Status, challenges and pathways to the sustainable use of wild species

DATA AVAILABILITY : Data will be made available on request.The use of wild species is extensive in both high- and low-income countries. At least 50,000 wild species are used by billions of people around the world for food, energy, medicine, material, education or recreation, contributing significantly to efforts to achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. However, overexploitation remains a major threat to many wild species. Ensuring and enhancing the sustainability of use of wild species is thus essential for human well-being and biodiversity conservation. Globally, the use of wild species is increasing due to growing human demand and efficiency, but its sustainability varies and depends on the social-ecological contexts in which the use occurs. Multiple environmental and social (including economic) drivers affect the sustainability of use of wild species, posing major current and future challenges. In particular, climate change has already increased the vulnerability of many uses and is expected to increase it further in the coming decades, while global and illegal trades are, in many cases, key drivers of unsustainability. There is no single “silver bullet” policy to address these and other major challenges in the sustainable use of wild species. Rather, effective policies need to integrate inclusive actions at multiple scales that adopt right-based approaches, pay attention to equitable distribution of access and costs and benefits, employ participatory processes, strengthen monitoring programs, build robust customary or government institutions and support context-specific policies, as well as adaptive management.http://www.elsevier.com/locate/gloenvchahj2023Plant Production and Soil Scienc

An integrated framework for assessing coastal community vulnerability across cultures, oceans and scales.

Coastal communities are some of the most at-risk populations with respect to climate change impacts. It is therefore important to determine the vulnerability of such communities to co-develop viable adaptation options. Global efforts to address this issue include international scientific projects, such as Global Learning for Local Solutions (GULLS), which focuses on five fast warming regions of the southern hemisphere and aims to provide an understanding of the local scale processes influencing community vulnerability that can then be up-scaled to regional, country and global levels. This paper describes the development of a new social and ecological vulnerability framework which integrates exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity with the social livelihoods and food security approaches. It also measures community flexibility to understand better the adaptive capacity of different levels of community organization. The translation of the conceptual framework to an implementable method is described and its application in a number of “hotspot” countries, where ocean waters are warming faster than the rest of the world, is presented. Opportunities for cross-cultural comparisons to uncover similarities and differences in vulnerability and adaptation patterns among the study’s coastal communities, which can provide accelerated learning mechanisms to other coastal regions, are highlighted. The social and ecological framework and the associated survey approach allow for future integration of local-level vulnerability data with ecological and oceanographic models

Strategies to reengage patients lost to follow up in HIV care in high income countries, a scoping review

Background: Despite remarkable achievements in antiretroviral therapy (ART), losses to follow-up (LTFU) might prevent the long-term success of HIV treatment and might delay the achievement of the 90-90-90 objectives. This scoping review is aimed at the description and analysis of the strategies used in high-income countries to reengage LTFU in HIV care, their implementation and impact. Methods: A scoping review was done following Arksey & O'Malley's methodological framework and recommendations from Joanna Briggs Institute. Peer reviewed articles were searched for in Pubmed, Scopus and Web of Science; and grey literature was searched for in Google and other sources of information. Documents were charted according to the information presented on LTFU, the reengagement procedures used in HIV units in high-income countries, published during the last 15 years. In addition, bibliographies of chosen articles were reviewed for additional articles. Results: Twenty-eight documents were finally included, over 80% of them published in the United States later than 2015. Database searches, phone calls and/or mail contacts were the most common strategies used to locate and track LTFU, while motivational interviews and strengths-based techniques were used most often during reengagement visits. Outcomes like tracing activities efficacy, rates of reengagement and viral load reduction were reported as outcome measures. Conclusions: This review shows a recent and growing trend in developing and implementing patient reengagement strategies in HIV care. However, most of these strategies have been implemented in the United States and little information is available for other high-income countries. The procedures used to trace and contact LTFU are similar across reviewed studies, but their impact and sustainability are widely different depending on the country studied

