Bioassays for the evaluation of reclaimed opencast coal mining areas

Environmental Science and Pollution Research - This study aimed to use bioassays (single and multispecies) with organisms from different trophic levels to assess soil quality in reclaimed coal...     

Soil carbon stock estimations: methods and a case study of the Maranhão State,Brazil

Environment, Development and Sustainability - Soils feature significant variations in soil carbon stocks through land-use changes, management practices, and intrinsic characteristics. The aim of...     

Evaluation of chelating and cytoprotective activity of vanillin against the toxic action of mercuric chloride as an alternative for phytoremediation

Environmental Geochemistry and Health - Mercury is widely found in nature, however, in low concentrations, but anthropological activities have increased its concentration considerably. This causes...     

Trace metals in estuarine organisms from a port region in southern Brazil: consumption risk to the local population

Environmental Science and Pollution Research - Metal contamination is a threat to estuarine environments. They can accumulate in the food chain and cause toxic effects on aquatic organisms and...     

Cost shifting and other perverse incentives in biodiversity offsetting in India

Biodiversity offsetting aims to compensate for development‐induced biodiversity loss through commensurate conservation gains and is gaining traction among governments and businesses. However, cost shifting (i.e., diversion of offset funds to other conservation programs) and other perverse incentives can undermine the effectiveness of biodiversity offsetting. Additionality—the requirement that biodiversity offsets result in conservation outcomes that would not have been achieved otherwise—is fundamental to biodiversity offsetting. Cost shifting and violation of additionality can go hand in hand. India's national offsetting program is a case in point. Recent legislation allows the diversion of offset funds to meet the country's preexisting commitments under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). With such diversions, no additional conservation takes place and development impacts remain uncompensated. Temporary additionality cannot be conceded in light of paucity of funds for preexisting commitments unless there is open acknowledgement that fulfillment of such commitments is contingent on offset funds. Two other examples of perverse incentives related to offsetting in India are the touting of inherently neutral offsetting outcomes as conservation gains, a tactic that breeds false complacency and results in reduced incentive for additional conservation efforts, and the clearing of native vegetation for commercial plantations in the name of compensatory afforestation, a practice that leads to biodiversity decline. The risks accompanying cost shifting and other perverse incentives, if not preempted and addressed, will result in net loss of forest cover in India. We recommend accurate baselines, transparent accounting, and open reporting of offset outcomes to ensure biodiversity offsetting achieves adequate and additional compensation for impacts of development.     

Sequential determination and chemical speciation analysis of inorganic As and Sb in airborne particulate matter collected in outdoor and indoor environments using slurry sampling and detection by HG AAS

Environmental Science and Pollution Research - In this work, fast sequential determination and chemical speciation analysis of inorganic arsenic and antimony in airborne particulate matter...     

Land‐use trade‐offs between tree biodiversity and crop production in the Atlantic Forest

Trade‐offs in ecosystem services (ES) have received increasing attention because provisioning services often come at the expense of biodiversity loss. When land‐use patterns are not maximally efficient relative to productivity, provisioning services, such as crop production, can often be increased without losing biodiversity. The Atlantic Forest (AF) encompasses dense, mixed, and seasonal forests and has high levels of endemism and anthropogenic threat. We examined trade‐offs between biodiversity and crop production in the AF to provide insights into land‐use management decisions. We developed a biodiversity metric that combines information on tree species richness, evolutionary distinctiveness, and rarity at the local level. We examined the extent to which the nature of ES trade‐offs differ among the 3 forest types. We assessed how annual deforestation rates and land management practices affect biodiversity and agricultural revenues. Finally, we tested whether it is possible to achieve the same total regional revenue without reducing biodiversity by improving local management practices. The 3 forest types had similar patterns in ES trade‐offs, although within mixed forest patterns differed. Biodiversity appeared to be more sensitive to land‐use change than crop revenues. Certain crops yielded up to 10 times higher values in some sites. Enhanced crop productivity may increase revenues without reducing biodiversity. Our results showed that to enhance human well‐being without further conversion of AF, maximizing crop productivity is needed . Increasing efficiency of management outcomes by maintaining higher biodiversity and increasing provisioning services depends on knowledge of forest type, the comparative advantage of planting crops in the best places, and preserving species in a balanced manner across forests.     

A review of waste paper recycling networks focusing on quantitative methods and sustainability

Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management - A discussion is currently under way in the literature on the sustainable benefits of recycling material, particularly paper, which has high global...