Electrochemical degradation of chlorophenoxy and chlorobenzoic herbicides in acidic aqueous medium by the peroxi-coagulation method

The degradation of 4-chlorophenoxyacetic acid (4-CPA), 4-chloro-2-methylphenoxyacetic acid (MCPA), 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) and 2,4,5-trichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4,5-T) as chlorophenoxy herbicides, as well as of 3,6-dichloro-2-methoxybenzoic acid (dicamba) as chlorobenzoic herbicide, has been studied by peroxi-coagulation. This electrochemical method yields a very effective depollution of all compounds in acidic aqueous medium of pH 3.0 working under pH regulation, since they are oxidized with hydroxyl radicals produced from Fenton's reaction between Fe(2+) and H(2)O(2) generated by the corresponding Fe anode and O(2)-diffusion cathode. Their products can then be removed by mineralization or coagulation with the Fe(OH)(3) precipitate formed. Both degradative paths compete at low currents, but coagulation predominates at high currents. The peroxi-coagulation process of dicamba at I>or=300 mA leads to more than 90% of coagulation, being much more efficient than its comparative electro-Fenton treatment with a Pt anode and 1 mM Fe(2+), where only mineralization takes place. For the chlorophenoxy compounds, electro-Fenton gives a slightly lower depollution than peroxi-coagulation, because more easily oxidable products are produced. Oxidation of chlorinated products during peroxi-coagulation is accompanied by the release of chloride ion to the solution. The efficiency of this method decreases with increasing electrolysis time and current. The decay of all herbicides follows a pseudo-first-order reaction, with a similar constant rate for 4-CPA, MCPA, 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T, and a higher value for dicamba.     

Sustainable livelihoods and people’s vulnerability in the face of coastal hazards

The present study investigates into the link between people’s vulnerability in the face of coastal hazards and sustainable livelihoods. It focuses on the town of Borongan in the Philippines and draws on questionnaire-based surveys and focus group discussions. This research shows that local fishermen are often compelled to go out fishing despite pending typhoon or storm surge to sustain the daily needs of their family. Its also demonstrates that the capacity of these people to protect themselves from the threat is constrained by poor and fragile livelihoods. In the event of a crisis, the study argues that people resort to a range of adjustments on their daily life which is rooted in the strength and diversity of their livelihoods. To reduce people’s vulnerability and enhance capacities to face coastal hazards, the study fosters Community-Based Disaster Risk Reduction with special emphasis to sustainable livelihoods.     

Academic publishing in disaster risk reduction: past,present, and future

Nowadays there are approximately 80 Anglophone journals that deal primarily with disaster risk reduction (DRR) and allied fields. This large array signals a sustained, if uneven, growth in DRR scholarship but also competition between the offerings of different publishers and institutions. The purpose of this article is first to summarise the development of academic publishing on DRR from its early beginnings to the present day. The paper then evaluates the current state of publishing in this field and discusses possible future trends. Next, it identifies some possible opportunities, challenges, expectations, and commitments for journal editors both within DRR and academia more broadly, including those that refer to changes in the use of terminology, the relentless increase in the number of papers submitted, the expansion and dangers of predatory journals, different peer review models, open access versus paywalls, citations and bibliography metrics, academic social networks, and copyright and distribution issues.     

Disaster studies inside out

Disaster studies is faced with a fascinating anomaly: frequently it claims to be critical and innovative, as suggested by the so‐called vulnerability paradigm that emerged more than 40 years ago, yet often it is perpetuating some of the core and problematic tenets of the hazard paradigm that we were asked to challenge initially. This paper interrogates why such an anomaly persists. In so doing, it employs Antonio Gramsci's concept of hegemony to unpack why disaster studies is still dominated by Western epistemologies and scholars that perpetuate an orientalist view of disasters. Ultimately, it suggests a research agenda for the 40 years to come, which builds on the importance of local researchers analysing local disasters using local epistemologies, especially in the non‐Western world. Such subaltern disaster studies are to be fuelled by increasing consciousness of the need to resist the hegemony of Western scholarship and to relocate disaster studies within the realm of its original political agenda.