Effects of oilfield water treated by electroflocculation and reverse osmosis in a typical brazilian semiarid soil.

Produced water (PW), which is water extracted along with oil, is the largest waste stream in the oil and gas industry. With the proper treatment, this wastewater can be used in agricultural irrigation. This study evaluated the effects the application of PW treated by electroflocculation (EF) and combined electroflocculationreverse osmosis (EF-RO) on soil salinity and sodification parameters. Excessive sodium levels in PW treated by EF may affect soil structural stability and plant growth, and tends to accumulate in upper layers, displacing the nutrient K to deeper layers of the soil profile. PW treated by EF-RO did not promote salinization and soil sodification, indicating that this combined technique may be a viable alternative for oily water treatment aiming at irrigation use in semiarid regions

Plural valuation of nature for equity and sustainability: Insights from the Global South

Plural valuation is about eliciting the diverse values of nature articulated by different stakeholders in order to inform decision making and thus achieve more equitable and sustainable outcomes. We explore what approaches align with plural valuation on the ground, as well as how different social-ecological contexts play a role in translating plural valuation into decisions and outcomes. Based on a co-constructed analytical approach relying on empirical information from ten cases from the Global South, we find that plural valuation contributes to equitable and sustainable outcomes if the valuation process: 1) is based on participatory value elicitation approaches; 2) is framed with a clear action-oriented purpose; 3) provides space for marginalized stakeholders to articulate their values in ways that can be included in decisions; 4) is used as a tool to identify and help reconcile different cognitive models about human-nature relations; and 5) fosters open communication and collaboration among stakeholders. We also find that power asymmetries can hinder plural valuation. As interest and support for undertaking plural valuation grows, a deeper understanding is needed regarding how it can be adapted to different purposes, approaches, and social-ecological contexts in order to contribute to social equity and sustainability

An agenda for research and action towards diverse and just futures for life on Earth

Decades of research and policy interventions on biodiversity have insufficiently addressed the dual issues of biodiversity degradation and social justice. New approaches are therefore needed. This essay outlines a research and action agenda that calls for a collective task of 'revisiting biodiversity' towards the goal of sustaining diverse and just futures for life on Earth. The agenda was developed through a two-year dialogue process that involved close to 300 experts from diverse disciplines and geographies. This process was informed by social science insights that have shown that biodiversity research and action is underpinned by choices about how problems are conceptualized. Recognizing knowledge, action, and ethics as inseparable, we synthesize a set of principles that help navigate the task of 'revisiting biodiversity'. The agenda articulates four thematic areas for future research. First, the need to revisit biodiversity narratives by challenging conceptualizations that exclude diversity and entrench the separation of humans, cultures, economies, and societies from nature. Second, embracing a focus on the relationships between the anthropocene, biodiversity, and culture by considering humanity and biodiversity as tied together in specific contexts. Third, focusing on nature and economy by better accounting for the interacting structures of economic and financial systems as core drivers of biodiversity loss. Finally, enabling transformative biodiversity research and action by re-configuring relationships between human and non-human communities in and through science, policy, and practice. Revisiting biodiversity necessitates a renewed focus on dialogue among biodiversity communities and beyond that critically reflects on the past to channel research and action towards fostering just and diverse futures for human and non-human life on Earth. Article impact statement: Placing diversity and justice at the heart of transformative change for biodiversity offers important new directions for research and action. This article is protected by copyright

Diverse values of nature for sustainability

Twenty-five years since foundational publications on valuing ecosystem services for human well-being1,2, addressing the global biodiversity crisis3 still implies confronting barriers to incorporating nature’s diverse values into decision-making. These barriers include powerful interests supported by current norms and legal rules such as property rights, which determine whose values and which values of nature are acted on. A better understanding of how and why nature is (under)valued is more urgent than ever4. Notwithstanding agreements to incorporate nature’s values into actions, including the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)5 and the UN Sustainable Development Goals6, predominant environmental and development policies still prioritize a subset of values, particularly those linked to markets, and ignore other ways people relate to and benefit from nature7. Arguably, a ‘values crisis’ underpins the intertwined crises of biodiversity loss and climate change8, pandemic emergence9 and socio-environmental injustices10. On the basis of more than 50,000 scientific publications, policy documents and Indigenous and local knowledge sources, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) assessed knowledge on nature’s diverse values and valuation methods to gain insights into their role in policymaking and fuller integration into decisions7,11. Applying this evidence, combinations of values-centred approaches are proposed to improve valuation and address barriers to uptake, ultimately leveraging transformative changes towards more just (that is, fair treatment of people and nature, including inter- and intragenerational equity) and sustainable futures

