Motivation, rationale and key results from the GERBILS Saharan dust measurement campaign

The Geostationary Earth Radiation Budget Intercomparison of Longwave and Shortwave radiation (GERBILS) was an observational field experiment over North Africa during June 2007. The campaign involved 10 flights by the FAAM BAe-146 research aircraft over southwestern parts of the Sahara Desert and coastal stretches of the Atlantic Ocean. Objectives of the GERBILS campaign included characterisation of mineral dust geographic distribution and physical and optical properties, assessment of the impact upon radiation, validation of satellite remote sensing retrievals, and validation of numerical weather prediction model forecasts of aerosol optical depths (AODs) and size distributions. We provide the motivation behind GERBILS and the experimental design and report the progress made in each of the objectives. We show that mineral dust in the region is relatively non-absorbing (mean single scattering albedo at 550 nm of 0.97) owing to the relatively small fraction of iron oxides present (1–3%), and that detailed spectral radiances are most accurately modelled using irregularly shaped particles. Satellite retrievals over bright desert surfaces are challenging owing to the lack of spectral contrast between the dust and the underlying surface. However, new techniques have been developed which are shown to be in relatively good agreement with AERONET estimates of AOD and with each other. This encouraging result enables relatively robust validation of numerical models which treat the production, transport, and deposition of mineral dust. The dust models themselves are able to represent large-scale synoptically driven dust events to a reasonable degree, but some deficiencies remain both in the Sahara and over the Sahelian region, where cold pool outflow from convective cells associated with the intertropical convergence zone can lead to significant dust production.

Languages Learning at Key Stage 2. A Longitudinal Study. Final report.

In 2006, The Open University, the University of Southampton and Canterbury Christ Church University were commissioned by the then Department for Education and Skills (DfES), now Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) to conduct a three-year longitudinal study of languages learning at Key Stage 2 (KS2). The qualitative study was designed to explore provision, practice and developments over three school years between 2006/07 and 2008/09 in a sample of primary schools and explore children’s achievement in oracy and literacy, as well as the possible broader cross-curricular impact of languages learning.

Considering the normative, systemic and procedural dimensions in indicator-based sustainability assessments in agriculture

This paper develops a framework for evaluating sustainability assessment methods by separately analyzing their normative, systemic and procedural dimensions as suggested by Wiek and Binder [Wiek, A, Binder, C. Solution spaces for decision-making – a sustainability assessment tool for city-regions. Environ Impact Asses Rev 2005, 25: 589-608.]. The framework is then used to characterize indicator-based sustainability assessment methods in agriculture. For a long time, sustainability assessment in agriculture has focused mostly on environmental and technical issues, thus neglecting the economic and, above all, the social aspects of sustainability, the multifunctionality of agriculture and the applicability of the results. In response to these shortcomings, several integrative sustainability assessment methods have been developed for the agricultural sector. This paper reviews seven of these that represent the diversity of tools developed in this area. The reviewed assessment methods can be categorized into three types: (i) top-down farm assessment methods; (ii) top-down regional assessment methods with some stakeholder participation; (iii) bottom-up, integrated participatory or transdisciplinary methods with stakeholder participation throughout the process. The results readily show the trade-offs encountered when selecting an assessment method. A clear, standardized, top-down procedure allows for potentially benchmarking and comparing results across regions and sites. However, this comes at the cost of system specificity. As the top-down methods often have low stakeholder involvement, the application and implementation of the results might be difficult. Our analysis suggests that to include the aspects mentioned above in agricultural sustainability assessment, the bottomup, integrated participatory or transdisciplinary methods are the most suitable ones.

Normative, systemic and procedural aspects: a review of indicator‐based sustainability assessments in agriculture

Several methods for assessing the sustainability of agricultural systems have been developed. These methods do not fully: (i) take into account the multi‐functionality of agriculture; (ii) include multidimensionality; (iii) utilize and implement the assessment knowledge; and (iv) identify conflicting goals and trade‐offs. This paper reviews seven recently developed multidisciplinary indicator‐based assessment methods with respect to their contribution to these shortcomings. All approaches include (1) normative aspects such as goal setting, (2) systemic aspects such as a specification of scale of analysis, (3) a reproducible structure of the approach. The approaches can be categorized into three typologies. The top‐down farm assessments focus on field or farm assessment. They have a clear procedure for measuring the indicators and assessing the sustainability of the system, which allows for benchmarking across farms. The degree of participation is low, potentially affecting the implementation of the results negatively. The top‐down regional assessment assesses the on‐farm and the regional effects. They include some participation to increase acceptance of the results. However, they miss the analysis of potential trade‐offs. The bottom‐up, integrated participatory or transdisciplinary approaches focus on a regional scale. Stakeholders are included throughout the whole process assuring the acceptance of the results and increasing the probability of implementation of developed measures. As they include the interaction between the indicators in their system representation, they allow for performing a trade‐off analysis. The bottom‐up, integrated participatory or transdisciplinary approaches seem to better overcome the four shortcomings mentioned above.

Pollination ecology in the 21st century: key questions for future research

To inspire new ideas in research on pollination ecology, we list the most important unanswered questions in the field. This list was drawn up by contacting 170 scientists from different areas of pollination ecology and asking them to contribute their opinion on the greatest knowledge gaps that need to be addressed. Almost 40% of them took part in our email poll and we received more than 650 questions and comments, which we classified into different categories representing various aspects of pollination research. The original questions were merged and synthesised, and a final vote and ranking led to the resultant list. The categories cover plant sexual reproduction, pollen and stigma biology, abiotic pollination, evolution of animal-mediated pollination, interactions of pollinators and floral antagonists, pollinator behaviour, taxonomy, plant-pollinator assemblages, geographical trends in diversity, drivers of pollinator loss, ecosystem services, management of pollination, and conservation issues such as the implementation of pollinator conservation. We focused on questions that were of a broad scope rather than case-specific; thus, addressing some questions may not be feasible within single research projects but constitute a general guide for future directions. With this compilation we hope to raise awareness of pollination-related topics not only among researchers but also among non-specialists including policy makers, funding agencies and the public at large.