 

[18] ACCOUNTS, P. (2013). Access to clinical trial information and the stockpili= ng of Tamiflu. Available from: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmselect/cmpubacc/295/295= 02.htm. 

[19] AllTrials (cited 8 December 2016). Available from: http://www.alltrials.net= ./

[20] Perkins, C., Steinbach, R., Tompson, L., Green, J., Johnson, S., Grundy, C., Edwards, P. et al. (2015). What is the effect of reduced street lighting on crime and road traffic injuries at night? A mixed-methods study. Available from:  https://www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/phr/11300402/#/. 

[21] Perkins, C., Steinbach, R., Tompson, L., Green, J., Johnson, S., Grundy, C., Edwards, P. et al. (2015). What is the effect of reduced street lighting on crime and road traffic injuries at night? A mixed-methods study. Available from: https://www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/phr/phr03110#/full-report.

[22] Marchant, P.R. (2008).Regression towards the Mean. In: Darity WA (ed.) International Encyclopaedia of Social Sciences. 2nd Edition Thomson Gale. 141-143.

[23] Baxter, P.D., Marchant, P.R. (2010). The cross product ratio in the bivaria= te log normal distribution and gamma distribution, with an application to non-randomised trials, Journal of Applied Statistics, 37(4), 529-536.<= /o:p>

[24] Understanding Uncertainty. Does street lighting really reduce fatal road crashes by 2/3? (cited 8 December 2016).Available from: http://understandinguncertainty.org/node/231.

[25] Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (cited 8 December 2016). Available from: www.equator-network.org.

[26] Moher, D., Altman, D.G. (2015) Four Proposals to Help Improve the Medical Research Literature. PLoS Medicine,12(9), e1001864. Available from: http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=3D10.1371/journal. pmed.10= 01864.

[27] Feynman, R. Cargo Cult Science: Some remarks on science, pseudoscience, and learning how to not fool yourself. Caltech¡¯s 1974 commencement address. (c= ited 8 December 2016). Available from: http://calteches. library.caltech.edu/51/2/CargoCult.htm.&nb= sp;

[28] Smaldino, P. E., & McElreath, R. (2016). The natural selection of bad science. Royal Society Open Science, 3(9), 160384.

[29] Ioannidis, J. P. (2014). How to make more published research true. PLoS Med, 11(10), e1001747.

[30] Altman, D. G. (1994). The scandal of poor medical research. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 308(6924), 283.

[31] Bacon, F. (1885). The advancement of learning. Clarendon Press. Available from:  www.gutenberg.org/files/5500/5500-h/5500-h.htm.<= /p>



