Organic Action Plans. Development, implementation and evaluation. A resource manual for the organic food and farming sector

In 2004, the European Action Plan for Organic Food and Farming was launched. Many European countries have also developed national Organic Action Plans to promote and support organic agriculture. As part of the EU funded ORGAP project (“European Action Plan of Organic Food and Farming - Development of criteria and procedures for the evaluation of the EU Action Plan for Organic Agriculture”) a toolbox to evaluate and monitor the implementation of national and European Action Plans has been developed. In order to communicate the results of this project as widely as possible, a practical manual for initiating and evaluating Organic Action Plans has been produced. This manual has been created to inspire the people, organisations and institutions involved, or with an interest, in the organic food and farming sector to engage in the initiation, review, revision and renewal of regional, national and European Organic Action Plans. The objectives of the manual are to provide: • a tool for stakeholder involvement in future Action Plan development and implementation processes at EU, national and regional level • a guide to the use of the Organic Action Plan Evaluation Toolbox (ORGAPET) developed through the project The manual summarises the key lessons learnt from more than 10 years experience of development, implementation and evaluation of Organic Action Plans throughout Europe. The Organic Action Plan Evaluation Toolbox (ORGAPET), which includes comprehensive information to support the Organic Action Plan development and evaluation process is included with the manual as a CD-ROM, and is also accessible on-line at www.orgap.org/orgapet. The ORGAP website www.orgap.org provides a further information on the project and the European and national organic action plans. Published by: Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Frick, Switzerland; IFOAM EU Group, Brussels Table of contents Foreword 1 1 Introduction 3 1.1 About this manual 3 1.2 Organic farming – origins, definition & principles 6 1.3 Development of organic food & farming in Europe 8 1.3.1 Organic food and farming regulation in Europe 10 1.3.2 Policy support for organic food and farming in Europe 11 2 Organic Action Plans – what are they about? 16 2.1 Why Organic Action Plans? 16 2.2 European Organic Action Plan 21 2.3 Overview of national and regional Organic Action Plans 23 3 Planning and implementing Organic Action Plans 28 3.1 Policy development 28 3.2 Defining organic sector development needs and potential 31 3.3 Defining policy goals and objectives 34 3.4 Involving stakeholders 40 3.4.1 The case for stakeholder involvement 40 3.4.2 Identifying relevant stakeholders 42 3.4.3 Participatory approaches for stakeholders involvement 44 3.5 Decision making: selecting, integrating and prioritising relevant measures 46 3.5.1 Deciding on policy instruments and action points 47 3.5.2 Priorities for action – allocating resources 50 3.6 Implementing Organic Action Plans 52 3.7 Including monitoring and evaluation of Organic Action Plans from outset 56 3.8 Managing communication 58 3.9 Development of Action Plans in countries that joined the EU in 2004 and later 59 4 Evaluating Organic Action Plans 61 4.1 Principles of evaluation 61 4.2 Conducting an evaluation 64 4.3 Evaluating Action Plan design and implementation 70 4.3.1 Evaluating programme design and implementation processes 70 4.3.2 Evaluating programme coherence 72 4.3.3 Evaluating stakeholder involvement 74 4.4 Evaluating Action Plan effects 78 4.4.1 Developing and using indicators for evaluation 78 4.5 Overall evaluation of Organic Action Plans – judging success 85 4.6 Evaluating Action Plans in countries that joined the EU in 2004 and later 89 5 Organic Action Plans – the Golden Rules 91 5.1 Key elements of Organic Action Plan development 91 5.2 The Golden rules for Organic Action Plan 93 References 96 Annex Detailed synopsis of ORGAPET 10

A Meta-Analysis of Genome-Wide Association Scans Identifies IL18RAP, PTPN2, TAGAP, and PUS10 As Shared Risk Loci for Crohn's Disease and Celiac Disease

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited

Endoscopic tri-modal imaging for surveillance in ulcerative colitis: randomised comparison of high-resolution endoscopy and autofluorescence imaging for neoplasia detection; and evaluation of narrow-band imaging for classification of lesions

Background: Endoscopic tri-modal imaging (ETMI) incorporates white light endoscopy (WLE), autofluorescence imaging (AFI) and narrow-band imaging (NBI). Aims: To assess the value of ETMI for the detection and classification of neoplasia in patients with longstanding ulcerative colitis. Design: Randomised comparative trial of tandem colonoscopies. Setting: Academic Medical Centre Amsterdam, Netherlands. Patients and methods: Fifty patients with ulcerative colitis underwent surveillance colonoscopy with ETMI. Each colonic segment was inspected twice, once with AFI and once with WLE, in random order. All detected lesions were inspected by NBI for Kudo pit pattern analysis and additional random biopsies were taken. Main outcome measures: Neoplasia miss-rates of AFI and WLE, and accuracy of the Kudo classification by NBI. Results: Among patients assigned to inspection with AFI first (n = 25), 10 neoplastic lesions were primarily detected. Subsequent WLE detected no additional neoplasia. Among patients examined with WLE first (n = 25), three neoplastic lesions were detected; subsequent inspection with AFI added three neoplastic lesions. Neoplasia miss-rates for AFI and WLE were 0% and 50% (p = 0.036). The Kudo classification by NBI had a sensitivity and specificity of 75% and 81%; however, all neoplasia was coloured purple on AFI (sensitivity 100%). No additional patients with neoplasia were detected by random biopsies. Conclusion: Autofluorescence imaging improves the detection of neoplasia in patients with ulcerative colitis and decreases the yield of random biopsies. Pit pattern analysis by NBI has a moderate accuracy for the prediction of histology, whereas AFI colour appears valuable in excluding the presence of neoplasia. Trial registration number: ISRCTN0527274

