Visual and Rhetorical Cues to Transform Nature: A Historical Analysis of Mao Zedong’s Environmental Policy Through Print and Visual Media

The contemporary mainstream media offers passionate praise for China’s recent improvements regarding renewable energy generation and sustainability. However, such articles make deliberate comparisons of these achievements to the state of China less than a decade ago, with the nation’s dense smog posing a public health crisis for the Chinese people. In this thesis, I step back into history to examine the environmental policy message promoted by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) under Mao Zedong to better understand China’s swift turnaround and present-day environmental policy. The existing body of literature provides ample evidence of the land-use change and pollution that arose in the Maoist Era, though little attention is paid to Mao’s environmental policy message that led to said environmental degradation. Using People’s Daily newspaper articles and propaganda posters, I uncover clues that Mao crafted an environmental policy message of utopian urgency and a conflict that pitted man against the fundamental functions of the environment. Additionally, I argue that Mao’s environmental policy was important for the broader goals of the CCP as it was used to exert political control over China’s citizens. Although many facets of Mao’s environmental policy were anthropocentric, I also argue that Chinese print and visual media began to promote norms of environmental conservation in the 1960s and 1970s. Finally, I conclude with a discussion of how these emerging norms of conservation as well as Mao’s anthropocentric attitudes towards nature have contributed to the contradictory environmental policy outcomes we see from China today

The anatomy of Laevapex fuscus, a freshwater limpet (Gastropoda: Pulmonata)

http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/56352/1/MP108.pd

From adoption potential to transformative learning around Conservation Agriculture in Burkina Faso

Despite the substantial support of donors and development agencies, Conservation Agriculture (CA) has not moved from an invention to an innovation stage in sub-Saharan Africa. The results of the common strategy to transfer the technology from science through donors to farms in a top down manner have been disappointing (with Burkina Faso being a typical case). To make things worse, assessing the actual levels of adoption has been problematic due to the biases and weaknesses of the applied methods - including the Qualitative expert Assessment Tool for CA adoption in Africa (QAToCA). However, to promote sustainable farming pathways such as CA, we still see a need for methods that help to understand and foster transitions in agricultural practices. The purpose of this work is thus to design an approach that combines current insights in learning theory and practice. The starting point of the process is an assessment of the agro-ecosystem health of the farming system of interest, by exploring the social, economic and ecological characteristics of the system. Second, to create space for social learning, we apply participatory stakeholder mapping to make the roles, values, interests, and capabilities of the different stakeholders explicit. Third, the stakeholders jointly work on a historical timeline of CA promotion to identify key events, drivers and constraints of the innovation process. Then, to support individual experience, dialogue and different ways of learning, the stakeholders together create non-scripted, non-edited videos of their perspectives on challenges in the farming system. These videos are then screened in a multi-stakeholder meeting to stimulate the discussion on the innovation potential of CA. Discussions are structured by the framework of QAToCA. The results of all exercises feed into a proposal for an improved promotion of CA. We tested the approach in a farming community in Koumbia, Burkina Faso. The described learning elements helped to moderate the expert bias and rigidity of QAToCA. As a learning outcome, the results underlined that CA uptake will depend on the adaptation to the local conditions (e.g. competition over crop residue exacerbated by free-grazing) in order become a viable agricultural system

Feeding the soil AND feeding the cow – Conservation Agriculture in Kenya

One of the main obstacles to the implementation of Conservation Agriculture (CA) in subSaharan Africa is the priority given to using crop residues as cattle feed rather than mulching material. As documented in past projects (e.g. CA-SARD, CA2Africa, ABACO), in this way the CA approach will not reach its full potential - particularly in countries with a limited biomass production due to climatic conditions. To identify pathways for enabling an implementation of CA that is not in conflict with other goals of farmers’ livelihoods (e.g. livestock farming), we used a transformative learning approach with farmers and other stakeholders in Laikipia County (Kenya). The learning elements comprised: a timeline that encompasses the past promotion activities; stakeholder mapping which highlights the various stakeholders involved and their influence; non-scripted participatory videos filmed by the stakeholders themselves that show the farming system from different perspectives; focus group discussions structured by the Qualitative expert Assessment Tool for CA adoption in Africa (QAToCA). Challenges to CA adoption that were jointly identified include the competition for fodder, a lack of financial resources to get started with CA. There are knowledge gaps on proper application of CA equipment, on the fodder production and conservation options and, lastly, on sustainable crop-livestock production systems. Furthermore, farmers feel disconnected from existing governmental support. However, our findings highlight solutions which enable feeding the soil “and” feeding the cow. Some farmers already have started to grow forages on their farms in order to reduce dependence on crop residues as a feeding source – an approach which had not been promoted during past projects. This shows the importance of an enabling environment provided by government programs which supports long-term extension efforts combined with farmers’ willingness to jointly learn towards a more sustainable agriculture. On farms where both systems (CA and conventional) are practised, women play an important role by experimenting with CA practices, thereby realising promising results in terms of yield and drought resilience. Furthermore, our findings underline the need for a long-term monitoring of innovation processes which is often not possible within short-term term research projects and promotion programs