Towards a better future for biodiversity and people: modelling Nature Futures

The expert group on scenarios and models of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services initiated the development of the Nature Futures Framework for developing scenarios of positive futures for nature, to help inform assessments of policy options. This new scenarios and modelling Framework seeks to open up diversity and plurality of perspectives by differentiating three main value perspectives on nature – Nature for Nature (intrinsic values of nature), Nature for Society (instrumental values) and Nature as Culture (relational values). This paper describes how the Nature Futures Framework can be applied in modelling to support policy processes by identifying key interventions for change in realizing a diversity of desirable futures. First, the paper introduces and elaborates on key building blocks of the framework for developing qualitative scenarios and translating them into quantitative scenarios: i) multiple value perspectives on nature and the Nature Futures frontier representing diverse preferences, ii) incorporating mutual and key feedbacks of social-ecological systems in Nature Futures scenarios, and iii) indicators describing the evolution of social-ecological systems with complementary knowledge and data. This paper then presents three possible application approaches to modelling Nature Futures scenarios to support the i) review, ii) implementation and iii) design phases of policy processes. The main objective of this paper is to facilitate the integration of the relational values of nature in models, through improved indicators and other forms of evidence, and to strengthen modelled linkages across biodiversity, ecosystems, nature’s contributions to people, and quality of life to identify science- and knowledge-based interventions and to enhance ecological understanding for achieving sustainable futures. The paper aims at stimulating the development of new scenarios and models based on this new framework by a wide community of modelers, and the testing and possible further development of the framework, particularly in the context of future IPBES assessments

Towards a better future for biodiversity and people: Modelling Nature Futures

The Nature Futures Framework (NFF) is a heuristic tool for co-creating positive futures for nature and people. It seeks to open up a diversity of futures through mainly three value perspectives on nature – Nature for Nature, Nature for Society, and Nature as Culture. This paper describes how the NFF can be applied in modelling to support decision-making. First, we describe key considerations for the NFF in developing qualitative and quantitative scenarios: i) multiple value perspectives on nature as a state space where pathways improving nature toward a frontier can be represented, ii) mutually reinforcing key feedbacks of social-ecological systems that are important for nature conservation and human wellbeing, iii) indicators of multiple knowledge systems describing the evolution of complex social-ecological dynamics. We then present three approaches to modelling Nature Futures scenarios in the review, screening, and design phases of policy processes. This paper seeks to facilitate the integration of relational values of nature in models and strengthen modelled linkages across biodiversity, nature’s contributions to people, and quality of life

A review of the pharmacology and clinical efficacy of brivaracetam

Pavel Klein,1 Anyzeila Diaz,2 Teresa Gasalla,3 John Whitesides4 1Mid-Atlantic Epilepsy and Sleep Center, Bethesda, MD, USA; 2Neurology Patient Value Unit, UCB Pharma, Smyrna, GA, USA; 3Neurology Patient Value Unit, UCB Pharma, Monheim am Rhein, Germany; 4Asset Development, UCB Pharma, Raleigh, NC, USA Abstract: Brivaracetam (BRV; Briviact) is a new antiepileptic drug (AED) approved for adjunctive treatment of focal (partial-onset) seizures in adults. BRV is a selective, high-affinity ligand for synaptic vesicle 2A (SV2A) with 15- to 30-fold higher affinity than levetiracetam, the first AED acting on SV2A. It has high lipid solubility and rapid brain penetration, with engagement of the target molecule, SV2A, within minutes of administration. BRV has potent broad-spectrum antiepileptic activity in animal models. Phase I studies indicated BRV was well tolerated and showed a favorable pharmacokinetic profile over a wide dose range following single (10–1,000 mg) and multiple (200–800 mg/day) oral dosing. Three pivotal Phase III studies have demonstrated promising efficacy and a good safety and tolerability profile across doses of 50–200 mg/day in the adjunctive treatment of refractory focal seizures. Long-term data indicate that the response to BRV is sustained, with good tolerability and retention rate. BRV is highly effective in patients experiencing secondarily generalized tonic–clonic seizures. Safety data to date suggest a favorable psychiatric adverse effect profile in controlled studies, although limited postmarketing data are available. BRV is easy to use, with no titration and little drug–drug interaction. It can be initiated at target dose with no titration. Efficacy is seen on day 1 of oral use in a significant percentage of patients. Intravenous administration in a 2-minute bolus and 15-minute infusion is well tolerated. Here, we review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and clinical data of BRV. Keywords: brivaracetam, efficacy, epilepsy, focal seizures, pharmacokinetics, tolerabilit