A US-India Example in Case History Use in Levee Safety — A Multi-Cultural Perception of What It Is, and How Should It Be Applied

The State of Bihar, India experienced substantial flooding in the Ganges Basin as a result of levee (embankment) non performance. As a result of the 2008 failures the Bihar Water Resources Department is examining, as a programmatic model, the US experience in establishing and conducting the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Levee Safety Program. This case model examination is intended to structure a new program for managing the Bihari embankment infrastructure. Similar to many historical flood control initiatives throughout the world, India’s embankment infrastructure shows the effects of aging and multi-purpose use of the facilities. To examine what practices that could be employed to increase the reliable performance of the embankment system; the World Bank facilitated a detailed case history examination of the USACE Levee Safety Program. The case study included a trial application of elements of the US approach to Indian Levee systems in order to stimulate discussion of what elements could be and should be incorporated into the Indian embankment management system. Elements of the levee safety program examined in this case study include the development of a comprehensive database of features and information on the embankments, a data viewer, areas of maintenance issues and corrective maintenance management activities

Genome Sequence Conservation of Hendra Virus Isolates during Spillover to Horses, Australia

Bat-to-horse transmission of Hendra virus has occurred at least 14 times. Although clinical signs in horses have differed, genome sequencing has demonstrated little variation among the isolates. Our sequencing of 5 isolates from recent Hendra virus outbreaks in horses found no correlation between sequences and time or geographic location of outbreaks

No reef is an island: integrating coral reef connectivity data into the design of regional-scale marine protected area networks

We integrated coral reef connectivity data for the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico into a conservation decision-making framework for designing a regional scale marine protected area (MPA) network that provides insight into ecological and political contexts. We used an ocean circulation model and regional coral reef data to simulate eight spawning events from 2008-2011, applying a maximum 30-day pelagic larval duration and 20% mortality rate. Coral larval dispersal patterns were analyzed between coral reefs across jurisdictional marine zones to identify spatial relationships between larval sources and destinations within countries and territories across the region. We applied our results in Marxan, a conservation planning software tool, to identify a regional coral reef MPA network design that meets conservation goals, minimizes underlying threats, and maintains coral reef connectivity. Our results suggest that approximately 77% of coral reefs identified as having a high regional connectivity value are not included in the existing MPA network. This research is unique because we quantify and report coral larval connectivity data by marine ecoregions and Exclusive Economic Zones (EZZ) and use this information to identify gaps in the current Caribbean-wide MPA network by integrating asymmetric connectivity information in Marxan to design a regional MPA network that includes important reef network connections. The identification of important reef connectivity metrics guides the selection of priority conservation areas and supports resilience at the whole system level into the future

Overcoming failure in infrastructure risk governance implementation: large dams journey