Zika virus on youtube: An analysis of english-language video content by source

Objectives The purpose of this study was to describe the source, length, number of views, and content of the most widely viewed Zika virus (ZIKV)-related YouTube videos. We hypothesized that ZIKV-related videos uploaded by different sources contained different content. Methods The 100 most viewed English ZIKV-related videos were manually coded and analyzed statistically. Results Among the 100 videos, there were 43 consumer-generated videos, 38 Internet-based news videos, 15 TV-based news videos, and 4 professional videos. Internet news sources captured over two-thirds of the total of 8 894 505 views. Compared with consumer-generated videos, Internet-based news videos were more likely to mention the impact of ZIKV on babies (odds ratio [OR], 6.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.64 to 23.76), the number of cases in Latin America (OR, 5.63; 95% CI, 1.47 to 21.52); and ZIKV in Africa (OR, 2.56; 95% CI, 1.04 to 6.31). Compared with consumer-generated videos, TV-based news videos were more likely to express anxiety or fear of catching ZIKV (OR, 6.67; 95% CI, 1.36 to 32.70); to highlight fear of ZIKV among members of the public (OR, 7.45; 95% CI, 1.20 to 46.16); and to discuss avoiding pregnancy (OR, 3.88; 95% CI, 1.13 to 13.25). Conclusions Public health agencies should establish a larger presence on YouTube to reach more people with evidence-based information about ZIKV

Financial Relationships With Industry Among National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guideline Authors

Financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs) among authors of clinical practice guidelines have the potential to influence treatment recommendations. To quantify FCOIs with industry among authors of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines. We assessed FCOIs occurring during 2014 among NCCN guideline authors in the United States. All were physician members of the NCCN guideline committees for lung, breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer as of the end of 2014. The data source for FCOIs was Open Payments, which is publically reported by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. This study was cross-sectional. The proportion of NCCN authors having FCOIs with industry; the average amount received from industry sources per author. Of 125 guideline authors, 108 (86%) had at least 1 reported FCOI. Authors received an average of $10 011 (range,$0-$106 859) in general payments (GPs), which include consulting, meals, lodging, and similar transfers of value, and$236 066 (range $0-$2 756 713) in industry research payments (RPs), including funding associated with clinical trials. Approximately 84% of authors received GPs, while 47% received RPs. Eight (6%) had FCOIs in excess of the $50 000 net and/or$20 000 single-company maximums stipulated by NCCN. Among NCCN guideline authors, FCOIs involving RPs were of greater value, while those involving GPs were more prevalent. Although FCOIs may result from engaging in important scholarship, FCOIs may still influence guideline authors in counterproductive ways. Research is needed to understand how best to manage author FCOIs during guideline creation

Electronic Patient Reporting of Adverse Events and Quality of Life: A Prospective Feasibility Study in General Oncology

PURPOSE: Adverse event (AE) reporting is essential in clinical trials. Clinician interpretation can result in under-reporting; therefore, the value of patient self-reporting has been recognized. The National Cancer Institute has developed a Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) for direct patient AE reporting. A nonrandomized prospective cohort feasibility study aimed to explore the compliance and acceptability of an electronic (Internet or telephone) system for collecting patient self-reported AEs and quality of life (QOL). METHODS: Oncology patients undergoing treatment (chemotherapy, targeted agents, hormone therapy, radiotherapy, and/or surgery) at 2 hospitals were sent automated weekly reminders to complete PRO-CTCAE once a week and QOL (for a maximum of 12 weeks). Patients had to speak/understand English and have access to the Internet or a touch-tone telephone. Primary outcome was compliance (proportion of expected questionnaires), and recruitment rate, attrition, and patient/staff feedback were also explored. RESULTS: Of 520 patients, 249 consented (47.9%)—mean age was 62 years, 51% were male, and 70% were married—and 230 remained on the study at week 12. PRO-CTCAE was completed at 2,301 (74.9%) of 3,074 timepoints and QOL at 749 (79.1%) of 947 timepoints. Individual weekly/once every 4 weeks compliance reduced over time but was more than 60% throughout. Of 230 patients, 106 (46.1%) completed 13 or more PRO-CTCAE, and 136 (59.1%) of 230 patients completed 4 QOL questionnaires. Most were completed on the Internet (82.3%; mean age, 60.8 years), which was quicker, but older patients preferred the telephone option (mean age, 70.0 years). Positive feedback was received from patients and staff. CONCLUSION: Self-reporting of AEs and QOL using an electronic home-based system is feasible and acceptable. Implementation of this approach in cancer clinical trials may improve the precision and accuracy of AE reporting

