Questions related to Society and Environment
TB is transmitted through the air. The droplet nuclei generated when a sputum positive pulmonary TB patients coughs, mixes in the air and are carried to a susceptible person in the vicinity or by air currents to longer distances. Sputum Negative TB patients may also contribute in transmission of infection to a smaller extent. Now my concern is that, "Can housefly provides an additional epidemiological link to spread TB infection in the community?"
By our avidity, weaknesses, desires, fears, and ignorance, due to economical models based on over-consumerism, we are creating our misery and the misery of many living beings.
We are so confident, Arrogant and Ignorant that we believe that we can safely regulate the climate of our planet. But since we are Human beings before we recognize our mistake it maybe too late for the many to live and a few would just be happy about living with robot bees, AI, and genetically modified living beings.
For the benefit of the many, what path would you like to choose? Business as usual or proceed an economical, social, and ecological paradigm shift?
As a starting point, in May 2011 the OEDC started measuring successful societies utilizing the-so called 'Better Life Index':
However, it excludes many other successful societies or some quite large countries.Further, its methodology and epistemology can be questionnable and some parameters maybe hidden or don't contribute actively to answer the current question.
Thank you in advance for sharing your experience and expertise.
All your comments are welcome.
Shall is it time to call for an update of the national innovation system concept to the National Innovation Ecosystem?
when reading recent researches on innovation issues, I remarked that the concept of NIS become, in some how, out of date (even it keeps its explanatory power). this is because there are researchers who look to innovation from an ecological point of view and consider its happening as the result of linked ecologies whose aim is to cooperate for promoting innovation and the state of knowledge. therefore, their approximation emerged within a whole system called "Ecosystem". within this ecosystem, the elements of NIS can be reduced to the biotic components ( or according to Andrew Abbott: ecologies): universities, research institutes, industrials, governments. and relations refer to the abiotic items which are considered as input and output of biotic convergence.
Call for Papers - in "Environmental Health Insights" Journal supplement:
We are floating an "Environmental Health Insights" Journal supplement, namely "Waste management (including hazardous waste, illegal dumping, and remediation of existing spells)".
For more details please go through the attachment.
If anyone interested, please send your interests ( Name of authors, Title, and corresponding Author mail Id) to my mail id: email@example.com, and will send the further details about the paper submission.
With best regards,
In the course of my research I found that 1,4,7,10 tetra-pheniltetracene crystals also provides fast singlet exciton fission into two triplet ones with energy about 1,2 eV. Sublimed films of this material have good resistance to oxidation.
Pair of publication were issued in Russian academic journals. Unfortunately I have only printed copies of those publications in Optika I Spectroscopia ( Optics and Spectroscopy) and Doklady Academii Nauk SSSR ( Academy of Sciences -Dokladi).
Do you want to have copies of my papers?
Victor I. Lesin
Me encuentro en el planteamiento de la importancia de este campo de estudio de la ecología para la Ingeniería Ambiental en mi facultad, con lo que pretendo ser conciso y abrir el espacio de aceptación de este conocimiento como un tema disciplinar de la labor como Ingeniero ambiental.
We are working on a project about social norms and it is very interesting to know how and why societies construct social norms? It is curious to know how and why societies construct some progressive norms that lead to transform a society and some regressive norms that push societies backward. Any empirical research and theories behind it will help a lot.
I am looking for opinions, as well as articles, on the relationship between the formation of town/city planning and the formation plural society.
I am interested in developing a international collaboration on developing a sociocultural understanding of personality development. If you are interested in pursuing this through joint funding bids and research please contact me.
As part of a research project on the impact of feeder road development on productive employment I am searching for experiences and recommendation related to roadside planting for environmental mitigation + employment generation.
The ideal approach to curbing pollution would be by quantifying externalities (costs to society and the environment that polluters escape paying) and building externalized costs into operating expenses, as costs of doing business. That would be fair, incentive mitigation, scale antipollution measures to the magnitude of the problem, and provide an automatic control on, say, 80% of the problem (Pareto principle) without regulation. In practice, it is not so simple, because health, environmental, and social costs are always disputed and because the usual ways of returning costs into expenses (like taxes and fees) are strongly resisted and deeply unpopular. Is there a practical way to do this in the real world?
Farming communities in coastal areas of India are in a vulnerable condition and nutritional security in India is a issue. So enrichment of the dietary pattern of the people with low-cost available protein or micronutrients can help in gaining nutritional security. I want to intervene a suitable design for nutria-smart village in coastal India.
When an ocean-going vessel on berth is using high voltage shore power, how to charge the ship? What is the strategy to make the price? If it is too high, there is no attraction to use shore power; if it is too low, the cost-benefit can't make balance.
In economics, the field of behavioural economics has identified fascinating phenomena such as prospect theory. In a similar vein, is there a field within Environmental Science/Studies that looks at the behaviour patterns of humans in, or introduced into, an environment (either built or natural)? Are there similar identifiable but counter-intuitive trends in human-environment interaction? Can anyone point me in the direction of research in this area? Even a tangential connection is appreciated.
