Search

A global, independent scientific assessment of Carbon Dioxide Removal

A global, independent scientific assessment of Carbon Dioxide Removal

Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) plays a central role in scenario pathways that limit global warming in line with the objectives of the Paris Agreement. Yet deliberate policy efforts to incentivise BECCS—whether through amending existing climate policies or introducing entirely new ones—remain rare. In this paper, we contend that BECCS must be incentivised responsibly, through policy-making processes which account for diverse and geographically varying societal values and interests. More specifically, we make the case for responsible incentivisation by undertaking a comparative analysis of stakeholder attitudes to four idealised policy scenarios for BECCS, including representatives of government, business, nongovernmental and academic communities, in the UK and Sweden. The scenarios were: business as usual; international policy reform; national BECCS policy; and national policy for negative emissions technologies. Based on our findings, we recommend that policymakers 1) recognise the need to develop new incentives and make enabling reforms to existing policy instruments; 2) consider the risk of mitigation deterrence in their real world (and not abstracted) contexts; 3) employ multi-instrument approaches to incentivisation that do not overly rely on carbon pricing or 4) force a choice between technology specific or technology neutral policies; and 5) attend to the diversity of stakeholder and wider public perspectives that will ultimately determine the success—or failure—of their policy designs., QC 20210319

In recent years, there has been a growth in scholarship on “nature-based solutions” and “natural climate solutions” to climate change. A variety of actors have argued that these natural solutions—variously involving the protection, conservation, restoration, management, enhancement, or imitation of natural ecosystems—can play a crucial role in both mitigating and adapting to climate change. What is more, by virtue of their label, natural solutions promise to be particularly attractive to the public and policymakers and have received significant media and scholarly attention. But what is natural is also social: people, acting in various social groups, can selectively emphasize or deemphasize certain characteristics of climate solutions to make them seem more or less natural. The framing of particular solutions as “natural” or “unnatural” has far-reaching implications for climate policy, but has thus far been overlooked. Here, we undertake a critical review of the ways in which natural solutions to climate change have been framed and examine the normative and practical implications of this framing. We review what counts (and what does not count) as a natural solution, and find that those labeled natural are routinely framed under technical and social appraisal criteria as being more beneficial, cost effective, mature, and democratic than ostensibly artificial counterparts. And yet we show that, under greater scrutiny, the natural framing obscures the reality that natural solutions can be just as risky, expensive, immature, and technocratic. We conclude by reflecting on the dangers of narrowing the range of solutions considered natural and indeed, of selecting solutions through recourse to “nature” at all. Rather, climate solutions must be evaluated in terms of their specific qualities, against a far broader range of framings. This article is categorized under: Social Status of Climate Change Knowledge > Knowledge and Practice.

In recent years, there has been a growth in scholarship on “nature-based solutions” and “natural climate solutions” to climate change. A variety of actors have argued that these natural solutions—variously involving the protection, conservation, restoration, management, enhancement, or imitation of natural ecosystems—can play a crucial role in both mitigating and adapting to climate change. What is more, by virtue of their label, natural solutions promise to be particularly attractive to the public and policymakers and have received significant media and scholarly attention. But what is natural is also social: people, acting in various social groups, can selectively emphasize or deemphasize certain characteristics of climate solutions to make them seem more or less natural. The framing of particular solutions as “natural” or “unnatural” has far-reaching implications for climate policy, but has thus far been overlooked. Here, we undertake a critical review of the ways in which natural solutions to climate change have been framed and examine the normative and practical implications of this framing. We review what counts (and what does not count) as a natural solution, and find that those labeled natural are routinely framed under technical and social appraisal criteria as being more beneficial, cost effective, mature, and democratic than ostensibly artificial counterparts. And yet we show that, under greater scrutiny, the natural framing obscures the reality that natural solutions can be just as risky, expensive, immature, and technocratic. We conclude by reflecting on the dangers of narrowing the range of solutions considered natural and indeed, of selecting solutions through recourse to “nature” at all. Rather, climate solutions must be evaluated in terms of their specific qualities, against a far broader range of framings. This article is categorized under: Social Status of Climate Change Knowledge > Knowledge and Practice.

