Monitoring and Assessment of Desertification and Land Degradation: Knowledge Management, Institutions and Economics: White Paper of the DSD Working Group 3

The White Paper is a review of leading scientific knowledge on the role of knowledge management, institutions and economics in monitoring and assessment of land degradation and desertification. It provides key recommendations for more effective policies and actions for combating desertification both withn the UNCCD and beyond. This White Paper is the result of an international collaboration and consultation led jointly by the Association of DesertNet International and the United Nations University - Institute for Water, Environment and Health (UNU-INWEH), of the Dryland Science for Development Consortium (DSD). The findings were presented at the First UNCCD Scientific Conference held during the COP-9 in Buenos Aires, 2009.

Use of audiovisual messages from land user to land user for sharing knowledge about SLM: experiences from a pilot project in Kenya and Tajikistan

The global World Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies (WOCAT) initiative has developed standardised tools and methods to compile and evaluate knowledge available about SLM. This knowledge is now combined and enriched with audiovisual information in order to give a voice to land users, reach a broad range of stakeholders, and assist in scaling up SLM to reverse trends of degradation, desertification, and drought. Five video products, adapted to the needs of different target groups, are created and embedded in already existing platforms for knowledge sharing of SLM such as the WOCAT database and Google Earth application. A pilot project was carried out in Kenya and Tajikistan to verify ideas and tools while at the same time assessing the usefulness of the suggested products on the ground. Video has the potential to bridge the gap between different actor groups and enable communication and sharing on different levels and scales: locally, regionally, and globally. Furthermore, it is an innovative tool to link local and scientific knowledge, raise awareness, and support advocacy for SLM. Keywords: Sustainable Land Management (SLM), knowledge sharing, audiovisual messages, video, World Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies (WOCAT)

Local environmental knowledge: a key input for the sustainable development of Andean mountain communities

Local knowledge is crucial to both human development and environmental conservation. This is especially the case in mountain regions, where a combination of remoteness, harsh climatic conditions, rich cultural heritage, and high biological diversity has led to the development of complex local environmental knowledge systems. In the Andes for instance, rural populations mainly rely on their own environmental knowledge to ensure their food security and health. Recent studies conducted within Quechua communities in Peru and Bolivia showed that this knowledge was both persistent and dynamic, and that it responded to socio-economic and environmental changes through cultural resistance and adaptation. As this paper argues, combining local knowledge and so-called scientific knowledge – especially in development projects – can lead to innovative solutions to the socio-environmental challenges facing mountain communities in our globalized world. Based on experiences from the Andes, this paper will provide concrete recommendations to policymakers and practitioners for integrating local knowledge into development and natural resource management initiatives.

Ethics in science: enhancing the democratisation of knowledge production in transdisciplinary research partnerships for sustainable development

Better access to knowledge and knowledge production has to be reconsidered as key to successful individual and social mitigation and adaptation strategies for global change. Indeed, concepts of sustainable development imply a transformation of science towards fostering democratisation of knowledge production and the development of knowledge societies as a strategic goal. This means to open the process of scientific knowledge production while simultaneously empowering people to implement their own visions for sustainable development. Advocates of sustainability science support this transformation. In transdisciplinary practice, they advance equity and accountability in the access to and production of knowledge at the science–society interface. UNESCO points to advancements, yet Northern dominance persists in knowledge production as well as in technology design and transfer. Further, transdisciplinary practice remains experimental and hampered by inadequate and asymmetrically equipped institutions in the North and South and related epistemological and operational obscurity. To help identify clear, practicable transdisciplinary approaches, I recommend examining the institutional route – i.e., the learning and adaptation process – followed in concrete cases. The transdisciplinary Eastern and Southern Africa Partnership Programme (1998–2013) is a case ripe for such examination. Understanding transdisciplinarity as an integrative approach, I highlight ESAPP’s three key principles for a more democratised knowledge production for sustainable development: (1) integration of scientific and “non-scientific” knowledge systems; (2) integration of social actors and institutions; and (3) integrative learning processes. The analysis reveals ESAPP’s achievements in contributing to more democratic knowledge production and South ownership in the realm of sustainable development.

Knowledge as a resource: enhancing the democratisation of knowledge production in transdisciplinary research partnerships for sustainable development

Better access to knowledge and knowledge production has to be reconsidered as key to successful individual and social mitigation and adaptation strategies for global change. Indeed, concepts of sustainable development imply a transformation of science (Lubchenco 1998; WBGU 2011 and 2012) towards fostering democratisation of knowledge production as a contribution to the development of knowledge societies as a strategic goal (UNESCO 2005). This means to open the process of scientific knowledge production while simultaneously empowering people to implement their own visions for sustainable development. Advocates of sustainability science support this transformation. In transdisciplinary practice, they advance equity and accountability in the access to and production of knowledge at the science–society interface (Hirsch Hadorn et al 2006; Hirsch Hadorn et al 2008; Jäger 2009; Adger and Jordan 2009; KFPE 2012). UNESCO (2010) points to advancements, yet Northern dominance persists in knowledge production as well as in technology design and transfer (Standing and Taylor 2007; Zingerli 2010). Further, transdisciplinary practice remains experimental and hampered by inadequate and asymmetrically equipped institutions in the North and South and related epistemological and operational obscurity (Wiesmann et al 2011). To help identify clear, practicable transdisciplinary approaches, I recommend examining the institutional route (Mukhopadhyay et al 2006) – i.e., the learning and adaptation process – followed in concrete cases. The transdisciplinary Eastern and Southern Africa Partnership Programme (1998–2013) is a case ripe for such examination. Understanding transdisciplinarity as an integrative approach (Pohl et al 2008; Stock and Burton 2011), I highlight ESAPP’s three key principles for a more democratised knowledge production for sustainable development: (1) integration of scientific and “non-scientific” knowledge systems; (2) integration of social actors and institutions; and (3) integrative learning processes. The analysis reveals ESAPP’s achievements in contributing to more democratic knowledge production and South ownership in the realm of sustainable development.

