Numerical modelling of uncongested wood transport in the Rienz river

Environmental Fluid Mechanics - The Eulerian–Lagrangian model ORSA2D_WT is employed for the simulation of uncongested wood transport, with reference to a field experiment that studied the...     

Ethical considerations when conservation research involves people

Social science is becoming increasingly important in conservation, with more studies involving methodologies that collect data from and about people. Conservation science is a normative and applied discipline designed to support and inform management and practice. Poor research practice risks harming participants and, researchers, and can leave negative legacies. Often, those at the forefront of field-based research are early-career researchers, many of whom enter their first research experience ill-prepared for the ethical conundrums they may face. We draw on our own experiences as early-career researchers to illuminate how ethical challenges arise during conservation research that involves human participants. Specifically, we considered ethical review procedures, conflicts of values, and power relations, and devised broad recommendations on how to navigate ethical challenges when they arise during research. In particular, we recommend researchers apply reflexivity (i.e., thinking that allows researchers to recognize the effect researchers have on the research) to help navigate ethical challenges and encourage greater engagement with ethical review processes and the development of ethical guidelines for conservation research that involves human participants. Such guidelines must be accompanied by the integration of rigorous ethical training into conservation education. We believe our experiences are not uncommon and can be avoided and hope to spark discussion to contribute to a more socially just conservation.     

Atmospheric aerosol growth rates at different background station types

Environmental Science and Pollution Research - Highly time-resolved particle number size distributions (PNSDs) were evaluated during 5 years (2013–2017) at four background stations in the...     

Evaluation and comparison of advanced oxidation processes for the degradation of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D): a review

Environmental Science and Pollution Research - Organochlorine pesticides have generated public concern worldwide because of their toxicity to human health and the environment, even at low...     

Pharmaceutical compound removal efficiency by a small constructed wetland located in south Brazil

Environmental Science and Pollution Research - The fate of pharmaceuticals during the treatment of effluents is of major concern since they are not completely degraded and because of their...     

Addressing social attitudes toward lethal control of wildlife in national parks

The extraordinary population growth of certain ungulate species is increasingly a concern in agroforestry areas because overabundance may negatively affect natural environments and human livelihoods. However, society may have negative perceptions of killing wildlife to reduce their numbers and mitigate damage. We used an online survey that included a choice experiment to determine Spanish citizens’ (n = 190) preferences toward wildlife population control measures related to negative effects of ungulate overabundance (negative impacts on vegetation and other wildlife species and disease transmission to livestock) in 2 agroforestry national parks in Spain. We used latent-class and willingness-to-pay in space models to analyze survey results. Two percent of respondents thought a national park should have no human intervention even if lack of management may cause environmental degradation, whereas 95% of respondents favored efforts to reduce damage caused by overabundant ungulate species. We estimated human well-being losses of survey respondents when sustainable effects of deer overabundance on the environment became unsustainable effects and well-being gains when sustainable effects transitioned to no visible effects. We found that the type of wildlife-control program was a very relevant issue for the respondents; indirect control in which killing was avoided was the preferred action. Sixty-six percent of respondents agreed with the option of hunters paying for culling animals to reduce ungulate impacts rather than management cost coming out of taxes, whereas 19% of respondents were against this option and willing to pay for other solutions in national parks. Our results suggest that killing wildlife in national parks could be a socially acceptable tool to manage overabundance problems in certain contexts, but it could also generate social conflicts.     

Inflammatory effects of particulate matter air pollution

Environmental Science and Pollution Research - Air pollution is an important cause of non-communicable diseases globally with particulate matter (PM) as one of the main air pollutants. PM is...     

The carbon footprint of water treatment as well as sewer and sanitation utilities of Pamplona in Colombia

Environment, Development and Sustainability - At a global level, it has been scientifically reported that the processes of water purification, management and disposal of wastewater, and solid waste...