Introduction: Since 1992 the Australian Government has funded a periodic national survey of HIV and Sexually Transmissible Infection (STI) knowledge and sexual risk behavior among secondary school students. Adolescents continue to be a priority population in public health efforts to reduce rates of STIs in Australia. The purpose of the survey is to inform progress on national strategic sexual health priorities. The results are used by federal and state/territory government agencies, youth-serving community organizations and health educators to improve knowledge, promote healthy sexual behaviors and target educational efforts aimed at communicating public health messages to young people. Materials and Equipment: The 6th survey entitled the "National Survey of Secondary Students and Adolescent Sexual Health" was conducted online in 2018 among 14-18 year olds living in Australia. The anonymous self-complete survey contained up to 286 items assessing three primary domains of knowledge, behaviors and education experiences. Factual knowledge measures covered HIV transmission and STI knowledge around transmission and prevention covering gonorrhea, Chlamydia, syphilis, hepatitis, herpes, and HPV. Behavioral measures examined perceived susceptibility, peer norms, protective behaviors, age of onset for various behaviors, reasons for not being sexually active yet, and/or sexual histories with additional detail on most recent sexual event. The 6th survey was completed by 8,400 Australian adolescents a represents a broad cross-section by age, gender, year in school, type of school (e.g., government, Catholic), and state/territory which closely matched census data on these strata. The one-of-a-kind survey instrument, grounded in public health theories, may prove valuable for public health researchers. Expected Impact of the Study on Public Health: Findings from the 6th National Survey of Secondary Students and Adolescent Sexual Health will contribute important insights into curre

The effect of WR 149024, an alpha receptor antagonist, on survival following hemorrhage with no volume replacement therapy was investigated. WR 14902 (either 5.0 or 50.0 mg/kg) was administered intraperitoneally to conscious rats during exsanguination. Both WR 149024 treatments caused a significant decrease in survival (p0.021), compared with water-injected controls.

Since the late 1970s, over 140 global environmental assessments (GEAs) have been completed. But are they any longer fit for purpose? Some believe not. Compelling arguments have been advanced for a new assessment paradigm, one more focussed on problem-solving than problem-identification. If translated into new assessment practices, this envisaged paradigm could prevail for the next several decades, just as the current one has since the late 1970s. In this paper, it is contended that the arguments for GEAs 2.0 are, in fact, insufficiently bold. Solutions-orientated assessments, often associated with a ‘policy turn’ by their advocates, are undoubtedly necessary. But without a ‘politics turn’ they will be profoundly insufficient: policy options would be detached from the diverse socio-economic explanations and ‘deep hermeneutics’ of value that ultimately give them meaning, especially given the very high stakes now attached to managing human impacts on a fast-changing planet. Here we make the case for GEAs 3.0, where two paradigmatic steps forward are taken at once rather than just one. The second step involves the introduction of political reasoning and structured normative debate about existential alternatives, a pre-requisite to strategic decision-making and its operational expression. Possible objections to this second step are addressed and rebutted. Even so, the case for politically-overt GEAs faces formidable difficulties of implementation. However, we consider these challenges less a sign of our undue idealism and more an indication of the urgent need to mitigate, if not overcome them. In a world of ‘wicked problems’ we need ‘wicked assessments’ adequate to them, preparatory to so-called ‘clumsy solutions’. This paper is intended to inspire more far-reaching debate about the future of GEAs and, by implication, about the roles social science and the humanities might usefully play in addressing global environmental change.