[EN] There is ample recognition of the risk inherent in our very existence and modes of social organization, with a reasonable expectation that implementing risk governance will result in enhanced resilience as a society. Despite this, risk governance is not a mainstream approach in the infrastructure sector, regardless of the increasing number of peer-reviewed published conceptualizations, mature procedures to support its application, or public calls to cope with systemic risks in our modern societies. This paper aims to offer a different view on the issue of risk governance, with focus in the analysis of the root causes of its relatively low degree of implementation in the infrastructure sector. We later analyze the impact of such essential causes, which we have grouped and labeled as the ontology, the concerns, the anathemas, and the forgotten, in the specific field of large dams. Finally, we describe the journey toward risk governance in the specific field of large dams, thus supporting the ultimate objective of this paper to facilitate an evidence-based approach to successful risk governance implementation within and outside the dam sector.This work was supported by Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (España) [grant number BIA2013-48157-C2-1-R].Escuder Bueno, I.; Halpin, E. (2016). Overcoming failure in infrastructure risk governance implementation: large dams journey. Journal of Risk Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2016.1215345SAbrahamsen, E. B., & Aven, T. (2012). Why risk acceptance criteria need to be defined by the authorities and not the industry? Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 105, 47-50. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2011.11.004Ardiles, L. D. Sanz, P. Moreno, E. Jenaro, J. Fleitz, and I. Escuder. 2011. “Risk Assessment and Management of 26 Dams Operated by the Duero River Authority in Spain”.Dam Engineering. 21 (4): 313–328. Willmington Publishing. ISSN 0958-9341.Van Asselt, M. B. A., & Renn, O. (2011). Risk governance. Journal of Risk Research, 14(4), 431-449. doi:10.1080/13669877.2011.553730Van Asselt, M., & Vos, E. (2008). Wrestling with uncertain risks: EU regulation of GMOs and the uncertainty paradox. Journal of Risk Research, 11(1), 281-300. doi:10.1080/13669870801990806Aven, T. (2010). Misconceptions of Risk. doi:10.1002/9780470686539Aven, T. (2012). Foundational Issues in Risk Assessment and Risk Management. Risk Analysis, 32(10), 1647-1656. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01798.xAven, T. (2012). The risk concept—historical and recent development trends. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 99, 33-44. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2011.11.006Aven, T., & Renn, O. (2010). Response to Professor Eugene Rosa’s viewpoint to our paper. Journal of Risk Research, 13(3), 255-259. doi:10.1080/13669870903484369Aven, T., & Renn, O. (2010). Risk Management and Governance. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-13926-0Baecher, G. B., Paté, M. E., & De Neufville, R. (1980). Risk of dam failure in benefit-cost analysis. Water Resources Research, 16(3), 449-456. doi:10.1029/wr016i003p00449Black, J., & Baldwin, R. (2012). When risk-based regulation aims low: Approaches and challenges. Regulation & Governance, 6(1), 2-22. doi:10.1111/j.1748-5991.2011.01124.xBoholm, Å., Corvellec, H., & Karlsson, M. (2012). The practice of risk governance: lessons from the field. Journal of Risk Research, 15(1), 1-20. doi:10.1080/13669877.2011.587886Cox, L. A. (2009). Risk Analysis of Complex and Uncertain Systems. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-89014-2Davis, D., Faber, B. A., & Stedinger, J. R. (2008). USACE Experience in Implementing Risk Analysis for Flood Damage Reduction Projects. Journal of Contemporary Water Research & Education, 140(1), 3-14. doi:10.1111/j.1936-704x.2008.00023.xDe Vries, G., Verhoeven, I., & Boeckhout, M. (2011). Taming uncertainty: the WRR approach to risk governance. Journal of Risk Research, 14(4), 485-499. doi:10.1080/13669877.2011.553728Escuder-Bueno, I., Matheu, E., T. Castillo-Rodríguez, J., & T. Castillo-Rodríguez, J. (Eds.). (2011). Risk Analysis, Dam Safety, Dam Security and Critical Infrastructure Management. doi:10.1201/b11588Ezell, B. C., Bennett, S. P., von Winterfeldt, D., Sokolowski, J., & Collins, A. J. (2010). Probabilistic Risk Analysis and Terrorism Risk. Risk Analysis, 30(4), 575-589. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01401.xForrester, I., & Hanekamp1, J. C. (2006). Precaution, Science and Jurisprudence: a Test Case. Journal of Risk Research, 9(4), 297-311. doi:10.1080/13669870500042974Funabashi, Y., & Kitazawa, K. (2012). Fukushima in review: A complex disaster, a disastrous response. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 68(2), 9-21. doi:10.1177/0096340212440359Hartford, D. N. D., & Baecher, G. B. (2004). Risk and uncertainty in dam safety. doi:10.1680/rauids.32705IRGC (International Risk Governance Council) 2005.Risk Governance: Towards an Integrative Approach, White Paper No. 1, O. Renn with an Annex by P. Graham. Geneva: International Risk Governance Council.Krause, P., Fox, J., Judson, P., & Patel, M. (1998). Qualitative risk assessment fulfils a need. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 138-156. doi:10.1007/3-540-49426-x_7Kröger, W. (2008). Critical infrastructures at risk: A need for a new conceptual approach and extended analytical tools. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 93(12), 1781-1787. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2008.03.005Lofstedt, R. E. (2010). Risk communication guidelines for Europe: a modest proposition. Journal of Risk Research, 13(1), 87-109. doi:10.1080/13669870903126176(2008). Journal of Contemporary Water Research & Education, 140(1). doi:10.1111/jcwr.2008.140.issue-1Park, J., Seager, T. P., Rao, P. S. C., Convertino, M., & Linkov, I. (2012). Integrating Risk and Resilience Approaches to Catastrophe Management in Engineering Systems. Risk Analysis, 33(3), 356-367. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01885.xRenn, O., & Walker, K. D. (Eds.). (2008). Global Risk Governance. International Risk Governance Council Bookseries. doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-6799-0Renn, O., Klinke, A., & van Asselt, M. (2011). Coping with Complexity, Uncertainty and Ambiguity in Risk Governance: A Synthesis. AMBIO, 40(2), 231-246. doi:10.1007/s13280-010-0134-0Rosa, E. A. (2010). The logical status of risk – to burnish or to dull. Journal of Risk Research, 13(3), 239-253. doi:10.1080/13669870903484351Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236(4799), 280-285. doi:10.1126/science.3563507Vlek, C. (2010). Judicious management of uncertain risks: I. Developments and criticisms of risk analysis and precautionary reasoning. Journal of Risk Research, 13(4), 517-543. doi:10.1080/13669871003629887Zhao, X., Hwang, B.-G., & Low, S. P. (2015). Enterprise Risk Management in International Construction Operations. doi:10.1007/978-981-287-549-

Ecosystem Interactions Underlie the Spread of Avian Influenza A Viruses with Pandemic Potential