PRETERM BIRTH AND FETAL GROWTH RESTRICTION IN HIV-INFECTED BRAZILIAN PREGNANT WOMEN

Introduction: Maternal HIV infection and related co-morbidities may have two outstanding consequences to fetal health: mother-to-child transmission (MTCT) and adverse perinatal outcomes. After Brazilian success in reducing MTCT, the attention must now be diverted to the potentially increased risk for preterm birth (PTB) and intrauterine fetal growth restriction (IUGR). Objective: To determine the prevalence of PTB and IUGR in low income, antiretroviral users, publicly assisted, HIV-infected women and to verify its relation to the HIV infection stage. Patients and Methods: Out of 250 deliveries from HIV-infected mothers that delivered at a tertiary public university hospital in the city of Vitória, state of Espírito Santo, Southeastern Brazil, from November 2001 to May 2012, 74 single pregnancies were selected for study, with ultrasound validated gestational age (GA) and data on birth dimensions: fetal weight (FW), birth length (BL), head and abdominal circumferences (HC, AC). The data were extracted from clinical and pathological records, and the outcomes summarized as proportions of preterm birth (PTB, < 37 weeks), low birth weight (LBW, < 2500g) and small (SGA), adequate (AGA) and large (LGA) for GA, defined as having a value below, between or beyond the ±1.28 z/GA score, the usual clinical cut-off to demarcate the 10th and 90th percentiles. Results: PTB was observed in 17.5%, LBW in 20.2% and SGA FW, BL, HC and AC in 16.2%, 19.1%, 13.8%, and 17.4% respectively. The proportions in HIV-only and AIDS cases were: PTB: 5.9 versus 27.5%, LBW: 14.7% versus 25.0%, SGA BW: 17.6% versus 15.0%, BL: 6.0% versus 30.0%, HC: 9.0% versus 17.9%, and AC: 13.3% versus 21.2%; only SGA BL attained a significant difference. Out of 15 cases of LBW, eight (53.3%) were preterm only, four (26.7%) were SGA only, and three (20.0%) were both PTB and SGA cases. A concomitant presence of, at least, two SGA dimensions in the same fetus was frequent. Conclusions: The proportions of preterm birth and low birth weight were higher than the local and Brazilian prevalence and a trend was observed for higher proportions of SGA fetal dimensions than the expected population distribution in this small casuistry of newborn from the HIV-infected, low income, antiretroviral users, and publicly assisted pregnant women. A trend for higher prevalence of PTB, LBW and SGA fetal dimensions was also observed in infants born to mothers with AIDS compared to HIV-infected mothers without AIDS

Diverse values of nature for sustainability

Data availability: All the data are freely available online. The supplementary information provides links to Zenodo with specific DOIs where the data are stored for free use.Supplementary information is available online at https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41586-023-06406-9/MediaObjects/41586_2023_6406_MOESM1_ESM.docx . The Supplementary Information includes three parts. Part A explains how the paper is associated with the IPBES Values Assessment. Part B provides details about each of the 29 review protocols. Part C offers information about the case study of Chilika Lagoon, India, that is used in the main paper.Copyright © The Author(s) 2023. Twenty-five years since foundational publications on valuing ecosystem services for human well-being1,2, addressing the global biodiversity crisis3 still implies confronting barriers to incorporating nature’s diverse values into decision-making. These barriers include powerful interests supported by current norms and legal rules such as property rights, which determine whose values and which values of nature are acted on. A better understanding of how and why nature is (under)valued is more urgent than ever4. Notwithstanding agreements to incorporate nature’s values into actions, including the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)5 and the UN Sustainable Development Goals6, predominant environmental and development policies still prioritize a subset of values, particularly those linked to markets, and ignore other ways people relate to and benefit from nature7. Arguably, a ‘values crisis’ underpins the intertwined crises of biodiversity loss and climate change8, pandemic emergence9 and socio-environmental injustices10. On the basis of more than 50,000 scientific publications, policy documents and Indigenous and local knowledge sources, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) assessed knowledge on nature’s diverse values and valuation methods to gain insights into their role in policymaking and fuller integration into decisions7,11. Applying this evidence, combinations of values-centred approaches are proposed to improve valuation and address barriers to uptake, ultimately leveraging transformative changes towards more just (that is, fair treatment of people and nature, including inter- and intragenerational equity) and sustainable futures.We received no specific funding for this work; all authors involved in IPBES do so on a voluntary basis. The IPBES Values Assessment was made possible thanks to many generous contributions, including non-earmarked contributions to the IPBES trust fund from governments. All donors are listed on the IPBES website www.ipbes.net/donors. U.P. acknowledges BC3’s Maria de Maeztu excellence accreditation 2023–2026 (reference no. CEX2021-001201-M) provided by grant no. MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033

Diverse values of nature for sustainability

Twenty-five years since foundational publications on valuing ecosystem services for human well-being, addressing the global biodiversity crisis still implies confronting barriers to incorporating nature’s diverse values into decision-making. These barriers include powerful interests supported by current norms and legal rules such as property rights, which determine whose values and which values of nature are acted on. A better understanding of how and why nature is (under)valued is more urgent than ever. Notwithstanding agreements to incorporate nature’s values into actions, including the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) and the UN Sustainable Development Goals, predominant environmental and development policies still prioritize a subset of values, particularly those linked to markets, and ignore other ways people relate to and benefit from nature. Arguably, a ‘values crisis’ underpins the intertwined crises of biodiversity loss and climate change, pandemic emergence and socio-environmental injustices. On the basis of more than 50,000 scientific publications, policy documents and Indigenous and local knowledge sources, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) assessed knowledge on nature’s diverse values and valuation methods to gain insights into their role in policymaking and fuller integration into decisions. Applying this evidence, combinations of values-centred approaches are proposed to improve valuation and address barriers to uptake, ultimately leveraging transformative changes towards more just (that is, fair treatment of people and nature, including inter- and intragenerational equity) and sustainable futures