Since the late 1970s, over 140 global environmental assessments (GEAs) have been completed. But are they any longer fit for purpose? Some believe not. Compelling arguments have been advanced for a new assessment paradigm, one more focussed on problem-solving than problem-identification. If translated into new assessment practices, this envisaged paradigm could prevail for the next several decades, just as the current one has since the late 1970s. In this paper, it is contended that the arguments for GEAs 2.0 are, in fact, insufficiently bold. Solutions-orientated assessments, often associated with a ‘policy turn’ by their advocates, are undoubtedly necessary. But without a ‘politics turn’ they will be profoundly insufficient: policy options would be detached from the diverse socio-economic explanations and ‘deep hermeneutics’ of value that ultimately give them meaning, especially given the very high stakes now attached to managing human impacts on a fast-changing planet. Here we make the case for GEAs 3.0, where two paradigmatic steps forward are taken at once rather than just one. The second step involves the introduction of political reasoning and structured normative debate about existential alternatives, a pre-requisite to strategic decision-making and its operational expression. Possible objections to this second step are addressed and rebutted. Even so, the case for politically-overt GEAs faces formidable difficulties of implementation. However, we consider these challenges less a sign of our undue idealism and more an indication of the urgent need to mitigate, if not overcome them. In a world of ‘wicked problems’ we need ‘wicked assessments’ adequate to them, preparatory to so-called ‘clumsy solutions’. This paper is intended to inspire more far-reaching debate about the future of GEAs and, by implication, about the roles social science and the humanities might usefully play in addressing global environmental change.

Background Pain management is a global priority as the costs to society through health provision and the loss of productivity are significant. It affects approximately one fifth of the population of whom half record chronic pain. Chronic pain is complex, often accompanied by co-morbidities and is difficult to manage. Pain management requires a holistic approach that involves multiple health professionals and pain sufferers working together. There is a requirement for health professionals to understand pain, and how it is best managed so that they can confidently work together and with pain sufferers to support a holistic approach. Increased education relating to pain correlates positively with changes in attitudes to pain, and improves health professionals decision making. However, hours spent engaged in undergraduate pain education is limited and most of the time delivered uniprofessionally. There is a limited understanding of the attitudes and beliefs of undergraduate health professionals to pain management. The aim of this study was to explore attitudes and beliefs to pain management among undergraduate health care students using a short 10 item questionnaire Methods The study sample consisted of students (n=217) from a Faculty of Health and Social Sciences in a University in the UK. After University Ethics approval was obtained students received an invitation email to take part in an online survey. A total of 537 second year students were invited of whom 40% responded by completing a questionnaire from the following programmes; midwifery, nursing, operating department practice, occupational therapy, physiotherapy and paramedic science. Programmes were reviewed to explore current shared learning around pain management. The questionnaire consisted of 10 items with a 6 point Likert scale, divided into 3 factors relating to attitudes and beliefs about; 1 ‘Chronic pain’; 2 ‘Living and working with chronic pain; 3 ‘Sedation and pain relief’. SPSS v23 was used for the

Background Pain management is a key public health problem costing over £10 billion per annum and involves complex multi-professional perspectives in the provision of care. Pain sufferers however often perceive that management of their pain is not effective. Pain sufferers want to be partners in their pain management and to have confidence in the people managing their pain. To achieve a gold standard there needs to be meaningful interprofessional engagement in pain education. . Currently few Higher Education institutions engage in shared pain education between health professions and time spent on content is considered inadequate. Understanding different professional attitudes to pain management, starting at undergraduate level, may provide a basis from which to support the future education of students and promote a more holistic confident approach. There is a requirement to establish students’ attitudes and beliefs in order to focus education resources appropriately. Aim: To show the development and exploration of the validity and reliability of a short questionnaire to assess attitudes and beliefs about pain management in undergraduate professional health programmes. Method: A literature search was undertaken to find attitudes to pain questionnaires for health professionals and seven validated questionnaires were identified. University Ethics approval was obtained. The items from the questionnaires were collated and duplicates removed. These were then reviewed by health professionals for content and face validity using the Delphi method, leaving a total of 30 questions. A total of 537 second year students were invited to participate, 217 completed (40% response rate) from midwifery, nursing, operating department practice, occupational therapy, physiotherapy and paramedic science programmes. A group of 22 students answered the questionnaire twice. Item consistency response was reviewed. Cronbach’s alpha was used to measure internal consistency, factor analysis with v