Local Understandings of Soil Fertility, Rainfall and Conservation Agriculture in Laikipia, Kenya: A Qualitative Analysis.

Conservation Agriculture (CA) is mostly referred to in the literature as having three principles at the core of its identity: minimum soil disturbance, permanent organic soil cover and crop diversity. This farming package has been described as suitable to improve yields and livelihoods of smallholders in semi-arid regions of Kenya, which since the colonial period have been heavily subjected to tillage. Our study is based on a qualitative approach that followed local meanings and understandings of soil fertility, rainfall and CA in Ethi and Umande located in the semi-arid region of Laikipia, Kenya. Farm visits, 53 semistructured interviews, informal talks were carried out from April to June 2015. Ethi and Umande locations were part of a resettlement programme after the independence of Kenya that joined together people coming from different farming contexts. Since the 1970–80s, state and NGOs have been promoting several approaches to control erosion and boost soil fertility. In this context, CA has also been promoted preferentially since 2007. Interviewees were well acquainted with soil erosion and the methods to control it. Today, rainfall amount and distribution are identified as major constraints to crop performance. Soil fertility is understood as being under control since farmers use several methods to boost it (inorganic fertilisers, manure, terraces, agroforestry, vegetation barriers). CA is recognised to deliver better yields but it is not able to perform well under severe drought and does not provide yields as high as ‘promised’ in promotion campaigns. Moreover, CA is mainly understood as “cultivating with chemicals”, “kulima na dawa”, in kiswahili. A dominant view is that CA is about minimum tillage and use of pre-emergence herbicides. It is relevant to reflect about what kind of CA is being promoted and if elements like soil cover and crop rotation are given due attention. CA based on these two ideas, minimum tillage and use of herbicides, is hard to stand as a programme to be promoted and up-scaled. Therefore CA appears not to be recognised as a convincing approach to improve the livelihoods in Laikipia

Green Carbon: Making sustainable agriculture real

The concept of sustainable development has evolved from a mere movement for the protection of the environment, to other multidimensional approaches. Indeed, today it calls for a holistic approach, seeking to preserve and improve not only the environment, but also to achieve social equity and economic sustainability. In Europe, society demands quality and safe products, not only in the industrial sector but also in agriculture. According to FAO, sustainable agriculture development is a key element of the new global challenges to meet human food security needs at 2050. Unsustainable practices based on intensive soil tillage and agro-chemical applications have increased agri-environmental risks. Whereas world’s food needs are expected to increase by 70% by 2050, agricultural land in Europe will also have to face environmental, economic and social challenges related to sustainable agriculture. As a result, in the EU 2020 Strategy, it is expressed that the new Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is required to contribute to smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, enhancing social well-being, providing ecosystem services, managing resources sustainably while avoiding environmental degradation. There is broad consensus within the scientific sector that human actions generate a large portion of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, causing global warming. Certainly, Kyoto Protocol states it. According to the European Environmental Agency (EEA), there has been a decrease of 17% in GHG emissions between 1990 and 2009. However, EEA also stressed the importance of the agricultural contribution to total emissions (10.3%). The fossil fuel used in agricultural field operations, along with increasing CO2 emissions from soil through tillage, are considered to be one of the main direct sources of GHG emissions from agriculture sector. Increased inputs required to sustain conventional agriculture also adds significantly to total GHG emissions. Therefore, intensification of production through tillage, agro-chemicals and heavy machinery, which characterizes conventional agriculture in Europe, strongly contributes to increased net GHG emissions instead of mitigating global warming. Sustainable agricultural soil management is crucial for mitigating climate change, especially for the restoration of lost soil organic carbon. In fact, "Agricultural soils management" is recognized as one of the 15 most promising technology options for reducing GHG emissions in the COM (2005) 35 final "Winning the battle against global climate change." The Green Carbon Conference aims to show sustainable management of agricultural soils can help to agriculture mitigate and adapt to climate change, being compatible with the objectives of environmental protection, enhancing biodiversity and supporting farmers’ welfare along with many other environmental, economic and social benefits. Over the last decade, Conservation Agriculture has become known as a set of interlinked agricultural practices, of no or minimum mechanical soil disturbance, maintenance of soil mulch cover, and diversified cropping system, capable of: (a) overcoming several of the severe sustainability limitations of conventional agriculture; and (b) raising productivity, enhancing resilience, reducing degradation and increasing the flow of ecosystem services. The discussion around both the Soil Thematic Strategy initiated in 2002, and the JRC SoCo (Soil Conservation) project clearly recognized the potential of Conservation Agriculture in mitigating and even reversing the problems of soil erosion, soil organic matter decline, soil compaction, loss of biodiversity, climate change vulnerability, among others. Whereas Conservation Agriculture is now practiced successfully on more than 125 million hectares worldwide, Europe has shown to be reluctant with regard to its adoption, despite many promising results confirming its suitability in Europe. Therefore, this European Conference on Green Carbon provides an opportunity to take a leap forward in terms of sharing farmers experiences on Conservation Agriculture across Europe, reviewing the recent progress made in knowledge generation regarding Conservation Agriculture, and to disseminate the outcomes of the currently running LIFE+ Agricarbon (LIFE08 ENV/E/000129). The slogan of ‘Green Carbon’ chosen for this Conference attempts to clarify and highlight the indivisible yet vital link between soil organic carbon and the role that soil health plays in the sustainability of agricultural production and in the flow of ecosystem services. Nevertheless, the topics addressed by the Green Carbon Conference are not only related to the importance of soil organic carbon for the overall soil quality and health, but also include other sustainability issues intimately related to the role of soil carbon such as landscape scale ecosystem functions and services, climate change mitigation and carbon offset, and economic aspects. This Conference also seeks to alert and inform EU policy stakeholders and technical officers of the urgent need to adopt sustainable soil and production practices of Conservation Agriculture to contribute to the objectives of Europe 2020, the EU's growth strategy for the coming decades

