[Book Review:] Francesco Lo Piccolo and Thomas Huw (Eds.): Ethics and planning research surrey, UK and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2009

Dieser Beitrag ist mit Zustimmung des Rechteinhabers aufgrund einer (DFG geförderten) Allianz- bzw. Nationallizenz frei zugänglich.This publication is with permission of the rights owner freely accessible due to an Alliance licence and a national licence (funded by the DFG, German Research Foundation) respectively.Having approached this volume from a sceptical standpoint on ethics in planning, I have been favourably impressed by the reflections it prompts – although not to the effect of dropping my scepticism altogether. The strength of this volume lies in highlighting the relevance of the topic and the inevitability of taking position with regard to it. While directing attention to a range of ethical implications in planning, the volume focuses on a specific set of ethical issues concerning the role of planning in the production and management of knowledge. The starting point can be summarized as follows: since designing and conducting research involves assuming an explicit or implicit ethical standing towards our social world, planning researchers need to develop reflexivity and awareness – a meta-ethics, so to speak – of the ethical issues and dilemmas involved in their work. Neglecting the need for reflexive sensitivity on ethical issues is neither politically nor epistemologically innocent, and can be seen as contributing to the (re-)production of the very conditions that should challenge our ethical consciousness and our moral conduct as planners

'Territorial cohesion' as a category of agency: the missing dimension in the EU spatial policy debate

EU spatial policy is a remarkable expression of how this ‘sui-generis institution’ is moving – against all odds – towards increased ‘positive integration’. While its development may be seen as consistent with a ‘European model of society’, it is nevertheless apparent that current political-institutional discourse on spatial policy also reflects the EU’s unresolved contradictions on its way to becoming more ‘effective and democratic’. Apparently, while progressing in institutionally ‘mainstreaming’ spatial issues, the EU keeps having a hard time developing its policies beyond settings defined by limitedly innovative expert processes and restricted intergovernmental negotiations. One result of this can be seen in the current trend towards supporting EU-wide policy choices by means of, so-called, ‘evidence-based’ approaches. What remains unaddressed in light of this search for ‘objective’ consensus is the fact that a mature EU spatial policy can only develop through actively engaging in innovative subsidiaritybased forms of agency. This is particularly so in respect of ‘territorial cohesion’, a policy concept which – as even official EU documents admit – can only gain effective meaning through its appropriation and enactment by local-regional governance actors. The paper discusses these issues in the context of recent developments in EU spatial development policy, and particularly in relation to an analysis of the ‘Territorial Agenda’ process. In light of the features adopted by this process, it argues that it is now both scientifically and politically expedient to address the meaning of ‘territorial cohesion’ as a category of agency, that is, as the expression of concrete patterns of spatially contingent interests, interactions and practices of governance

'Territorial cohesion' as a category of agency: the missing dimension in the EU spatial policy debate

EU spatial policy is a remarkable expression of how this ‘sui-generis institution’ is moving – against all odds – towards increased ‘positive integration’. While its development may be seen as consistent with a ‘European model of society’, it is nevertheless apparent that current political-institutional discourse on spatial policy also reflects the EU’s unresolved contradictions on its way to becoming more ‘effective and democratic’. Apparently, while progressing in institutionally ‘mainstreaming’ spatial issues, the EU keeps having a hard time developing its policies beyond settings defined by limitedly innovative expert processes and restricted intergovernmental negotiations. One result of this can be seen in the current trend towards supporting EU-wide policy choices by means of, so-called, ‘evidence-based’ approaches. What remains unaddressed in light of this search for ‘objective’ consensus is the fact that a mature EU spatial policy can only develop through actively engaging in innovative subsidiarity-based forms of agency. This is particularly so in respect of ‘territorial cohesion’, a policy concept which – as even official EU documents admit – can only gain effective meaning through its appropriation and enactment by local-regional governance actors. The paper discusses these issues in the context of recent developments in EU spatial development policy, and particularly in relation to an analysis of the ‘Territorial Agenda’ process. In light of the features adopted by this process, it argues that it is now both scientifically and politically expedient to address the meaning of ‘territorial cohesion’ as a category of agency, that is, as the expression of concrete patterns of spatially contingent interests, interactions and practices of governance

Dental Implants with Internal versus External Connections: 10-year Post-Loading Results of a Pragmatic Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial

PURPOSE. To compare the effectiveness of identical implants with internal or external connections. MATERIALS AND METHODS. One hundred and twenty patients with any type of edentulism (single tooth, partial or total edentulism) requiring one implant-supported prosthesis were randomly allocated at four centres to two equal groups to receive either implants with external connection (EC) or implants of the same type but with internal connection (IC) (EZ Plus, MegaGen Implant, Gyeongbuk, South Korea). Due to slight differences in implant design/components, IC implants were platform-switched while ECs were not. Patients were followed up for 10 years after initial loading. Outcome measures were: Any prosthesis/implant failures, complications, and marginal bone level changes, as assessed by blinded outcome assessors whenever possible. RESULTS. Sixty patients received 96 EC implants and 60 patients 107 IC implants. Eight patients from the EC group and nine from the IC group dropped out, but all remaining patients were followed up to 10 years post-loading. Two EC patients experienced implant and prosthesis failures versus three IC patients (P = 0.631, diff = 0.02, 95% CI: -0.07 to 0.11). Fifteen complications occurred in 13 EC patients versus 13 complications in 11 IC patients (P = 0.720, diff. = -0.03, 95%o CI: -0.19 to 0.13). There were no statistically significant differences for prosthesis and implant failures and complications between the different con-nection types. Ten years after loading, both groups had lost a significant amount of bone (1.01 mm at EC implants and 1.27 mm at IC implants), but there was no statistically signi-ficant difference in estimated marginal bone levels between the two groups (diff. = 0.07 mm, 95% CI: -0.41 to 0.54 mm, P (ANCOVA) = 0.782). CONCLUSIONS. Acknowledging the difference between EC and IC implants in terms of neck design and platform-switching, 10-year post-loading data revealed no statistically significant differences between the two connection types, and clinicians can therefore choose which they prefer. CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT. This trial was partially funded by MegaGen Implant, Gyeongbuk, South Korea, the manufacturer of the implants evaluated in this investigation. However, the resulting data belonged to the authors and by no means did the manufacturer interfere with the conduct of the trial or the publication of the results

Multicentre Withinperson Randomised Controlled Trial of 0.5 Mm Versus 1.5 Mm Subcrestal Placement of Dental Implants With Internal Conical Connection: Five-year Post-loading Results

PURPOSE. To assess whether there are any clinical benefits to placing single dental implants either 0.5 or 1.5 mm subcrestally in healed bone crests. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Sixty partially edentulous patients at six centres requiring two single implant-supported crowns had both sites randomly allocated according to a split-mouth design to either 0.5 mm or 1.5 mm subcrestal implant placement; implants in aesthetic areas were submerged for 3 months while those in non-aesthetic areas were not. Provisional acrylic crowns were fitted and replaced with definitive metal-ceramic crowns after 2 months. Patients were followed up to 5 years after loading. Outcome measures were: crown and implant failures, complications, aesthetics assessed using the pink esthetic score (PES), peri-implant marginal bone level changes, and patient prefe-rence, recorded by blinded assessors. RESULTS. Two patients dropped out. There were no statistically significant differences in failure rate (out of 58 patients, four implants failed in the 0.5 mm group versus one in the 1.5 mm group; difference =-5.17%; 95% CI-10.87% to 0.53%; P = 0.250) or complications (out of 58 patients eight complications occurred in eight patients from the 0.5 mm group versus five complications in five patients from the 1.5 mm group (difference =-5.17%; 95% CI-14.01% to 3.67%; P = 0.453) between groups. At 5 years after loading, the mean pink aesthetic scores were 10.89 ± 2.30 and 10.79 ± 2.41 in the 0.5 and 1.5 mm groups, respecti-vely, a difference that was not statistically significant (P = 0.943). Patients from the 0.5 mm group lost on average 0.53 ± 1.43 mm peri-implant marginal bone, and those in the 1.5 mm group lost 0.31 ± 0.98 mm, a statistically significant difference (0.26 mm; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.47; P = 0.016). Patients did not prefer any depth of implant placement over the other. There were no differences in outcomes between centres. CONCLUSIONS. No clinically appreciable differences were noted when placing implants surrounded by at least 1 mm of bone 0.5 mm or 1.5 mm subcrestally. Clinicians are therefore free to choose which strategy they prefer

