Geoheritage in Europe and its conservation. Italy.

In recent years (1994-2004), an enhanced sensitivity of Italian public opinion toward natural environment has allowed a better perception of physical landscape as a whole, not only limited to its biological aspects (flora, fauna, etc.), but including its main geological characters (geosites).These new demands and expectations, however, have not been fulfilled by any obligation from the government, not capable so far of issuing any kind of rule, good for the entire country, which could produce a systematic inventory of the sites of geological interest. The beginning of geoconservation in Italy was many years ago with some precursors (Praturlon, 1986; Regione Lombardia, 1982; Panizza and Piacente, 1989), but organized activities were only begun at the start of the 1990s. After the creation of ProGEO\u2019s Italian working group, and as a consequence of the II International Symposium of the Association in Rome in 1996, activities became stronger and well organized. Clearly, we are still far from organized activity at the public level, but, nevertheless, some important targets have been reached and now the concept of geoconservation is commonly accepted in all parts of Italy. New associations have also been constituted (Geotourism association and Geomorphosites group are the most important, because they derive from the academic world). Some national programmes have also started, financed by the Ministry for Scientific Research and the National Geological Service. A more recent initiative is the creation of the \u201cGeosites Documentation Centre\u201d, located at the Genova University \u2013 POLIS Dept. at Architectural Faculty - which has been already formally recognized by ProGEO and by SIGEA (Italian Society for Environmental Geology). In the future, ProGEO activity will be focused on the promotion of geosites approach in those regions which are not involved in inventory activity, as well as on educational programm

Recuperiamo terreno

Nell’ambito delle iniziative legate all’Anno internazionale dei suoli, con lo scopo di riunire le varie comunità (scientifiche, istituzionali, professionali e sociali) che a vario titolo si occupano dell’uso e del consumo di suolo, e per avviare un percorso che consenta di affrontare la materia con approccio multidisciplinare, ISPRA e il Forum Salviamo il Paesaggio, con il supporto di Slow Food Italia hanno organizzato un convegno scientifico che intende affrontare i seguenti aspetti: il monitoraggio dello stato del consumo di suolo; le conseguenze delle diverse forme di consumo di suolo sulle componenti ambientali, incluse le funzioni ecologiche che esse svolgono e considerando le implicazioni economiche di questi impatti, come la perdita di capitale naturale e di servizi ecosistemici; le pressioni delle diverse forme di consumo di suolo sulle varie componenti (agricoltura, foreste e ambienti naturali, paesaggio, acque sotterranee, acque superficiali, atmosfera, biocenosi, etc.); le cause determinanti del consumo di suolo; la valutazione delle risposte in termini di strategie e strumenti di intervento possibili, nonché della sostenibilità di uno stop al consumo di suolo netto, previsto dall’Unione Europea entro il 2050. L'elemento innovativo del convegno è la partecipazione congiunta di comunità diverse, fondata sull'idea che per affrontare in modo efficace il problema dell'eccessivo consumo di suolo sia necessario fornire una informazione completa e dettagliata a tutti gli attori coinvolti

Consensus Report by the Italian Academy of Osseointegration on the Use of Graft Materials in Postextraction Sites

Purpose: After tooth extraction, a modeling and remodeling phase of bone and soft tissues occurs. It has been fully demonstrated that bone resorption as high as 50% can take place regarding ridge width and a variable amount concerning ridge height, making it difficult to perform implant surgery. Materials and Methods: Active members of the Italian Academy of Osseointegration (IAO) participated in this Consensus Conference, and three systematic reviews were conducted before the meeting to provide guidelines on alveolar ridge preservation procedures. The systematic reviews covered the following topics: (1) What material best preserves the dimensions of the ridge horizontally and vertically?; (2) what material favors the formation of the highest quantity of new bone?; (3) which technique would best seal the socket?; and (4) what effect does alveolar ridge preservation have on soft tissues? Results: The main conclusions reached by the assembly were that alveolar ridge preservation is advisable after dental extraction, particularly in esthetic areas, in proximity of anatomical structures (ie, maxillary sinus, inferior alveolar nerve, and mental foramen), whenever the treatment plan requires delayed placement, and whenever patients ask to postpone implant insertion for various reasons. Socket debridement is advised before the use of a "regenerative material," and xenograft is considered the gold standard material to maintain ridge dimensions. Another indication is antibiotic therapy, which is recommended in the case of alveolar ridge preservation (amoxicillin 2 g 1 hour before the intervention and 1 g every 12 hours for 6 days). A membrane or autologous soft tissue should be used to seal the socket and protect the regenerative material, and the indicated reentry time (implant insertion) is 4 to 6 months. Conclusion: This Consensus Conference agreed that the adoption of alveolar ridge preservation can effectively prevent physiologic bone loss, especially in esthetic areas. It is recommended to cover the xenograft material with a membrane or autologous soft tissue, and antibiotic therapy is advisable