Search

"Wicked problems" are complex to understand and challenging to teach. Our experience of teaching about environmental concerns in Aotearoa New Zealand suggests how these concepts are taught is more important for student learning than the nature of wicked problems themselves. By offering opportunities for students to co-develop their own situated knowledges about wicked problems, they can conceptualise and tackle them more effectively at their own pace and in their own experiential contexts. Here we identify and discuss approaches to teaching and learning that can be effectively applied to any wicked problem. We demonstrate a hopeful way to teach and learn about unwieldy and overwhelming issues that many of today's undergraduates will inevitably be expected to confront in the future. This paper provides a framework to engage students in a course, and tools for engendering active participation in situated and tangible learning experiences when teaching wicked problems. As lecturers teaching in a School of Environment in the disciplinary areas of geography, environmental science, science communication, and sustainability, we discuss the value and applications of these ideas across three levels of undergraduate teaching. We identify challenges that we have experienced and show how it is possible to turn these challenges into opportunities.

Information on the occurrence of PFAS in aquatic matrices of countries with no PFAS manufacturing, e.g., New Zealand, is limited. Also, the fingerprint of PFAS along an urban water cycle, following water path from wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) effluent to treated drinking water has not been widely assessed. Hence, 38 long-, short-, ultrashort-chain PFAS and fluorinated alternatives (including precursors) were monitored in this study by collecting composite samples from two urban WWTPs of New Zealand and grab samples from the water bodies receiving the WWTPs' effluents and a drinking water treatment plant, whose source water received the effluent of one of the studied WWTPs. ∑PFAS at concentrations 0.1 – 13 ng/L were detected in all wastewater samples, including influents and different treatment stages of the two WWTPs (WW1 and WW2). The fate of most PFAS was similar in the two WWTPs, despite large differences in WWTPs' PFAS loads in the influents, serving populations (1.6 vs 0.16 million), total capacities (300 vs 54 million liters per day), and designs (aerobic and anoxic secondary treatment vs aerobic only). The fate of PFAS in WWTPs appeared to be driven by a range of processes. For instance, a simultaneous increase (41.6%) in short-chain perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA) concentrations and decrease (49.7%) in precursor 6:2 fluorotelomer sulfonate (6:2 FTS) concentrations after secondary biological treatment suggested possible transformation of 6:2 FTS into PFHxA during the treatment. In contrast, the reason behind an average decrease of 35% in ultrashort-chain perfluoropropionic acid (PFPrA) concentrations after treatment was unclear, and further studies are recommended. The concentrations of a linear isomer of long-chain perfluorosulfonic acid (PFOS-L) decreased (48%) in the effluent, possibly due to its partitioning to sludge. Although the concentrations of PFAS in coastal waters suggested that the WW1 effluent is a potential source of PFAS, earlier dispersion model and no detection of PFAS in the receiving waters of WW2 implied that other sources, such as septic systems, peripheral industries, and the airport, could also be contributing to PFAS in coastal waters. The source of ultrashort-chain PFPrA (5.5 ng/L) detected in the treated drinking water produced from that river was unclear. The monitoring results confirm incomplete removal of PFAS in WWTPs, indicate a possible transformation of unknown precursors present in wastewater into short-chain perfluoroalkylcarboxylic acids (PFCAs) during biological treatment, and reveal a possible accumulation of perfluoroalkylsulfonic acids (PFSAs) in the sludge, overall suggesting the circulation of PFAS in urban water systems. [Display omitted] • Long-, short- and ultrashort-chain PFAS detected in two urban WWTPs of New Zealand. • Ultrashort-chain PFPrA detected in treated drinking water. • A combination of sources contributed to PFAS detected in coastal waters. • 6:2 FTS could transform to short-chain PFHxA during secondary biological treatment. • Partitioning of long-chain PFOS to sludge could explain its presence in biosolids. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE), wastewater loads are commonly reported as a per capita value. Census population counts are often used to obtain a population size to normalise wastewater loads. However, the methods used to calculate the population size of wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) from census data are rarely reported in the WBE literature. This is problematic because the geographical extents of wastewater catchments and census area units rarely align perfectly with each other and exist at different spatial scales. This complicates efforts to estimate the number of people serviced by WWTPs in these census area units. This study compared four geospatial methods to combine wastewater catchment areas and census area units to calculate the census population size of wastewater treatment plants. These methods were applied nationally to WWTPs across New Zealand. Population estimates varied by up to 73 % between the methods, which could skew comparisons of per capita wastewater loads between sites. Variability in population estimates (relative standard deviation, RSD) was significantly higher in smaller catchments (r s  = -0.727, P < .001), highlighting the importance of method selection in smaller sites. Census population estimates were broadly similar to those provided by wastewater operators, but significant variation was observed for some sites (ranging from 42 % lower to 78 % higher, RSD = 262 %). We present a widely applicable method to calculate population size from census, which involves disaggregating census area units by individual properties. The results reinforce the need for transparent reporting to maintain confidence in the comparison of WBE across sites and studies., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

This paper gathers gatekeeper views and perceptions on nano-enabled viticulture in Aotearoa New Zealand. While the science of nanotechnology is indicated to offer improvements to conventional vineyard inputs and operations, its acceptability by potential users and consumers has an impact on the governance of nano-enabled agriculture. This governance takes place not just at the state level through regulation and policy, but also through corporate, and community sectors' use of branding and narratives about nanotechnology and nano-based agrichemicals, and the (non)consumption of nano-enabled products. This paper investigates the technical and market acceptability, or governance, of nanotechnology by elucidating the attitudes of industry gatekeepers towards wines grown with nanotechnology. This necessarily informs the 'market permissibility' of such technologies, and illuminates sensitivities, concerns, and consumer-based barriers to adoption. We conducted 15 semi-structured, key informant interviews and a thematic data analysis. Our results suggest a high level of technical acceptability, particularly if environmental sustainability benefits are made clear. Wine producers are interested in nano-solutions to labour, pest and disease, and cost of production issues. However, key actors in the production-consumption network of New Zealand wine have concerns about nano-enabled approaches. Regulatory approval and safety assurances are expected prior to adoption in food or wine. Respondents argue that consumer acceptability is less clear, and that thought leaders like wine writers, intermediaries and 'influencers' will be critical in shaping public opinion. This research highlights the potential risks of nanotechnology development and adoption., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier B.V.)