Biologisk mångfald i miljökonsekvensbeskrivningar och strategiska miljöbedömningar

Det nationella ansvaret för Sveriges åtaganden inom ramen för konventionen om biologisk mångfald (CBD) är knutet till Miljödepartementet. Eftersom CBD medför en lång rad åtaganden finns behov av att fördela ansvaret. Regeringskansliet har, tillsammans med ett antal berörda myndigheter och institutioner, etablerat ett system med tematiska fokalpunkter. Syftet är att stärka och underlätta det fortsatta genomförandet av de åtaganden som Sverige gjort inom ramen för CBD. MKB-centrum har fått uppdraget att vara tematisk fokalpunkt för biologisk mångfald i MKB och andra miljöbedömningar. För MKB-centrum innebär det att driva, samordna och följa upp Sveriges åtaganden enligt artikel 14 – konsekvensbedömning och minimering av skadliga effekter – i CBD. Som ett led i MKB-centrums uppdrag har dessa frivilliga riktlinjer om konsekvensbedömning innefattande biologisk mångfald översatts från engelska till svenska. Originalet, Biodiversity in EIA and SEA. Background Document to CBD Decision VIII/28: Voluntary Guidelines on Biodiversity-Inclusive Impact Assessment, har sammanställts och utgivits av Commission for Environmental Assessment i Nederländerna. Med denna översättning är vår förhoppning att dessa riktlinjer blir ett bra stöd för att beakta den biologiska mångfalden i miljökonsekvensbeskrivningar och andra miljöbedömningar för projekt, policys, planer och program. Riktlinjerna bidrar också till att uppfylla vårt 16: e miljökvalitetsmål Ett rikt växt- och djurliv och 2010-målet, det vill säga att till år 2010 signifikant stoppa den dramatiska förlusten av biologisk mångfald

SNX10 gene mutation leading to osteopetrosis with dysfunctional osteoclasts

Acknowledgements We sincerely thank the patients and family members who participated in this study. We would also like to thank Stefan Esher, Umeå University, for help with genealogy, and Anna Westerlund for excellent technical assistance. This work was supported by grants from the FOU, at the Umeå university hospital, and the Medical Faculty at Umeå University. The work at University of Gothenburg was supported by grants from The Swedish Research Council, the Swedish Rheumatism Association, the Royal 80-Year Fund of King Gustav V, ALF/LUA research grant from Sahlgrenska University Hospital in Gothenburg and the Lundberg Foundation. The work at the University of Gothenburg and the University of Aberdeen was supported by Euroclast, a Marie Curie FP7-People-2013-ITN: # 607446.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Biodiversity in urban governance and planning : Examples from Swedish cities

One of the key agreements adopted at the Rio Conference in 1992 was the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Both in practice and research biodiversity has been mainly addressed in a non-urban context, often discussed in relation to issues such as the depletion of rainforests and desertification. However, as more than half of the world population are urban dwellers, it is increasingly urgent to discuss the application of the concept of biodiversity within an urban context. Issues approached in this article are: What does it mean to talk about biodiversity in an urban context? Is biodiversity a meaningful goal for urban politics and planning? Is there empirical evidence of implementing biodiversity in urban politics and planning. After an introduction, the article is organized into four sections. In the second section the concept of biological diversity is defined with special reference to its application in an urban context. Biodiversity and its relationship to urban governance is the topic of the third section, followed by a section analysing examples of how this relationship is practised in selected Swedish cities. The final section highlights five major conclusions with regard to the application of biodiversity in an urban context: (1) that all cities studied have adopted overall 'green' policies, including biodiversity as one component; (2) that local coalitions in favour of implementing biodiversity have been established between employees at different offices, between employees and politicians, and between employees and NGOs; (3) that there are in all cases tangible signs of spatial patterns and structures that are favourable to biodiversity; (4) that urban biodiversity, for its successful implementation, needs to be related, and accommodated to other values given priority in current policymaking, such as recreation; (5) that mainstream biodiversity analysis should be complemented by an urban landscape approach. Finally, the article returns to the more general question of what biodiversity could and should mean in urban planning