Conventional and makeshift rainwater harvesting in rural South Africa: exploring determinants for rainwater harvesting mode

This article was supported by the Open Access Publication Fund of Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin.In underserved rural areas, domestic rainwater harvesting has been gaining importance as an alternative water source. In rural South Africa, however, less than 1% of households use conventional rainwater harvesting systems. Instead, a household survey in KwaZulu-Natal reveals that many households harvest rainwater in a makeshift manner, using homemade gutters and drums. Statistical analysis shows that high income, a brick house with straight gutters and good water services facilitate conventional rainwater harvesting, while a household with only round huts is easily trapped into makeshift rainwater harvesting. For upscaling rainwater harvesting in rural areas, housing types need to be considered.Peer Reviewe

Significant benefits of AIP testing and clinical screening in familial isolated and young-onset pituitary tumors

Context Germline mutations in the aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein (AIP) gene are responsible for a subset of familial isolated pituitary adenoma (FIPA) cases and sporadic pituitary neuroendocrine tumors (PitNETs). Objective To compare prospectively diagnosed AIP mutation-positive (AIPmut) PitNET patients with clinically presenting patients and to compare the clinical characteristics of AIPmut and AIPneg PitNET patients. Design 12-year prospective, observational study. Participants & Setting We studied probands and family members of FIPA kindreds and sporadic patients with disease onset ≤18 years or macroadenomas with onset ≤30 years (n = 1477). This was a collaborative study conducted at referral centers for pituitary diseases. Interventions & Outcome AIP testing and clinical screening for pituitary disease. Comparison of characteristics of prospectively diagnosed (n = 22) vs clinically presenting AIPmut PitNET patients (n = 145), and AIPmut (n = 167) vs AIPneg PitNET patients (n = 1310). Results Prospectively diagnosed AIPmut PitNET patients had smaller lesions with less suprasellar extension or cavernous sinus invasion and required fewer treatments with fewer operations and no radiotherapy compared with clinically presenting cases; there were fewer cases with active disease and hypopituitarism at last follow-up. When comparing AIPmut and AIPneg cases, AIPmut patients were more often males, younger, more often had GH excess, pituitary apoplexy, suprasellar extension, and more patients required multimodal therapy, including radiotherapy. AIPmut patients (n = 136) with GH excess were taller than AIPneg counterparts (n = 650). Conclusions Prospectively diagnosed AIPmut patients show better outcomes than clinically presenting cases, demonstrating the benefits of genetic and clinical screening. AIP-related pituitary disease has a wide spectrum ranging from aggressively growing lesions to stable or indolent disease course

Household survey on water security in KZN, South Africa, 2018: Survey, data and statistical analysis

Die Haushaltsbefragung wurde mit 67 Haushalten in einer ländlichen Gegend in Kwazulu-Natal, Südafrika, durchgeführt. Sie enthält Fragen zum Wasserholen, zur Wasserverfügbarkeit, zur Wassernutzung im Haushalt, zur Wasserspeicherung, zur Regenwassergewinnung und –nutzung, Trinkwasseraufbereitung, zu sanitären Einrichtungen und wasserbedingte Gesundheitsrisiken, sowie zu generellen Haushaltscharakteristika, Bildung, Einkommen und Haushaltsfinanzen. Die Umfrage ist in folgendem Dokument zu finden: Household Survey_Water_Security-2018-Lebek.pdf. Die Daten, die während der Haushaltsbefragung erhoben wurden, umfassen die Antworten der Befragten sowie Feldbeobachtungen. KZN_survey_data_value-labels.csv enthält die Labels der Zahlenwerte (value labels), während KZN_survey_data.csv nur Zahlenwerte enthält. Letztere werden für die statistische Analyse benötigt. Im Rahmen einer Studie zur Regenwassergewinnung im Untersuchungsgebiet haben wir die Daten mit Methoden der Bayes’schen Statistik analysiert. Den Programmcode dieser Studie gibt es in rainwater_kzn.r und rainwater_RHF.r.Die Haushaltsbefragung wurde mit 67 Haushalten in einer ländlichen Gegend in Kwazulu-Natal, Südafrika, durchgeführt. Sie enthält Fragen zum Wasserholen, zur Wasserverfügbarkeit, zur Wassernutzung im Haushalt, zur Wasserspeicherung, zur Regenwassergewinnung und –nutzung, Trinkwasseraufbereitung, zu sanitären Einrichtungen und wasserbedingte Gesundheitsrisiken, sowie zu generellen Haushaltscharakteristika, Bildung, Einkommen und Haushaltsfinanzen. Die Umfrage ist in folgendem Dokument zu finden: Household Survey_Water_Security-2018-Lebek.pdf. Die Daten, die während der Haushaltsbefragung erhoben wurden, umfassen die Antworten der Befragten sowie Feldbeobachtungen. KZN_survey_data_value-labels.csv enthält die Labels der Zahlenwerte (value labels), während KZN_survey_data.csv nur Zahlenwerte enthält. Letztere werden für die statistische Analyse benötigt. Im Rahmen einer Studie zur Regenwassergewinnung im Untersuchungsgebiet haben wir die Daten mit Methoden der Bayes’schen Statistik analysiert. Den Programmcode dieser Studie gibt es in rainwater_kzn.r und rainwater_RHF.r