Recently, there has been much discussion on so-called predatory journals that post untrue information about their journal on their website. Many claim they are in America and publish in America. But actually, they are either located in Africa or Asia. You will find names of reputable scientists on the list of their editorial board but if you contact any of these editors, there will be total denial. I just fell victim to one and I mailed the so-called editor-in-chief but he confessed not knowing the journal nor anyone affiliated to that journal. This is really bad for young scientists who are being deceived. What can the academic world do to control this?
Isn't the obvious solution and the elephant-in-the-room 'BETTER HUMAN BEINGS'? Shouldn't the focus be on better human beings rather than better technology? Why is it that everyone wants to develop better technology rather than focus on better humanity? Because no one has the answers and no one wants to change themselves? In environmental degradation, is it not obvious that nature can heal itself, if only left alone, and it is we humans who need regulation? Many natural parks managers do just that; seal off the area from human interference to let nature heal and recover. It is classified as 'Strict Nature Reserve"by IUCN. Complacency and inaction are not advocated here, as many have misunderstood, but the shifting of focus from technology to the human being. As technology is no match for human greed, isn't introspection & restraining ourselves more relevant than developing more technology, which caused the mess in the first place, by making it easy for a few to consume more? Since technology is only a short term quick fix which fails after a short time, isn't the real problem our addiction to material consumption & our lack of understanding about human nature? Isn't developing more technology sustaining the addiction instead of correcting it, leading to more complex problems later on, needing more complex technological quick fixes like higher drug dosages, more ground troops & equipment, (along with their debilitating side effects) in the future? Isn't this the vicious addiction circle we are trapped in? As researchers, do we merely buy more time with technology OR go to the very root of the problem, the human being?
A lot of hue and cry is made about climate change and the environment in general. Public and private money is poured into research to study its effects on the environment, sustainability etc. Should we study nature or ourselves?
" Our studies must begin with our selves and not with the heavens. "-Ouspensky
Human activities have been found to have a direct correlation to climate change and its impact on the environment(I=P x A x T, the Ehrlich and Holdren equation), in spite of what some complacent sections say to protect their own self interests.
We hardly know about Human nature. We can scarcely predict human behavior. We need to find out why we think like we do and why we do what we do and why, in spite of all knowledge and wisdom, consume more than what we need, in the form of addictions to consumption and imbalance not only ourselves but also the family, society and environment around us..
Humanity is directly responsible for all the unnatural imbalances occurring on the planet. Yet we refuse to take responsibility and instead focus on climate change, or fool the public exchequer with a 'breakthrough in renewable energy just around the corner'. We scarcely know what drives human beings. If we had known, all the imbalances around us would have had solutions by now, given the amount of money plowed into finding such solutions. Are we blindly groping in the dark of climate change because we don't know the answers to our own nature?
Is it not high time we focus on what makes us human, correct our consumptive behavior and leave nature to take care of climate change? Why focus effort on 'externals' when the problem is 'internal'- 'me'?
Aren't we addicts denying our addiction and blaming everything else but ourselves?
" We are what we think.
All that we are arises with our thoughts.
With our thoughts, we make the world." - Buddha
IMHO, We don't need to save the World. It is enough if we save ourselves from ourselves. The need of the hour is not vain glorious interventions, but self-restraint and self-correction!
The Mind is the Final frontier.
In a world dictated by consumerism, how many of us are willing to adopt a green lifestyle to save what's left of nature and leave this heritage for the future generations? Do we actually realise the importance of the environment and its role in our survival?
Collapse of the marsh ecosystems of southern Iraq after 1991 forced hundreds of thousands of people into urban slums, and led to contamination of the remaining water supply. We will establish three test beds to see whether brackish water returned from oil drilling and refining can be used to construct new salt marshes. These will filter water, provide forage for livestock, create habitat for fish nurseries, and give new economic opportunities.
According to IPCC (2007) climate change effected temperature increase is greater at higher northern latitudes. Net methane emissions from permafrost regions north included 64% from Russia, 11% from Canada and 7% from Alaska (2004). The temperature increases by 4-10oF at 2050 against 2000 may effect agricultural and forestry management, increased health risks, changes in infectious diseases. Do you think that we need a special International Center of GCC and plant stress/pathogens/pests research in Russia, accessable for scientists from other countries? It is not a rhetorical question, we need scientific ground to restore the idea that once gained support from the World Bank and Green Cross Foundation 15 years ago, but has not been fulfilled.
Many approaches are being used for research purposes like observational, experimental and modeling. Which approach among all is most effective and why? Especially for research on climate change and ecosystem services etc. Please also explain each approach with its merits and demerits.
Our conceptualisations of the relationship between nature and human societies have historically shaped the way in which we see the world and our actions towards it. Today there are huge challenges facing our world, mostly from our own activities, which have caused critical conflicts with the natural world we live in.