* Marchant P, E-mail address: p.marchant@leedsbeckett.ac.uk

------=_NextPart_01D2F505.27694E20 Content-Location: file:///C:/2A659234/09_Marchant_files/item0001.xml Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/xml ------=_NextPart_01D2F505.27694E20 Content-Location: file:///C:/2A659234/09_Marchant_files/props002.xml Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/xml ------=_NextPart_01D2F505.27694E20 Content-Location: file:///C:/2A659234/09_Marchant_files/themedata.thmx Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Type: application/vnd.ms-officetheme UEsDBBQABgAIAAAAIQDp3g+//wAAABwCAAATAAAAW0NvbnRlbnRfVHlwZXNdLnhtbKyRy07DMBBF 90j8g+UtSpyyQAgl6YLHjseifMDImSQWydiyp1X790zSVEKoIBZsLNkz954743K9Hwe1w5icp0qv 8kIrJOsbR12l3zdP2a1WiYEaGDxhpQ+Y9Lq+vCg3h4BJiZpSpXvmcGdMsj2OkHIfkKTS+jgCyzV2 JoD9gA7NdVHcGOuJkTjjyUPX5QO2sB1YPe7l+Zgk4pC0uj82TqxKQwiDs8CS1Oyo+UbJFkIuyrkn 9S6kK4mhzVnCVPkZsOheZTXRNajeIPILjBLDsAyJX89nIBkt5r87nons29ZZbLzdjrKOfDZezE7B /xRg9T/oE9PMf1t/AgAA//8DAFBLAwQUAAYACAAAACEApdan58AAAAA2AQAACwAAAF9yZWxzLy5y ZWxzhI/PasMwDIfvhb2D0X1R0sMYJXYvpZBDL6N9AOEof2giG9sb69tPxwYKuwiEpO/3qT3+rov5 4ZTnIBaaqgbD4kM/y2jhdj2/f4LJhaSnJQhbeHCGo3vbtV+8UNGjPM0xG6VItjCVEg+I2U+8Uq5C ZNHJENJKRds0YiR/p5FxX9cfmJ4Z4DZM0/UWUtc3YK6PqMn/s8MwzJ5PwX+vLOVFBG43lExp5GKh qC/jU72QqGWq1B7Qtbj51v0BAAD//wMAUEsDBBQABgAIAAAAIQBreZYWgwAAAIoAAAAcAAAAdGhl bWUvdGhlbWUvdGhlbWVNYW5hZ2VyLnhtbAzMTQrDIBBA4X2hd5DZN2O7KEVissuuu/YAQ5waQceg 0p/b1+XjgzfO3xTVm0sNWSycBw2KZc0uiLfwfCynG6jaSBzFLGzhxxXm6XgYybSNE99JyHNRfSPV kIWttd0g1rUr1SHvLN1euSRqPYtHV+jT9yniResrJgoCOP0BAAD//wMAUEsDBBQABgAIAAAAIQCW ta3ilgYAAFAbAAAWAAAAdGhlbWUvdGhlbWUvdGhlbWUxLnhtbOxZT2/bNhS/D9h3IHRvYyd2Ggd1 itixmy1NG8Ruhx5piZbYUKJA0kl9G9rjgAHDumGHFdhth2FbgRbYpfs02TpsHdCvsEdSksVYXpI2 2IqtPiQS+eP7/x4fqavX7scMHRIhKU/aXv1yzUMk8XlAk7Dt3R72L615SCqcBJjxhLS9KZHetY33 37uK11VEYoJgfSLXcduLlErXl5akD8NYXuYpSWBuzEWMFbyKcCkQ+AjoxmxpuVZbXYoxTTyU4BjI 3hqPqU/QUJP0NnLiPQaviZJ6wGdioEkTZ4XBBgd1jZBT2WUCHWLW9oBPwI+G5L7yEMNSwUTbq5mf t7RxdQmvZ4uYWrC2tK5vftm6bEFwsGx4inBUMK33G60rWwV9A2BqHtfr9bq9ekHPALDvg6ZWljLN Rn+t3slplkD2cZ52t9asNVx8if7KnMytTqfTbGWyWKIGZB8bc/i12mpjc9nBG5DFN+fwjc5mt7vq 4A3I4lfn8P0rrdWGizegiNHkYA6tHdrvZ9QLyJiz7Ur4GsDXahl8hoJoKKJLsxjzRC2KtRjf46IP AA1kWNEEqWlKxtiHKO7ieCQo1gzwOsGlGTvky7khzQtJX9BUtb0PUwwZMaP36vn3r54/RccPnh0/ +On44cPjBz9aQs6qbZyE5VUvv/3sz8cfoz+efvPy0RfVeFnG//rDJ7/8/Hk1ENJnJs6LL5/89uzJ i68+/f27RxXwTYFHZfiQxkSim+QI7fMYFDNWcSUnI3G+FcMI0/KKzSSUOMGaSwX9nooc9M0pZpl3 HDk6xLXgHQHlowp4fXLPEXgQiYmiFZx3otgB7nLOOlxUWmFH8yqZeThJwmrmYlLG7WN8WMW7ixPH v71JCnUzD0tH8W5EHDH3GE4UDklCFNJz/ICQCu3uUurYdZf6gks+VuguRR1MK00ypCMnmmaLtmkM fplW6Qz+dmyzewd1OKvSeoscukjICswqhB8S5pjxOp4oHFeRHOKYlQ1+A6uoSsjBVPhlXE8q8HRI GEe9gEhZteaWAH1LTt/BULEq3b7LprGLFIoeVNG8gTkvI7f4QTfCcVqFHdAkKmM/kAcQohjtcVUF 3+Vuhuh38ANOFrr7DiWOu0+vBrdp6Ig0CxA9MxHal1CqnQoc0+TvyjGjUI9tDFxcOYYC+OLrxxWR 