Epidemiology of ankylosing spondylitis: IGAS 2009

The International Genetics of Ankylosing Spondylitis (IGAS) meeting was held in Houston, Texas, July 25, 2009. Sixteen investigators from Asia, Australia, Europe, and North and South America presented the status of their respective cohorts of patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS). They also reviewed a proposal to examine their patients by single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping on an Illumina Infinium microarray SNP genotyping chip in a case-control cohort exceeding 12,000 samples. This chip will type 200,000 SNP selected from the most strongly associated variants identified in genome-wide association studies of inflammatory diseases, including inflammatory bowel disease, psoriasis, and ankylosing spondylitis.

The genetic basis of spondyloarthritis: SPARTAN/IGAS 2009

A joint meeting was held in July 2009 in Houston, Texas, of members of the Spondyloarthritis Research and Therapy Network (SPARTAN), founded in 2003 to promote research, education, and treatment of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and related forms of spondyloarthritis (SpA), and members of International Genetics of AS (IGAS), founded in 2003 to encourage and coordinate studies internationally in the genetics of AS. The general topic was the genetic basis of SpA, with presentations on the future of human genetic studies; microbes, SpA, and innate immunity; susceptibility of AS to the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) and non-MHC; and individual discussions of the genetics of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis, uveitis, inflammatory bowel disease, and enteropathic arthritis. Summaries of those discussions are presented.

Talking green: From Oz to Oz

This paper is an extension of Talking Green in Red States: Stories from the Great Plains (Gibson et al., 2014) that examined the communication strategies of planners involved in sustainability planning initiatives in the U.S. Great Plains. We expand these narratives beyond the Great Plains to Queensland, Australia by interviewing planners about their experiences when communicating and deliberating about issues of sustainability. Using a semi-formal structure, interviews are conducted as casual “coffee talks” (Maynard-Moody & Musheno, 2003). Together, these collected stories help us to understand how planners are “talking green” in conservative political atmospheres, across vastly differing geographies using an international comparative framework described by Reimer et al. (2014). The paper presents comparisons between the collected narratives, concerning similarities and differences in regard to the nuances of sustainability planning dialog. We relate the lessons learned about communication strategies of planners working in sustainability in Kansas and Queensland to the broader discourse of planning and politics, communicative planning and planning as storytelling, as they relate to sustainability planning in challenging situations. From this paper, the audience will better understand how: 1) to discuss environmental and sustainable planning in communities that have varying levels of distrust and suspicion towards these concepts; 2) to develop strategies to work around these planning communication issues, and; 3) international context affects these communication challenges.

The impacts of policy change on collaborative governance networks

For many complex natural resources problems, planning and management efforts involve groups of organizations working collaboratively through networks (Agranoff, 2007; Booher & Innes, 2010). These networks sometimes involve formal roles and relationships, but often include informal elements (Edelenbos & Klijn, 2007). All of these roles and relationships undergo change in response to changes in personnel, priorities and policy. There has been considerable focus in the planning and public policy literature on describing and characterizing these networks (Mandell & Keast, 2008; Provan & Kenis, 2007). However, there has been far less research assessing how networks change and adjust in response to policy and political change. In the Australian state of Queensland, Natural Resource Management (NRM) organizations were created as lead organizations to address land and water management issues on a regional basis with Commonwealth funding and state support. In 2012, a change in state government signaled a dramatic change in policy that resulted in a significant reduction of state support and commitment. In response to this change, NRM organizations have had to adapt their networks and relationships. In this study, we examine the issues of network relationships, capacity and changing relationships over time using written surveys and focus groups with NRM CEOs, managers and planners (note: data collection events scheduled for March and April 2015). The research team will meet with each of these three groups separately, conduct an in-person survey followed by a facilitated focus group discussion. The NRM participant focus groups will also be subdivided by region, which correlates with capacity (inland/low capacity; coastal/high capacity). The findings focus on how changes in state government commitment have affected NRM networks and their relationships with state agencies. We also examine how these changes vary according to the level within the organization and the capacity of the organization. We hypothesize that: (1) NRM organizations have struggled to maintain capacity in the wake of state agency withdrawal of support; (2) NRM organizations with the lowest capacity have been most adversely affected, while some high capacity NRM organizations may have become more resilient as they have sought out other partners; (3) Network relationships at the highest levels of the organization have been affected the most by state policy change; (4) NRM relationships at the lowest levels of the organizations have changed the least, as formal relationships are replaced by informal networks and relationships.