High School Science Fairs: Evaluation of Live Animal Experimentation--The Canadian Experience

When the Canadian Council on Animal Care was established in 1968, the Council, together with representatives from the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association in concert with the Youth Science Foundation, recognized the importance of well-conceived science fair projects involving live animals. It was recognized as well that poor science encouraged poor attitudes toward the animals involved, as well as a misunderstanding of scientific investigation. Numerous schemes were tried in an effort to ensure development of proper scientific investigational attitudes as well as a respect for living things. These will be discussed, outlining where such schemes failed. In May, 1975, Regulations for Animal Experimentation in Science Fairs in Canada were adopted by the regional representatives at the Canada-wide Science Fair in Jonquiere, Quebec. These regulations state that vertebrate animals are not to be used in experiments for projects for Science Fairs, with the following exceptions: A Observations of normal living patterns of wild animals in the free living state or in zoological parks, gardens or aquaria. B. Observations of normal living patterns of pets, fish or domestic animals. Since these regulations were adopted, the biological exhibits have increased and have shown significant improvements in scientific input involving increased numbers of bacteria, fungi, cells, sera and tissue culture. The requirement for strict supervision because of possible abuses has decreased, thus lessening the anxiety and frustration of the regional science fair committees

Letter to Editor: Firm Support for Culture Training

Dr. Rowsell corrects a report in the Journal (IJSAP 3(3): 185) regarding official funding support for a tissue culture training course offered by Professor Sergey Federoff at the University of Saskatchewan

Rius i ciutats : amenaces i potencialitats

Els rius i les ciutats haurien de conviure en un equilibri dinàmic. Els rius proporcionen avantatges i mitjans per a la navegació, l'abastament d'aigua, i també per al lleure i l'esplai. Aquests poden proveir, també, fonts d'alimentació i fins i tot un lloc on viure, en una barca o en una casa flotant. Però també comporten riscos derivats de les inundacions i de la contaminació, que poden degradar la ciutat i els recursos, i provocar danys i alteracions. Cal que s'estableixi un equilibri entre l'explotació del potencial dels recursos de les localitzacions fluvials i els riscos que aquestes poden comportar. En el procés de millorar un riu en benefici de la ciutat on es troba s'han de considerar, doncs, una àmplia gamma de factors de manera integral i dirigits cap a polítiques sostenibles. Davant un enfocament d'aquest tipus, apareixeran barreres institucionals però qualsevol canvi sense aquestes garanties comportarà el predomini dels interessos restringits i locals per sobre de la conservació dels recursos naturals dels nostres rius.Los ríos y las ciudades deberían convivir en un equilibrio dinámico. Los ríos proporcionan ventajas y medios para la navegación, el abastecimiento de agua, y también un lugar donde vivir, en una barca o en una casa flotante. Pero también conllevan riesgos derivados de las inundaciones y de la contaminación, que pueden degradar la ciudad y los recursos, y provocar daños y alteraciones. Es necesario que se establezca un equilibrio entre la explotación del potencial de recursos de las localidades fluviales y los riesgos que éstas pueden comportar. Así pues, en el proceso de recuperación de un río se han de considerar múltiples factores de manera integral y dirigidos hacia políticas sostenibles. Ante este enfoque, aparecerán barreras institucionales pero cualquier cambio sin estas garantías comportará el predominio de los intereses restringidos y locales por encima de la conservación de los recursos naturales de nuestros ríos.Les rivières et les villes auraient de cohabiter dans un équilibre dynamique. Les rivières proportionnent des avantages et des moyens pour la navigation, approvisionnement en eau, ainsi que pour le temps de loisir. Les rivières peuvent aussi provisionner de ressources d'alimentation et même d'un endroit pour vivre, dans un bateau ou bien dans une maison flottante. Mais, au même temps, les rivières occasionnent des dangers comme conséquence des inondations et de la pollution, lesquels peuvent dégrader le réseau urbain et les ressources, et provoquer des dégâts et des altérations. Il est nécessaire d'établir un équilibre entre l'exploitation du potentiel des ressources des localisations fluviales et les dangers que peuvent occasionner. Dans le processus d'amélioration d'une rivière, au bénéfice de la ville oú elle est placée, il est nécessaire d'avoir présent un large ventail de facteurs d'une façon globale et dirigés vers des politiques soutenables. Front à cette type d'approche, font son apparition des contraintes institutionnelles, mais par contre, n'importe quel changement sans ce type de garanties présuppose la prédominance des intérêts restreins et locaux au-dessus du maintien des ressources naturelles des notres rivières.Rivers and cities should live together in dynamic equilibrium. The rivers provide assets and resources for navigation, water supply, recreation and amenity values. They can provide sources of food and even a place in which to live, on a river boat or houseboat. But they also comprise threats, from floods and pollution, which can degrade the urban fabric and resources, and create damage and disruption. A balance needs to be struck between the exploitation of the resource potential of riverside locations and the threats that these locations can bring. In the process of enhancing the river in the city account must also be taken of a large range of factors, in a holistic way and towards sustainable policies. There will be institutional barriers to such an approach, but change without these safeguards will mean that the natural assets of our rivers will not be conserved and narrow sectional interests will prevail