9bYW4k3Yk6oyYftE+V2EO1l0u1wE9O2vuVt4kuwRCPP5jeddyX1Xcr3/fMldlM9nLbSz2gplV/cN tik2LXK8sEMeU8YGasrIDWmaZAn7RNCHQb3OnA5JcWJKI3jM6rqDCwU2a5Dg6iOqokGEU2iw654m EsqMdChRyiUc7MxwJW2NhyZd2WNhUx8YbD2QWO3ywA6v6OH8XFCQMbtNaA6fOaMVTeCszFauZERB 7ddhVtdCnZlb3YhmSp3DrVAZfDivGgwW1oQGBEHbAlZehfO5Zg0HE8xIoO1u997cLcYLF+kiGeGA ZD7Ses/7qG6clMeKuQmA2KnwkT7knWK1EreWJvsG3M7ipDK7xgJ2uffexEt5BM+8pPP2RDqypJyc LEFHba/VXG56yMdp2xvDmRYe4xS8LnXPh1kIF0O+EjbsT01mk+Uzb7ZyxdwkqMM1hbX7nMJOHUiF VFtYRjY0zFQWAizRnKz8y00w60UpYCP9NaRYWYNg+NekADu6riXjMfFV2dmlEW07+5qVUj5RRAyi 4AiN2ETsY3C/DlXQJ6ASriZMRdAvcI+mrW2m3OKcJV359srg7DhmaYSzcqtTNM9kCzd5XMhg3kri gW6Vshvlzq+KSfkLUqUcxv8zVfR+AjcFK4H2gA/XuAIjna9tjwsVcahCaUT9voDGwdQOiBa4i4Vp CCq4TDb/BTnU/23OWRomreHAp/ZpiASF/UhFgpA9KEsm+k4hVs/2LkuSZYRMRJXElakVe0QOCRvq Griq93YPRRDqpppkZcDgTsaf+55l0CjUTU4535waUuy9Ngf+6c7HJjMo5dZh09Dk9i9ErNhV7Xqz PN97y4roiVmb1cizApiVtoJWlvavKcI5t1pbseY0Xm7mwoEX5zWGwaIhSuG+B+k/sP9R4TP7ZUJv qEO+D7UVwYcGTQzCBqL6km08kC6QdnAEjZMdtMGkSVnTZq2Ttlq+WV9wp1vwPWFsLdlZ/H1OYxfN mcvOycWLNHZmYcfWdmyhqcGzJ1MUhsb5QcY4xnzSKn914qN74OgtuN+fMCVNMME3JYGh9RyYPIDk txzN0o2/AAAA//8DAFBLAwQUAAYACAAAACEADdGQn7YAAAAbAQAAJwAAAHRoZW1lL3RoZW1lL19y ZWxzL3RoZW1lTWFuYWdlci54bWwucmVsc4SPTQrCMBSE94J3CG9v07oQkSbdiNCt1AOE5DUNNj8k UeztDa4sCC6HYb6ZabuXnckTYzLeMWiqGgg66ZVxmsFtuOyOQFIWTonZO2SwYIKObzftFWeRSyhN JiRSKC4xmHIOJ0qTnNCKVPmArjijj1bkIqOmQci70Ej3dX2g8ZsBfMUkvWIQe9UAGZZQmv+z/Tga iWcvHxZd/lFBc9mFBSiixszgI5uqTATKW7q6xN8AAAD//wMAUEsBAi0AFAAGAAgAAAAhAOneD7// AAAAHAIAABMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAFtDb250ZW50X1R5cGVzXS54bWxQSwECLQAUAAYACAAA ACEApdan58AAAAA2AQAACwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAwAQAAX3JlbHMvLnJlbHNQSwECLQAUAAYACAAA ACEAa3mWFoMAAACKAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZAgAAdGhlbWUvdGhlbWUvdGhlbWVNYW5hZ2Vy LnhtbFBLAQItABQABgAIAAAAIQCWta3ilgYAAFAbAAAWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANYCAAB0aGVtZS90 aGVtZS90aGVtZTEueG1sUEsBAi0AFAAGAAgAAAAhAA3RkJ+2AAAAGwEAACcAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA oAkAAHRoZW1lL3RoZW1lL19yZWxzL3RoZW1lTWFuYWdlci54bWwucmVsc1BLBQYAAAAABQAFAF0B AACbCgAAAAA= ------=_NextPart_01D2F505.27694E20 Content-Location: file:///C:/2A659234/09_Marchant_files/colorschememapping.xml Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/xml ------=_NextPart_01D2F505.27694E20 Content-Location: file:///C:/2A659234/09_Marchant_files/header.htm Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="ks_c_5601-1987"





P. Marchant /International Journal of Sustainable Lighting 20 (2017) 69-74

 

69<= /p>

 

------=_NextPart_01D2F505.27694E20 Content-Location: file:///C:/2A659234/09_Marchant_files/filelist.xml Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/xml; charset="utf-8" ------=_NextPart_01D2F505.27694E20--