Plans d’action pour l’agriculture biologique. Développement, mise en œuvre et évaluation. Un manuel de ressources pour le secteur de l’alimentation et de l’agriculture biologiques

Avant-propos La Commission européenne a publié en juin 2004 le Plan d’action européen pour l’alimentation et l’agriculture biologiques. Avec ce plan, la Commission visait à évaluer la situation de l’agriculture biologique et à fonder les bases de développement de sa politique future. Au niveau national, de nombreux gouvernements ont également développé des plans d’action pour promouvoir l’agriculture biologique. Il est donc apparu nécessaire de considérer comment de tels plans d’action pouvaient être évalués avec succès. Le plan d’action européen a été la motivation principale pour la DG Recherche de la Commission européenne de financer un projet de soutien spécifique, l’ORGAP, Projet No. CT-2005-006591 au sein du 6ème programme-cadre de recherche. Ce projet, intitulé “Plan d’action européen pour l’alimentation et l’agriculture biologiques – développement de critères et de procédures d’évaluation du Plan d’action UE pour l’agriculture biologique”, a débuté en mai 2005 et s’est terminé en avril 2008. Des outils ont été développés au sein du projet pour évaluer et surveiller la mise en œuvre du Plan d’action européen dans les domaines suivants : information, formation et pédagogie, recherche, production, traitement, développement du marché, certification et dépenses publiques. Ces outils ont été testés sur un échantillon de Plans d’action nationaux existants, et pour partie aussi sur le Plan d’action européen, en plaçant principalement l’accent sur les processus de mise en œuvre. En outre, des recommandations politiques de la Commission européenne, des autorités nationales et autres acteurs ont été émises. Afin de communiquer les recommandations relatives à ce projet aussi largement que possible, ce manuel pratique d’initiation et d’évaluation des plans d’action a été créé. La fonction de ce manuel est double : a) Outil de participation des acteurs dans le développement de futurs plans et mise en œuvre au niveau UE, national et régional ; b) Guide d’utilisation d’ORGAPET, des outils d’évaluation du projet ORGAP (fourni sur CD-ROM avec le manuel et disponible en ligne sur le site www.orgap.org). Le manuel, créé dans le cadre du projet ORGAP, est largement basé sur les documents inclus dans l’Organic Action Plan Évaluation Toolbox (Outils d’évaluation du plan d’action biologique) (ORGAPET). Les institutions suivantes ont contribué au développement d’ORGAPET et du manuel : - Université de Hohenheim (UHO), Stuttgart (Prof. Stephan Dabbert, Christian Eichert) ; - Aberystwyth University (UWA), Pays de Galles, Grande-Bretagne (Dr. Nic Lampkin, Ian Jeffreys) ; - Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona (UNIVPM), Italie (Prof. Raffaele Zanoli, Dr. Daniela Vairo) ; - University of Southern Denmark (USD), Danemark (Dr. Johannes Michelsen)

Verkassen? Maatschappelijke kosten en baten van het verplaatsen van tuinbouw ten behoeve van woningbouw

Het bouwen van woningen in de Bollenstreek is maatschappelijk rendabel als de bollenteelt geleidelijk wordt verplaatst. Woningbouw in het Westland is mogelijk rendabel als het om extra woningen gaat. Dat blijkt uit een kengetallen kosten-batenanalyse (KKBA) van een toekomst waarin in 2040 een kwart van de huidige ‘greenports’ wordt gebruikt voor woningbouw. Het gaat bij de verplaatsing in het Westland om 1000 hectare tuinbouwgrond en in de Bollenstreek om 500 hectare. Voor de kosten en baten is van belang wat er gebeurt met de tuinbouwactiviteiten. Daarom zijn drie beleidsalternatieven onderzocht: 1. Er wordt elders binnen de Randstad ruimte voor tuinbouw gecreëerd; 2. Er wordt buiten de Randstad ruimte gecreëerd; 3. Er wordt geen extra ruimte gecreëerd en er moet gebruik worden gemaakt van al beschikbare ruimte

Early detection and follow‐up of colorectal neoplasia based on faecal volatile organic compounds

