EC91-102 C Nebraska Spring Wheat, Oats, Barley, Canola and Crambe Variety Tests 1991

Extension circular 91-102-C: This circular is a progress report of Nebraska spring wheat, oats, barley, canola and crambe variety trials conducted in 1991 by personnel of the agronomy department and the Northeast and Panhandle Centers and their associated agricultural laboratories

G80-487 Spring Small Grains Variety Selection (Revised January 1992)

Tests indicate which varieties of oats, barley and spring wheat are best adapted to Nebraska growing conditions. The primary spring small grain grown in Nebraska is oats. Oats are grown throughout the state, but production is concentrated in the east and northeast cropping districts. Nebraska\u27s estimated harvested oat acreage in 1989 was 310,000 acres. Spring barley production is centered in the northwest and southwest districts. Harvested barley acreage in 1990 was 30,000 acres. Barley is commonly grown as an early summer feed grain and corn substitute. Spring wheat production in Nebraska is concentrated in the northern section of the state where conditions limit reliability of winter wheat

World scientists’ warnings into action, local to global

‘We have kicked the can down the road once again – but we are running out of road.’ – Rachel Kyte, Dean of Fletcher School at Tufts University. We, in our capacities as scientists, economists, governance and policy specialists, are shifting from warnings to guidance for action before there is no more ‘road.’ The science is clear and irrefutable; humanity is in advanced ecological overshoot. Our overexploitation of resources exceeds ecosystems’ capacity to provide them or to absorb our waste. Society has failed to meet clearly stated goals of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Civilization faces an epochal crossroads, but with potentially much better, wiser outcomes if we act now. What are the concrete and transformative actions by which we can turn away from the abyss? In this paper we forcefully recommend priority actions and resource allocation to avert the worst of the climate and nature emergencies, two of the most pressing symptoms of overshoot, and lead society into a future of greater wellbeing and wisdom. Humanity has begun the social, economic, political and technological initiatives needed for this transformation. Now, massive upscaling and acceleration of these actions and collaborations are essential before irreversible tipping points are crossed in the coming decade. We still can overcome significant societal, political and economic barriers of our own making. Previously, we identified six core areas for urgent global action – energy, pollutants, nature, food systems, population stabilization and economic goals. Here we identify an indicative, systemic and time-limited framework for priority actions for policy, planning and management at multiple scales from household to global. We broadly follow the ‘Reduce-Remove-Repair’ approach to rapid action. To guide decision makers, planners, managers, and budgeters, we cite some of the many experiments, mechanisms and resources in order to facilitate rapid global adoption of effective solutions. Our biggest challenges are not technical, but social, economic, political and behavioral. To have hope of success, we must accelerate collaborative actions across scales, in different cultures and governance systems, while maintaining adequate social, economic and political stability. Effective and timely actions are still achievable on many, though not all fronts. Such change will mean the difference for billions of children and adults, hundreds of thousands of species, health of many ecosystems, and will determine our common future

Technologies, Policies, and Measures for Mitigating Climate Change

This Technical Paper provides an overview and analysis of technologies and measures to limit and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to enhance GHG sinks under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC). The paper focuses on technologies and measures for the countries listed in Annex I of the FCCC, while noting information as appropriate for use by non- Annex I countries. Technologies and measures are examined over three time periods -- with a focus on the short term (present to 2010) and the medium term (2010-2020), but also including discussion of longer-term (e.g., 2050) possibilities and opportunities. For this analysis, the authors draw on materials used to prepare the IPCC Second Assessment Report (SAR) and previous IPCC assessments and reports. The Technical Paper includes discussions of technologies and measures that can be adopted in three energy end-use sectors (commercial/residential/institutional buildings, transportation, and industry), as well as in the energy supply sector and the agriculture, forestry, and waste management sectors. Broader measures affecting national economies are discussed in a final section on economic instruments. A range of potential measures are analyzed, including market-based programs; voluntary agreements; regulatory measures; research, development, and demonstration (RD&D); taxes on GHG emissions; and emissions permits/quotas. It should be noted that the choice of instruments could have economic impacts on other countries. The paper identifies and evaluates different options on the basis of three criteria. Because of the difficulty of estimating the economic and market potential (see Box 1) of different technologies and the effectiveness of different measures in achieving emission reduction objectives, and because of the danger of double-counting the results achieved by measures that tap the same technical potentials, the paper does not estimate total global emissions reductions. Nor does the paper recommend adoption of any particular approaches

Production Externalities in the Wood Furniture Industry in Central Java

This paper exploits micro firm level data to examine the impact of spatial clustering and links to foreign buyer networks on firm performance in the wood furniture industry in Central Java, Indonesia. The analysis is based on an annual manufacturing survey. We identify the impact of specialization of the cluster, diversification, and links to foreign buyer networks. For this purpose, a production function framework is developed. The results lend support to the view that clustering of large and medium scale specialized firms improves firm performance, while clustering of small scale specialized firms and clustering of diverse firms are not conducive to firm performance. We also find a clear positive association between involvement in exporting activities and firm performance