Despite evidence for avian influenza A virus (AIV) transmission between wild and domestic ecosystems, the roles of bird migration and poultry trade in the spread of viruses remain enigmatic. In this study, we integrate ecosystem interactions into a phylogeographic model to assess the contribution of wild and domestic hosts to AIV distribution and persistence. Analysis of globally sampled AIV datasets shows frequent two-way transmission between wild and domestic ecosystems. In general, viral flow from domestic to wild bird populations was restricted to within a geographic region. In contrast, spillover from wild to domestic populations occurred both within and between regions. Wild birds mediated long-distance dispersal at intercontinental scales whereas viral spread among poultry populations was a major driver of regional spread. Viral spread between poultry flocks frequently originated from persistent lineages circulating in regions of intensive poultry production. Our analysis of long-term surveillance data demonstrates that meaningful insights can be inferred from integrating ecosystem into phylogeographic reconstructions that may be consequential for pandemic preparedness and livestock protection.National Institutes of Health (U.S.) (NIH Centers for Excellence in Influenza Research and Surveillance (CEIRS, contract # HHSN266200700010C))National Institutes of Health (U.S.) (NIH Centers for Excellence in Influenza Research and Surveillance (CEIRS, contract # HHSN272201400008C))National Institutes of Health (U.S.) (NIH Centers for Excellence in Influenza Research and Surveillance (CEIRS, contract # HHSN272201400006C)

Consistent improvement in health-related quality of life with tiotropium in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Novel and conventional responder analyses.

INTRODUCTION: Improving health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in COPD patients is an important pharmacotherapeutic objective. This study investigated the extent, consistency, and durability of tiotropium maintenance therapy impact on HRQoL in moderate-to-very severe COPD. METHODS: Patients received once-daily tiotropium 18 μg (n = 5244) or placebo (n = 4799) via HandiHaler(®) (10 trials), or once-daily tiotropium 5 μg (n = 2622) or placebo (n = 2618) via Respimat(®) inhaler (3 trials). St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total scores were measured at baseline, and 6 months (13 trials) and 1 year (9 trials) from treatment start. Adjusted mean differences between treatments for change from baseline in total scores were calculated at each time-point for each trial. Responder and deteriorator rates (decrease or increase in score ≥4 units from baseline, respectively), net benefit (responder rate increase plus deteriorator rate decrease), and cumulative improvement and deterioration were determined. RESULTS: Adjusted mean total score differences between treatments for change from baseline were significant (p < 0.05) in favor of tiotropium in 10/13 trials at 6 months and in 8/9 trials at 1 year. In all trials, estimated differences in responder rates between treatments favored tiotropium (significant [p < 0.05]: 5/13 trials at 6 months; 8/9 trials at 1 year). Net benefit favored tiotropium and cumulative improvement rates were consistently greater and deterioration rates consistently lower for tiotropium versus placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Tiotropium maintenance therapy significantly and consistently improved HRQoL in moderate-to-very severe COPD patients in a durable manner. These results may provide a benchmark for assessing benefits on HRQoL of other COPD treatments

ARIA-EAACI statement on asthma and COVID-19 (June 2, 2020)

Non peer reviewe

Global assessment of marine plastic exposure risk for oceanic birds

Plastic pollution is distributed patchily around the world’s oceans. Likewise, marine organisms that are vulnerable to plastic ingestion or entanglement have uneven distributions. Understanding where wildlife encounters plastic is crucial for targeting research and mitigation. Oceanic seabirds, particularly petrels, frequently ingest plastic, are highly threatened, and cover vast distances during foraging and migration. However, the spatial overlap between petrels and plastics is poorly understood. Here we combine marine plastic density estimates with individual movement data for 7137 birds of 77 petrel species to estimate relative exposure risk. We identify high exposure risk areas in the Mediterranean and Black seas, and the northeast Pacific, northwest Pacific, South Atlantic and southwest Indian oceans. Plastic exposure risk varies greatly among species and populations, and between breeding and non-breeding seasons. Exposure risk is disproportionately high for Threatened species. Outside the Mediterranean and Black seas, exposure risk is highest in the high seas and Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) of the USA, Japan, and the UK. Birds generally had higher plastic exposure risk outside the EEZ of the country where they breed. We identify conservation and research priorities, and highlight that international collaboration is key to addressing the impacts of marine plastic on wide-ranging species

Rhinitis associated with asthma is distinct from rhinitis alone: TARIA‐MeDALL hypothesis

Asthma, rhinitis, and atopic dermatitis (AD) are interrelated clinical phenotypes that partly overlap in the human interactome. The concept of “one-airway-one-disease,” coined over 20 years ago, is a simplistic approach of the links between upper- and lower-airway allergic diseases. With new data, it is time to reassess the concept. This article reviews (i) the clinical observations that led to Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA), (ii) new insights into polysensitization and multimorbidity, (iii) advances in mHealth for novel phenotype definitions, (iv) confirmation in canonical epidemiologic studies, (v) genomic findings, (vi) treatment approaches, and (vii) novel concepts on the onset of rhinitis and multimorbidity. One recent concept, bringing together upper- and lower-airway allergic diseases with skin, gut, and neuropsychiatric multimorbidities, is the “Epithelial Barrier Hypothesis.” This review determined that the “one-airway-one-disease” concept does not always hold true and that several phenotypes of disease can be defined. These phenotypes include an extreme “allergic” (asthma) phenotype combining asthma, rhinitis, and conjunctivitis.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio