Impacts of community-based natural resource management on wealth, food security and child health in Tanzania

Community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) is a major global strategy for enhancing conservation outcomes while also seeking to improve rural livelihoods; however, little evidence of socioeconomic outcomes exists. We present a national-level analysis that empirically estimates socioeconomic impacts of CBNRM across Tanzania, while systematically controlling for potential sources of bias. Specifically, we apply a difference-indifferences model to national-scale, cross-sectional data to estimate the impact of three different CBNRM governance regimes on wealth, food security and child health, considering differential impacts of CBNRM on wealthy and poor populations. We also explore whether or not longer-standing CBNRM efforts provide more benefits than recently-established CBNRM areas. Our results show significant improvements in household food security in CBNRM areas compared with non-CBNRM areas, but household wealth and health outcomes in children are generally not significantly different. No one CBNRM governance regime demonstrates consistently different welfare outcomes than the others. Wealthy households benefit more from CBNRM than poor households and CBNRM benefits appear to increase with longer periods of implementation. Perhaps evidence of CBNRM benefits is limited because CBNRM hasn\u27t been around long enough to yield demonstrable outcomes. Nonetheless, achieving demonstrable benefits to rural populations will be crucial for CBNRM\u27s future success in Tanzania. Copyright

Treatment for hepatorenal syndrome in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis: a network meta-analysis

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To compare the benefits and harms of different treatments of hepatorenal syndrome in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis

Corporate social responsibility or sustainability in music festivals

Purpose – To establish whether social considerations are valued within UK music festivals. Methodology – A case study featuring 21 semi-structured interviews with stakeholders delivering 7 music festivals. Thematic analysis enabled identification of insights into differences between organisers and suppliers. Findings - The respondents were positive towards sustainability however CSR had little recognition. Both stakeholder groups adopted ‘ethical’ practices. Suppliers want organisers to be transparent and fair. Organisers want supplier to comply with their approaches. All stakeholders need to improve their communications. Practical implications - Festivals operate in increasingly competitive environments hence the insights herein should improve stakeholder and festivalgoer engagement. Originality - Few studies of the adoption of social considerations exist within the creative industries. Research limitations – As a small qualitative study, it is not representative of the sector. Furthermore suppliers may be unwilling to critique festivals. Social desirability bias may be evident. Key words – Sustainability, CSR, Music Festivals, Stakeholders, Suppliers, Perceptions, Awareness Paper type - Researc

Nemabiome metabarcoding shows a high prevalence of Haemonchus contortus and predominance of Camelostrongylus mentulatus in alpaca herds in the northern UK

Gastrointestinal nematodes (GINs) are a common threat faced by pastoral livestock. Since their major introduction to the UK in the early 1990s, South American camelids have been co-grazed with sheep, horses, and other livestock, allowing exposure to a range of GIN species. However, there have been no molecular-based studies to investigate the GIN populations present in these camelids. In the current study, we sampled nine alpaca herds from northern England and southern Scotland and used high-throughput metabarcoded sequencing to describe their GIN species composition. A total of 71 amplicon sequence variants (ASVs) were identified representing eight known GIN species. Haemonchus contortus was the most prevalent species found in almost all herds in significant proportions. The identification of H. contortus in other livestock species is unusual in the northern UK, implying that alpacas may be suitable hosts and potential reservoirs for infection in other hosts. In addition, the camelid-adapted GIN species Camelostrongylus mentulatus was identified predominantly in herds with higher faecal egg counts. These findings highlight the value of applying advanced molecular methods, such as nemabiome metabarcoding to describe the dynamics of gastrointestinal nematode infections in novel situations. The results provide a strong base for further studies involving co-grazing animals to confirm the potential role of alpacas in transmitting GIN species between hosts

Biodiversity 2020: climate change evaluation report

In 2011, the government published Biodiversity 2020: A strategy for England’s wildlife and ecosystem services [1]. This strategy for England builds on the 2011 Natural Environment White Paper - NEWP [2] and provides a comprehensive picture of how we are implementing our international and EU commitments. It sets out the strategic direction for biodiversity policy between 2011-2020 on land (including rivers and lakes) and at sea, and forms part of the UK’s commitments under the ‘the Aichi targets’ agreed in 2010 under the United Nations Convention of Biological Diversity’s Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 [3]. Defra is committed to evaluating the Biodiversity 2020 strategy and has a public commitment to assess climate change adaptation measures. This document sets out the information on assessing how action under Biodiversity 2020 has helped our wildlife and ecosystems to adapt to climate change. Biodiversity 2020 aims to halt the loss of biodiversity and restore functioning ecosystems for wildlife and for people. The outcomes and actions in Biodiversity 2020, although wider in scope, aimed to increase resilience of our wildlife and ecosystems in the face of a changing climate. In order to inform the assessment, we have defined which of the measurable outputs under Biodiversity 2020 contribute to resilience. Biodiversity 2020 included plans to develop and publish a dedicated set of indicators to assess progress towards the delivery of the strategy. The latest list (at the time of writing), published in 2017, contains 24 biodiversity indicators [4] that would help inform progress towards achieving specific outcomes, they are also highly relevant to the outputs (detailed below) that form the basis for this evaluation. The Adaptation Sub-Committee’s 2017 UK Climate Change Risk Assessment Evidence Report [5] sets out the priority climate change risks and opportunities for the UK. The ASC also produced a review of progress in the National Adaptation Programme - “Progress in preparing for climate change” [6], which highlights adaptation priorities and progress being made towards achieving them. The UK Government’s response to the ASC [7] review includes a set of recommendations, of which Recommendation 6 states that “Action should be taken to enhance the condition of priority habitats and the abundance and range of priority species”. The recommendation further iterated that “This action should maintain or extend the level of ambition that was included in Biodiversity 2020” and that “An evaluation should be undertaken of Biodiversity 2020 including the extent to which goals have been met and of the implications for resilience to climate change.” To this, end an evaluation process has been put in place to define: a. What worked and why? Which actions or activities have had the greatest benefit in terms of delivering the desired outcomes? And, conversely, what prevented progress? b. Where are the opportunities? What are the financial, political, scientific and social opportunities for furthering the desired outcomes in the future? These objectives underpin the evaluation process for actions to date, and will also inform future actions and the iteration of a new nature strategy for England

Incidence and Severity of Lymphoedema following Limb Salvage of Extremity Soft Tissue Sarcoma

Background and Purpose. Lymphoedema is a serious complication following limb salvage for extremity soft tissue sarcomas (STSs) for which little is known. We aimed to evaluate its incidence, its, severity and its associated risk factors. Material and Method. Patient and tumor characteristics, treatment modalities and complications and functional outcomes (MSTS 1987, TESS), and lymphoedema severity (Stern) were all collected from prospective databases. Charts were retrospectively abstracted for BMI and comorbidities. Results. There were 289 patients (158 males). Mean age was 53 (16–88). Followup ranged between 12 and 60 months with an average of 35 and a median of 36 months. Mean BMI was 27.4 (15.8–52.1). 72% had lower extremity tumors and 38% upper extremity. Mean tumor size was 8.1 cm (1.0–35.6 cm). 27% had no adjuvant radiation, 62% had 50 Gy, and 11% received 66 Gy. The incidence of lymphoedema was 28.8% (206 none, 58 mild, 22 moderate, 3 severe, and 0 very severe). Mean MSTS score was 32 (11–35) and TESS was 89.4 (32.4–100). Radiation dose was significantly correlated with tumor size > 5 cm (P = 0.0001) and TESS score (P = 0.001), but not MSTS score (P = 0.090). Only tumor size > 5 cm and depth were found to be independent predictors of significant lymphoedema. Conclusion. Nine percent of STS patients in our cohort developed significant (grade ≥ 2) lymphoedema. Tumor size > 5 cm and deep tumors were associated with an increased occurrence of lymphoedema but not radiation dosage