Regional planning acceptance by residents of Northern New York,USA

This study compares the effectiveness of two regional planning agencies in terms of public support for various planning activities. The Adirondack Park Agency and the Temporary State Commission on Tug Hill have fundamentally different approaches to planning. The Adirondack Park Agency has implemented a restrictive regulatory program with little citizen participation by Adirondack residents. The Tug Hill Commission has implemented an advisory and coordinating program with an emphasis on public input. Residents of two towns in each region were surveyed to determine environmental concern and support for regional planning activities. Respondents from both regions favored a planning agency that incorporates citizen input; controls air, water, and toxic waste pollution; and develops recreation areas. They strongly opposed an agency that regulates private land-use. Basic demographic characteristics and levels of environmental concern were similar in all four towns, but receptivity to various planning activities was consistently greater among residents of the Tug Hill Region. Paired comparisons of the four towns demonstrated no differences between towns of the same region and significant differences between towns of different regions. Public support for regional planning is greater in the Tug Hill Region than in the Adirondack Park.     

Human Adaptation to Work in Two Different Climates

The processes of acclimation to hot-dry and to warm-humid climates were studied using two approaches: a quantitative analysis of literature data and an experimental study in the laboratory concerning the physiological parameters of heart rate, rectal temperature, sweat loss, and subjective assessment.

Analysis o f literature data: Data from 62 experiments with a total of 813 participants were pooled and recalculated. The experiments ranged from 6 to 24 days, air temperatures from 30.4 to 50.0°C, water vapor pressures from 1.5 to 6.5 kPa, and wet bulb globe temperatures (WBGT) from 27.4 to 38.6°C.

Laboratory studies: In the laboratory, 8 participants were acclimated during 15 consecutive days to a hot-dry climate and to a warm-humid climate, which were equivalent in terms of the WBGT (33.5 and 33.6°C, respectively). The participants walked four times for 25 min on a treadmill at a speed of 4 km/h. The hot-dry climate caused somewhat greater strain than the warm-humid condition. In the course of acclimation to the hot-dry climate, heart rate and rectal temperature started at higher levels, decreased slightly steeper but remained on a higher level throughout. Nevertheless, the differences between both thermal conditions were small, and both physiologic functions reached the point of acclimation almost at the same time under warm-humid and under hot-dry exposure. Sweat loss, which is not regarded as a valid predictor for acclimation, was considerably higher but increased less in the hot-dry than in the warm-humid climate.     

Quantitative Real-Time PCR and Digital PCR to Evaluate Residual Quantity of HAV in Experimentally Depurated Mussels

Food and Environmental Virology - Kinetics of hepatitis A virus (HAV) accumulation and depuration from mussels (Mytilus galloprovincialis) was studied in an experimental depuration system....     

Benefits, efforts and risks of participants in landscape co-management: an analytical framework and results from two case studies in Austria

Participatory processes in general and also in relation to managing landscape issues are gathering importance mostly due to arguments surrounding legitimacy and effectiveness in decision-making. The main aim of this research, based on a transaction costs perspective, is to present an integrated analytical framework in order to determine individual efforts (time, money), benefits and risks of participants in landscape co-management processes. Furthermore a reflection on the analytical approach developed and arising lessons to be learned for landscape co-management are presented. In the analytical framework benefit-components comprise of factors such as 'contributing to landscape maintenance/development and nature protection', 'representing one's interest group', 'co-deciding on relevant topics', 'providing and broadening one's knowledge' and 'building networks'. The risks of participation are related to a lack of information and agreements, missing support and actual decision-making power. The analytical framework is applied to two case studies in Austria: an EU LIFE-Nature project and a Cultural Landscape Project of the Provincial Government of Lower Austria. Analysis of the effort-benefit-relations provides an indication for a more effective design of co-management. Although the processes are rated as quite adequate, there is a low willingness of participants to commit additional time to co-management processes. In contrast to the Cultural Landscape Project, in the LIFE-Nature project, professionally involved persons participate next to partly and full volunteers. These uneven conditions of participation and an unfair distribution of transaction costs, jeopardize the promising chances co-management bears for landscape governance.