Aim: Early detection and removal of colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced adenomas (AAs) decreases the incidence of and mortality from the disease. We aimed to evaluate the potential of faecal volatile organic compounds (VOCs) for detection and follow‐up of colorectal adenoma using advanced electronic nose technology. Method: This was a prospective multi‐centre case–control cohort including two district hospitals and one tertiary referral hospital. Patients undergoing colonoscopy were instructed to collect a faecal sample prior to bowel cleansing and were included in the study when CRC, AAs, large adenomas (LAs; 0.5–1.0 cm), small adenomas (SAs; 0.1–0.5 cm) or no endoscopic abnormalities (controls) were observed. Patients undergoing polypectomy and controls were asked for a second sample after 3 months. Faecal VOCs were measured with gas chromatography–ion mobility spectrometry. Random forest, support vector machine, Gaussian process and neural net classification were used to evaluate accuracy. Results: In total, 14 patients with CRC, 64 with AAs, 69 with LAs, 127 with SAs and 227 controls were included. A second sample was collected from 32 polypectomy patients and 32 controls. Faecal VOCs discriminated CRC and adenomas from control [AUC (95% CI): CRC vs control 0.96 (0.89–1); AA vs control 0.96 (0.93–1); LA vs control 0.96 (0.92–0.99); SA vs control 0.96 (0.94–0.99)]. There were no significant differences between CRC and adenoma groups. Patients with adenomas and controls were discriminated prior to polypectomy, whereas 3 months after polypectomy VOC profiles were similar [T0 adenoma vs control 0.98 (0.95–1); T1 adenoma vs control 0.55 (0.40–0.69)]. Conclusions: Faecal VOC profiles may be useful for early detection of CRC and adenomas and the timing of polyp surveillance as polypectomy led to a normalization of the VOC profile

Colonoscopic surveillance improves survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis in inflammatory bowel disease

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: Colonoscopic surveillance provides the best practical means for preventing colorectal cancer (CRC) in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. Strong evidence for improved survival from surveillance programmes is sparse. METHOD: The aim of this study was to compare tumour stage and survival of IBD patients with CRC who were a part of a surveillance programme with those who were not. A nationwide pathology database (PALGA (pathologisch anatomisch landelijk geautomatiseerd archief)) was consulted to identify IBD patients with CRC treated in all eight university hospitals in The Netherlands over a period of 15 years. Patients were assigned to the surveillance group when they had undergone one or more surveillance colonoscopies before a diagnosis of CRC. Patients who had not undergone surveillance served as controls. Tumour stage and survival were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 149 patients with IBD-associated CRC were identified. Twenty-three had had colonoscopic surveillance before CRC was discovered. The 5-year CRC-related survival rate of patients in the surveillance group was 100% compared with 74% in the non-surveillance group (P=0.042). In the surveillance group, only one patient died as a consequence of CRC compared with 29 patients in the control group (P=0.047). In addition, more early tumour stages were found in the surveillance group (P=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: These results provide evidence for improved survival from colonoscopic surveillance in IBD patients by detecting CRC at a more favourable tumour stage

Association between HLA-DRB1 alleles polymorphism and hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>HLA-DRB1 allele polymorphisms have been reported to be associated with hepatocellular carcinoma susceptibility, but the results of these previous studies have been inconsistent. The purpose of the present study was to explore whether specific HLA-DRB1 alleles (DRB1*07, DRB1*12, DRB1*15) confer susceptibility to hepatocellular carcinoma.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Case-control studies on HLA-DRB1 alleles association with HCC were searched up to January 2010 through a systematic review of the literature. The odds ratios (ORs) of HLA-DRB1 allele distributions in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma were analyzed against healthy controls. The meta-analysis software REVMAN 5.0 was applied for investigating heterogeneity among individual studies and for summarizing all the studies. Meta-analysis was performed using fixed-effect or random-effect methods, depending on absence or presence of significant heterogeneity.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Eight case-control studies were included in the final analysis. Among the 3 HLA-DRB1 alleles studied, DRB1*07 and DRB1*12 were significantly associated with the risk of HCC in the whole populations (OR = 1.65, 95% CI: 1.08-2.51, P = 0.02 and OR = 1.59, 95% CI: 1.09-2.32, P = 0.02, respectively). No significant association was established for DRB1*15 allele with HCC in the whole populations. Subgroup analysis by ethnicity showed that DRB1*07, DRB1*12 and DRB1*15 alleles significantly increased the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in Asians (OR = 2.10, 95% CI: 1.06-4.14, P = 0.03; OR = 1.73, 95% CI: 1.17-2.57, P = 0.006 and <b><it>OR </it></b>= 2.88, <it><b>95%CI: 1</b></it>.77-4.69, P <<it><b>0.001</b></it>, respectively).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>These results support the hypothesis that specific HLA-DRB1 alleles might influence the susceptibility of hepatocellular carcinoma. Large, multi-ethnic confirmatory and well designed studies are needed to determine the host genetic determinants of hepatocellular carcinoma.</p