Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health

, Volume 10, Issue 4, pp 447–455 | Cite as

Towards an improved air quality index



Air quality indices (AQI) are commonly used to indicate the level of severity of air pollution to the public. A number of methods were developed in the past by various researchers/environmental agencies for the calculation of AQI, but there is no universally accepted method, appropriate for all situations. An updated review of the major air quality indices developed worldwide is presented in this paper. These methods differentiate mainly in the number of pollutants included, its sampling period and air quality classes and breakpoints. When applying different AQI to a common case study, important differences are found in terms of the classification of the quality of the air. The purposes of this research are to identify weaknesses of the current AQI and to discuss possible changes and updates with Portugal as case study. A survey, with 10 questions about the calculation and use of the AQI and its dissemination to public, was delivered to the five regional environmental agencies in Portugal and, based on results, modifications to the current AQI are proposed. Two main changes—inclusion of PM2.5 and specific urban/industrial AQI—were tested, comparing the current and the proposed AQI along the 2014 year. It is observed that a significant difference exists when specific urban and industrial sites are considered when calculating the AQI. On the other hand, and contrarily to other regional studies, the results show that the inclusion of fine suspended particulate (PM2.5) does not impact the final AQI value.


Air quality Classification index Public health Communication Legislation 



The authors wish to thank the Portuguese Agency for the Environment and the Regional Coordination and Development Commission (CCDRs) for their support. Also, the authors would like to acknowledge the financial support of FEDER through the COMPETE Programme and the national funds from FCT–Science and Technology Portuguese Foundation for the Ph.D. grant of C. Gama (SFRH/BD/87468/2012). Thanks are also due for the financial support to CESAM (UID/AMB/50017), to FCT/MEC through national funds, and the co-funding by the FEDER, within the PT2020 Partnership Agreement and Compete 2020.


  1. Ahmadi A, Abbaspour M, Arjmandi R, Abedi Z (2015) Air quality risk index (AQRI) and its application for a megacity. Int J Environ Sci Technol 12(12):3773–3780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cairncros EK, John J, Zunckel M (2007) A novel air pollution index based on the relative risk of daily mortality associated with short-term exposure to common air pollutants. Atmos Environ 41:8442–8454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cannistraro G, Ponterio L (2009) Analysis of air quality in the outdoor environment of the city of Messina by an application of the pollution index method. Int J Civ Environ Eng 1:4Google Scholar
  4. Cheng WL, Kuo YC, Lin PL, Chang KH, Chen YS, Lin TM, Huang R (2004) Revised air quality index derived from an entropy function. Atmos Environ 38:383–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cheng W-L, Chen Y-S, Zhang J et al (2007) Comparison of the revised air quality index with the PSI and AQI indices. Sci Total Environ 382(2-3):191–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Doan MH, East C (1977) Proposed air-quality index for urban areas. Water Air Soil Pollut 8(4):441–451Google Scholar
  7. Elshout S, Léger K, Nussio F (2008) Comparing urban air quality in Europe in real time, a review of existing air quality indices and the proposal of a common alternative. Environ Int 34(5):720–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Elshout S, Léger K, Heich H (2014) CAQI common air quality index—update with PM2.5 and sensitivity analysis. Sci Total Environ 488–489:461–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. EEA (Environmental European Agency) (2015) Minutes of the 20th EIONET Workshop on Air Quality Assessment and Management. Ljubljana, Slovenia, 5–6 October. Available at: Accessed Mar 2016.
  10. Fang S, Chen H (1996) Air quality and pollution control in Taiwan. Atmos Environ 30(5):735–741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fann N, Wesson K, Hubbell B (2016) Characterizing the confluence of air pollution risks in the United States. Air Qual Atmosphere Health 9(3):293–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hewings J (2001) Air quality indices: a review., Pollution A report prepared for Environment Canada by Pollution Probe, Available at: Google Scholar
  13. InVS (2008) Programme de surveillance air et santé (PSAS). Analyse des liens à court terme entre pollution atmosphérique urbaine et mortalité dans neuf villes françaises. InVS, Paris, p 41Google Scholar
  14. Kanchan K, Kumar A, Gorai P (2015) A review on air quality indexing system. Asian J Atmos Environ 9–2:101–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Katsouyanni K (2006) APHEA project: air pollution and health: a European approach. Epidemiology 17(6):S19, ISEE/ISEA 2006 Conference Abstracts SupplementCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kowalska M, Osrodka L, Klejnowski K, Zejda JE, Krajny E, Wojtylak M (2009) Air quality index and its significance in environmental health risk communication. Arc Environ Prot 35(1):13–21, ISSN: 0324-8461Google Scholar
  17. Kyrkilis G, Chaloulakou A, Kassomenos PA (2007) Development of an aggregate air quality index for an urban Mediterranean agglomeration: relation to potential health effects. Environ Int 33(5):670–676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Liu CM (2002) Effect of PM2.5 on AQI in Taiwan. Environ Model Softw 17:29–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Longhurst J (2005) 1 to 100: creating an air quality index in Pittsburgh. Environ Monit Assess 106(1-3):27–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mandal TK, Gorai AK (2014) Air quality indices: a literature review. J Environ Sci Eng 56(3):357–362Google Scholar
  21. Monteiro A, Vautard R, Lopes M, Miranda AI, Borrego C (2005) Air pollution forecast in Portugal: a demand from the new air quality framework directive. Int J Environ Pollut 25(2):4–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Monteiro A, Fernandes AP, Gama C, Borrego C, Tchepel O (2015) Assessing the mineral dust from North Africa over Portugal region. Atmos Pollut Res 6:70–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Murena F (2004) Measuring air quality over large urban areas: development and application of an air pollution index at the urban area of Naples. Atmos Environ 38:6195–6202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pyta H (2008) Classification of air quality based on factors of relative risk of mortality increase. Environ Prot Eng 34:111–117Google Scholar
  25. Radojevic M, Hassan H (1999) Air quality in Brunei Darussalam during the 1998 haze episode. Atmos Environ 33(22):3651–3658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Robichaud A, Ménard R, Zaïtseva Y, Anselmo D (2016) Multi-pollutant surface objective analyses and mapping of air quality health index over North America. Air Qual Atmosphere Health. doi: 10.1007/s11869-015-0385-9, in pressGoogle Scholar
  27. Ruggieri M, Plaia A (2012) An aggregate AQI: comparing different standardizations and introducing a variability index. Sci Total Environ 420:263–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Shooter D, Brimblecombe P (2009) Air quality indexing. Int J Environ Pollut 36(1-3):305–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sicard P, Lesne O, Alexandre N, Mangin A, Collomp R (2011) Air quality trends and potential health effects—development of an aggregate risk index. Atmos Environ 45:1145–1153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Stieb DM, Doiron MS, Blagden P et al (2005) Estimating the public health burden attributable to air pollution: an illustration using the development of an alternative air quality index. J Toxicol Environ Health Part A 68(13-14):1275–1288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Stieb DM, Burnett RT, Smith-Doiron M, Brion O, Shin HH, Economou V (2008) A new multi-pollutant, no-threshold air quality health index based on short-term associations observed in daily time-series analyses. J Air Waste Manage Assoc 58:435–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. WHO (2001) Health impact assessment of air pollution in the WHO European region. WHO/Euro product n 876(03):01(50263446)Google Scholar
  33. WHO (2004) Meta-analysis of time-series studies and panel studies of particulate matter (PM) and ozone (O3). WHO task group. WHO/EURO 04/5042688Google Scholar
  34. WHO (2005) Air quality guidelines for particulate matter, ozone, nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide: global update 2005. Summary of risk assessment. World Health Organization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  35. WHO (2006) Preventing disease through healthy environments-towards an estimate of the environmental burden of disease. / Prüss-Üstün A, & Corvalán C. ISBN 92 4 159382 2Google Scholar
  36. WHO (2008) Health risks of ozone from long-range trans boundary air pollution, ISBN 978 92 890 42895 WHO/Euro productGoogle Scholar
  37. WHO (2009) Global health risks: mortality and burden of diseases attributable to selected major risks. World Health Organization, Geneva, Available online at Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CESAM, Department of Environment and PlanningUniversity of AveiroAveiroPortugal

Personalised recommendations