Promoting adaptive flood risk management: the role and potential of flood recovery mechanisms

There is a high potential for recovery mechanisms to be used to incentivise the uptake of flood mitigation and loss reduction measures, undertake adaptation and promote community resilience. Indeed, creating a resilient response to flooding requires flood risk management approaches to be aligned and it needs to be ensured that recovery mechanisms to not provide disincentives for individuals and business to take proactive action to reduce risk. However, the degree to which it is desirable and effective for insurers and governments providing compensation to promote resilience and risk reduction depends upon how the cover or compensation is organised and the premiums which are charged. A review of international flood recovery mechanisms has been undertaken to identify firstly the types of schemes that exist and their characteristics. Analysis of existing instruments highlights that there are various potential approaches to encourage or require the uptake of flood mitigation and also discourage the construction of new development in high flood risk. However despite the presence of these instruments, those organising recovery mechanisms could be doing much more to incentivise increased resilience

The evolution of UK flood insurance: incremental change over six decades

In this paper, the authors' theorizing shifts away from the catalytic role of the flood itself – or other crises – towards a deeper understanding of the relationship between change and stability, taking the example of UK flood insurance and the agreements – and the implicit policy approaches – between the actors involved: private insurers and the government. The study relies upon in-depth analysis of policy agreements governing flood insurance since the 1960s, and semi-structured interviews with six current or former flood insurance professionals. The important agents of change have been, firstly, threats to existing household insurers from new entrants unencumbered by agreements to insure all comers. Secondly, technological changes have made exposure more explicit and pricing risk both easier and less expensive. The slow pace of change and the relatively stable role of the different actors and coalitions is now clearer. Many windows of opportunity created by major flooding or financial crises have not significantly affected the pace or direction of policy change. The overriding importance of the London location for – and the profitability of – the insurance industry, both to government and to the insurers, explains the extraordinary policy stability described here. This history suggests that the UK may not be a good model for imitation elsewhere

Understanding policy change in flood risk management

Policy change in the field of flood risk management is important as it alters the direction of attention, effort and investment. We elaborate three models of policy change developed in the political science literature. These models embrace concepts such as ‘policy streams’, ‘advocacy coalitions’, and ‘punctuated equilibrium’ and each has been important in illuminating the process of policy change in different discipline areas in the last 20 or 30 years. Each has been refined over this time but remains fundamentally unchanged. From this elaboration we distil an integrated model that we believe is particularly applicable to flood risk management, and have some general applicability outside the UK where it originated. This model emphasises both catalytic and incremental policy change, the former related to national scale flood events and the latter to intervening relatively flood-free periods

Managed retreat: a rare and paradoxical success, but yielding a dismal prognosis

Managed retreat (MR) involves permanent resettlement of existing households and communities away from areas at risk, here coastal flood risk. On post-Sandy Staten Island, New York, where MR has been successful, our research findings from interviews and a focus group of key stakeholders and commentators indicate there are very significant political impediments as well as financial constraints to MR programs being successful without the experience of a disaster and a repetitive sequence of hazardous events. Pre-disaster and long-term plans for reducing risks in such vulnerable areas are easy to advocate but not to implement. Many coastal locations globally will need some form of MR, where current risk is very high as a legacy of past decisions and where many communities will not be defendable against the expected future sea level rise. With leadership and community commitment locally MR agendas can and should be pursued: the optimistic scenario. But success appears likely only in the aftermath of a major disaster. This suggests strongly that we may have to await those inevitable disasters, and then be ready to act, rather than vice versa: a worrying conclusion and a dismal prognosis