Mobilizing Greater Crop and Land Potentials Sustainably

The supply side of the food security engine is the way we farm. The current engine of conventional tillage farming is faltering and needs to be replaced. This presentation will address supply side issues of agriculture to meet future agricultural demands for food and industry using the alternate no-till Conservation Agriculture (CA) paradigm (involving no-till farming with mulch soil cover and diversified cropping) that is able to raise productivity sustainably and efficiently, reduce inputs, regenerate degraded land, minimise soil erosion, and harness the flow of ecosystem services. CA is an ecosystems approach to farming capable of enhancing not only the economic and environmental performance of crop production and land management, but also promotes a mindset change for producing ‘more from less’, the key attitude towards sustainable production intensification. CA is now spreading globally in all continents at an annual rate of 10 Mha and covers some 157 Mha of cropland. Today global agriculture produces enough food to feed three times the current population of 7.21 billion. In 1976, when the world population was 4.15 billion, world food production far exceeded the amount necessary to feed that population. However, our urban and industrialised lifestyle leads to wastage of food of some 30%-40%, as well as waste of enormous amount of energy and protein while transforming crop-based food into animal-derived food; we have a higher proportion of people than ever before who are obese; we continue to degrade our ecosystems including much of our agricultural land of which some 400 Mha is reported to be abandoned due to severe soil and land degradation; and yields of staple cereals appear to have stagnated. These are signs of unsustainability at the structural level in the society, and it is at the structural level, for both supply side and demand side, that we need transformed mind sets about production, consumption and distribution. CA not only provides the possibility of increased crop yields for the low input smallholder farmer, it also provides a pro-poor rural and agricultural development model to support agricultural intensification in an affordable manner. For the high output farmer, it offers greater efficiency (productivity) and profit, resilience and stewardship. For farming anywhere, it addresses the root causes of agricultural land degradation, sub-optimal ecological crop and land potentials or yield ceilings, and poor crop phenotypic expressions or yield gaps. As national economies expand and diversify, more people become integrated into the economy and are able to access food. However, for those whose livelihoods continue to depend on agriculture to feed themselves and the rest of the world population, the challenge is for agriculture to produce the needed food and raw material for industry with minimum harm to the environment and the society, and to produce it with maximum efficiency and resilience against abiotic and biotic stresses, including those arising from climate change. There is growing empirical and scientific evidence worldwide that the future global supplies of food and agricultural raw materials can be assured sustainably at much lower environmental and economic cost by shifting away from conventional tillage-based food and agriculture systems to no-till CA-based food and agriculture systems. To achieve this goal will require effective national and global policy and institutional support (including research and education)