Traps of multi-level governance. Lessons from the implementation of the Water Framework Directive in Italy

During recent decades, different patterns of multi-level governance (MLG) have spread across Europe as a consequence of Europeanisation of public policies, which have increasingly adopted decentralized and participatory procedures conceived as a tool of more effective and accountable policy-making. It appears, however, that the implementation of operational designs based on MLG may be rather problematic and it does not necessarily bring to the expected performance improvements. Referring to the case of the EU Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC), which conceives the creation of new multi-level institutional settings as a key tool for enacting a new holistic approach to water management and protection, this article explores the difficulties that the implementation of such settings has brought in Italy, despite some favorable pre-conditions existing in the country. Evidence is provided that along with institutional and agency variables, the implementation effectiveness of MLG arrangements promoted by the EU can be challenged by their inherent characteristics

Effect of different implant placement depths on crestal bone levels and soft tissue behavior: A 5â year randomized clinical trial

ObjectivesThis randomized clinical trial analyzed the longâ term (5â year) crestal bone changes and soft tissue dimensions surrounding implants with an internal tapered connection placed in the anterior mandibular region at different depths (equiâ and subcrestal).Materials and methodsEleven edentulous patients were randomly divided in a splitâ mouth design: 28 equicrestal implants (G1) and 27 subcrestal (1â 3 mm) implants (G2). Five implants were placed per patient. All implants were immediately loaded. Standardized intraoral radiographs were used to evaluate crestal bone (CB) changes. Patients were assessed immediately, 4, 8, and 60 months after implant placement. The correlation between vertical mucosal thickness (VMT) and soft tissue recession was analyzed. Subâ group analysis was also performed to evaluate the correlation between VMT and CB loss. Rankâ based ANOVA was used for comparison between groups (α = .05).ResultsFiftyâ five implants (G1 = 28 and G2 = 27) were assessed. Implant and prosthetic survival rate were 100%. Subcrestal positioning resulted in less CB loss (â 0.80 mm) when compared to equicrestal position (â 0.99 mm), although the difference was not statistically significant (p > .05). Significant CB loss was found within the G1 and G2 groups at two different measurement times (T4 and T60) (p  .05).ConclusionsThere was no statistically significant difference in CB changes between subcrestal and equicrestal implant positioning; however, subcrestal position resulted in higher bone levels. Neither mucosal recession nor vertical mucosa thickness was influenced by different implant placement depths.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154286/1/clr13569.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154286/2/clr13569_am.pd

Indicadores de sustentabilidad de los recursos hídricos subterráneos en el área central de la provincia de Santa Fe, Argentina

El desarrollo de los indicadores de sustentabilidadde los recursos hídricos subterráneos es un proceso de aproximación científica, que presenta las distintas características de los sistemas de agua subterránea de manera simplificada y comprensible. Si bien su empleo es relativamente reciente, su apropiada selección proporciona un fundamento válido sobre el cual basar las acciones coordinadas en el proceso de explotación, planificación y gestión del recurso. En este trabajo se presenta la utilización de indicadores de sustentabilidad en un área de la provincia de Santa Fe, Argentina donde el recurso hídrico subterráneo es la única fuente de abastecimiento para satisfacer la demanda en los distintos usos. De los indicadores utilizados, los de explotación resultaron los más destacados, señalando que la recarga local no es suficiente para satisfacer la demanda actual en el área. La identificación de estos indicadores incorpora el alto valor agregado que ofrecen los mismos como medidas sintéticas de sustentabilidad de la explotación de las aguas subterráneas para la planificación del uso de las mismas.The development of groundwater resources sustainability indicators is a process of scientific approach that presents the different characteristics of the groundwater systems in a simplified and understandable way. Although its use in such a system is relatively recent, their proper selection provides a valid basis to support coordinated actions in the process of operation, planning and resource management. This paper focuses on the use of sustainability indicators in an area of the Santa Fe province, Argentina, where groundwaters are the only source of supply to satisfy the demand for the various purposes. From the indicators used, the indicators of groundwater abstraction demonstrated that local recharge rate is not sufficient to meet the current demand in the area. Therefore, the identification of these indicators incorporates the high added value that they offer as a synthetic measures for the sustainability of groundwater exploitation.Universidad Nacional de La Plat