Household survey on water security in KZN, South Africa, 2018: Survey, data and statistical analysis

Die Haushaltsbefragung wurde mit 67 Haushalten in einer ländlichen Gegend in Kwazulu-Natal, Südafrika, durchgeführt. Sie enthält Fragen zum Wasserholen, zur Wasserverfügbarkeit, zur Wassernutzung im Haushalt, zur Wasserspeicherung, zur Regenwassergewinnung und –nutzung, Trinkwasseraufbereitung, zu sanitären Einrichtungen und wasserbedingte Gesundheitsrisiken, sowie zu generellen Haushaltscharakteristika, Bildung, Einkommen und Haushaltsfinanzen. Die Umfrage ist in folgendem Dokument zu finden: Household Survey_Water_Security-2018-Lebek.pdf. Die Daten, die während der Haushaltsbefragung erhoben wurden, umfassen die Antworten der Befragten sowie Feldbeobachtungen. KZN_survey_data_value-labels.csv enthält die Labels der Zahlenwerte (value labels), während KZN_survey_data.csv nur Zahlenwerte enthält. Letztere werden für die statistische Analyse benötigt. Im Rahmen einer Studie zur Regenwassergewinnung im Untersuchungsgebiet haben wir die Daten mit Methoden der Bayes’schen Statistik analysiert. Den Programmcode dieser Studie gibt es in rainwater_kzn.r und rainwater_RHF.r.The household survey was conducted with 67 households in a rural area in Kwazulu-Natal, South Africa. It comprises questions on water collection, water availability, domestic water use, water storage, rainwater harvesting and rainwater use, drinking water treatment, sanitation and water-related health, as well as general household characteristics, education, income and economy. The survey items can be found in Household Survey_Water_Security-2018-Lebek.pdf. The data gathered during the survey includes responses by interviewees and field observations. KZN_survey_data_value-labels.csv shows the value labels, while KZN_survey_data.csv only contains numerical values. The latter is needed for statistical analysis. For a study on rainwater harvesting in the study area we analysed the data using Bayesian statistical analysis methods. The code for this study is found in rainwater_kzn.r and rainwater_RHF.r

Guiding principles for hydrologists conducting interdisciplinary research and fieldwork with participants

To explore and address complex water-related issues, true collaborative, interdisciplinary research at the interface of hydrology and social science is necessary. Accordingly, hydrologists are increasingly working with social sciences and becoming involved in fieldwork with participants. With the overarching aim of facilitating collaboration and interdisciplinary water research, here we discuss important considerations and guiding principles for hydrologists, both those new to and those already familiar with interdisciplinary research, who are: (i) involved in fieldwork with participants; and (ii) working more collaboratively with social scientists. Drawing on first-hand experiences, this paper combines theory and experience from hydrologists and social scientists from their various interdisciplinary research projects to better understand key ethical, theoretical and practical considerations when working with participants. Complementary to this, we discuss the barriers and opportunities in collaborative interdisciplinary research. Facilitating these practices and understandings for hydrologists is essential to strengthen collaboration and to develop more holistic, successful research

Go together, to go further! Reply to “Human-water research: Discussion of ‘Guiding principles for hydrologists conducting interdisciplinary research and fieldwork with participants’”

In this reply to Thaler (2022), we take the opportunity to discuss two main aspects from his piece to continue the discussion: 1) the integration of social and natural sciences data, and 2) the importance of transdisciplinary research. We agree, and highlight that necessary learning, reflections and participation processes are time-intensive for researchers, practitioners and participants. We believe that these discussion pieces are important for informing, engaging, and debating challenges and practices, providing continued opportunities to learn from one another, enabling new forms of research and collaborations to flourish

Bridging the gap: reply to discussion of “Guiding principles for hydrologists conducting interdisciplinary research and fieldwork with participants”

In this reply we thank both authors for their thoughtful insights on our original opinion piece “Guiding principles for hydrologists conducting interdisciplinary research and fieldwork with participants.” We believe these discussions will help to inspire and guide current and future researchers and illustrate how to continue to bring together physical and social data, experiences, and perspectives, and bridge the gap between the two disciplines with respect to socio-hydrological topics. Furthermore, we are confident that these insights and experiences will help foster a deeper understanding for hydrologists and natural scientists engaging with these discussions and research. Here we focus on two important themes that cut across both Quandt and Haeffner’s replies: (1) further discussions on the importance of perceptions and lived experiences; and (2) further discussions on collaborative working and some of the major external barriers