Does anyone have examples of university level student assessments that could double as deliverable for students to use in marketing their skills? For example, an environmental impact assessment course could have a mock EIS, a GIS course could have a map set, etc.
While those examples have clear "products" that double as assessments, I'm looking to try to integrate something like this for an Environmental History and Ethics Course (upper level undergraduate).
International agreements in responding to climate change continue to get stalled due to fundamental differences found between mitigation and adaptation. Will reclassification of adaptation as improving societal resilience under sustainable development be a viable route to allow a proper focus on climate change mitigation?
Just to rephrase, rather than considering two responses to climate change (mitigation and adaptation), will considering adaptation under sustainability pave way for mitigation to be successful tackled in international agreements?
Monitoring is critical to conservation and natural resource management but there seems to be too little training on how to design monitoring programs and analyze data to support decision making and enhance science inference.
As coordinator of a countywide affordable housing program, my goal is publicly subsidized housing built to a 100-year standard with low-to-zero maintenance, replacement, and energy use. I'd like to hear about recent projects from anywhere in the world that come close to this standard.
I am coordinating the Borneo Futures initiative, a research program focused on generating scientific insights that will result in more optimal use of land, forests, and forest services, and better wildlife (orangutan) protection. We are entering the second phase in which we will focus on translating science into language that can actually be used by our key audiences (policy makers, land use decision makers, communities, businesses, investors, media, and the broader public). I would like to hear where else this has been done successfully in the tropics, where land use decisions rarely follow a logical and transparent process. What were the key processes to influence decision makers? What kind of science was used and how were scientific results communicated? All thoughts and inputs are welcome.
The valorisation of geoheritages is an other view for sustainable development for Madagascar. I know the process but I need a lot of experiences for the realisation . In fact, your help will be welcome. Looking forward your reply.
The development of organizational ecology has been developed on the assumption of density dependence and competition most influencing slection processes. When we walk down the main street, its difficult to spot the populations; i.e. very similar types of firms interacting within a common environment. What seems to be more obvious is that firms as individual entities aim to find solutions to the unique opportunities and problems they confront in THEIR environment.
Local consequences of global climate change are difficult to predict. At the same time, climate is changing with consequences experienced by certain groups of population (e.g., subsistence farmers). This may include invasions of unusual pests, or failure of certain traditional practices. What protocol can be used to document and analyze this new experience?
Chosing to ignore the finality of 'our' research findings may be convenient and even comfortable, but it bypasses the fact that research can have devastating effects.
A case in point is the Manhattan Project which saw many of the very best mathematicians and physicists of the time gather for years in the desert of New Mexico to develop the first operational atomic bomb. Most of the academics recruited on that project worked under the delusion that it would culminate with a simple ‘demonstration’ of technological force in the desert. But a few weeks later, the dropping of the first atomic bomb on a civilian population did put an end to the war and also to the age of innocence (causing a lasting divide between two camps- roughly Robert Oppenheimer vs Edward Teller). Other, more recent examples will be found in medical and genetic research, for instance.
There lies a difficult, troubling question, which tracks a non quantifiable variable - the social consciousness of researchers. Pushing ahead blindly, ‘just for the sake of scientific knowledge, cannot be the answer. But then, where should we call it ‘stop’. Where should we draw the line?
I am interested in comparing levels of interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in various disciplines and epistemic cultures that are engaged in environmental research. I plan to do surveys and I was wondering if there are existing instruments out there that measure an individual's aptitude for or values associated with interdisciplinarity or transdisciplinarity. If not, then I think it would be an excellent opportunity for us to develop one. I plan to survey graduate students and faculty from various disciplines and institutions in North America and Asia, who do some research work related to the environment and sustainable development.
To this provocative question, the Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen replied: “the tragedies that we could not prevent, and the injustices that we could not repair”.
For our respective research sector, how would each of us answer this question, pragmatically? From my personal marine perspective, I suggest: “the global impacts of unregulated overfishing that now threatens the balance of ocean ecosystems, the survival of thousands of species, and food security“.
What do you suggest, speaking for your own research discipline ?
The affect of globalization is evident from the out-of-city increasing developments which are increasing the problems of diminishing land-cover and increasing CO2 emissions excessively, thereby posing threats to sustainability. The surrounding green edges of the city structure are shrinking progressively in an attempt to cater the growing demands of the population for accommodation, recreation, supporting facilities, as a process of urban sprawl. Are there any alternative routes to reaching a sustenance level for these natural forms?
Does the existence of green belts really contribute to prevent the urban sprawl due to aforementioned relationships or merely a form contributing to the conurbation?
There are populations whose growth rates have been decling.What does this have on the environment?What are the positives as well as the negatives?
I am studying the green cover loss due to a highway expansion in India. The tree felling is in large number affects the nearby climate and increases the temperature locally.This greencover loss harms us in many ways.
According to recent events in Japan, do you think we should follow new technologies blindly?
Should new developments that could have a global impact be discussed by an indempendent global agency that would have to find a common sense/agreement ?