Prevention, diagnosis, therapy and follow-up care of sepsis: 1st revision of S-2k guidelines of the German Sepsis Society (Deutsche Sepsis-Gesellschaft e.V. (DSG)) and the German Interdisciplinary Association of Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine (Deutsche Interdisziplinäre Vereinigung für Intensiv- und Notfallmedizin (DIVI))

Practice guidelines are systematically developed statements and recommendations that assist the physicians and patients in making decisions about appropriate health care measures for specific clinical circumstances taking into account specific national health care structures. The 1(st) revision of the S-2k guideline of the German Sepsis Society in collaboration with 17 German medical scientific societies and one self-help group provides state-of-the-art information (results of controlled clinical trials and expert knowledge) on the effective and appropriate medical care (prevention, diagnosis, therapy and follow-up care) of critically ill patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. The guideline had been developed according to the "German Instrument for Methodological Guideline Appraisal" of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies (AWMF). In view of the inevitable advancements in scientific knowledge and technical expertise, revisions, updates and amendments must be periodically initiated. The guideline recommendations may not be applied under all circumstances. It rests with the clinician to decide whether a certain recommendation should be adopted or not, taking into consideration the unique set of clinical facts presented in connection with each individual patient as well as the available resources.

Bringing results to fruition through publication: An analysis of a peer-reviewed, open access and context-focused journal's editorial practice

When it comes to helping to shape sustainable development, research is most useful when it bridges the science–implementation/management gap and when it brings development specialists and researchers into a dialogue (Hurni et al. 2004); can a peer-reviewed journal contribute to this aim? In the classical system for validation and dissemination of scientific knowledge, journals focus on knowledge exchange within the academic community and do not specifically address a ‘life-world audience’. Within a North-South context, another knowledge divide is added: the peer review process excludes a large proportion of scientists from the South from participating in the production of scientific knowledge (Karlsson et al. 2007). Mountain Research and Development (MRD) is a journal whose mission is based on an editorial strategy to build the bridge between research and development and ensure that authors from the global South have access to knowledge production, ultimately with a view to supporting sustainable development in mountains. In doing so, MRD faces a number of challenges that we would like to discuss with the td-net community, after having presented our experience and strategy as editors of this journal. MRD was launched in 1981 by mountain researchers who wanted mountains to be included in the 1992 Rio process. In the late 1990s, MRD realized that the journal needed to go beyond addressing only the scientific community. It therefore launched a new section addressing a broader audience in 2000, with the aim of disseminating insights into, and recommendations for, the implementation of sustainable development in mountains. In 2006, we conducted a survey among MRD’s authors, reviewers, and readers (Wymann et al. 2007): respondents confirmed that MRD had succeeded in bridging the gap between research and development. But we realized that MRD could become an even more efficient tool for sustainability if development knowledge were validated: in 2009, we began submitting ‘development’ papers (‘transformation knowledge’) to external peer review of a kind different from the scientific-only peer review (for ‘systems knowledge’). At the same time, the journal became open access in order to increase the permeability between science and society, and ensure greater access for readers and authors in the South. We are currently rethinking our review process for development papers, with a view to creating more space for communication between science and society, and enhancing the co-production of knowledge (Roux 2008). Hopefully, these efforts will also contribute to the urgent debate on the ‘publication culture’ needed in transdisciplinary research (Kueffer et al. 2007).

Definitions and outcome measures for bullous pemphigoid: recommendations by an international panel of experts

Our scientific knowledge of bullous pemphigoid (BP) has dramatically progressed in recent years. However, despite the availability of various therapeutic options for the treatment of inflammatory diseases, only a few multicenter controlled trials have helped to define effective therapies in BP. A major obstacle in sharing multicenter-based evidences for therapeutic efforts is the lack of generally accepted definitions for the clinical evaluation of patients with BP. Common terms and end points of BP are needed so that experts in the field can accurately measure and assess disease extent, activity, severity, and therapeutic response, and thus facilitate and advance clinical trials. These recommendations from the International Pemphigoid Committee represent 2 years of collaborative efforts to attain mutually acceptable common definitions for BP and proposes a disease extent score, the BP Disease Area Index. These items should assist in the development of consistent reporting of outcomes in future BP reports and studies.

Gene and stem cell therapy in peripheral arterial occlusive disease

Peripheral arterial occlusive disease (PAOD) is a manifestation of systemic atherosclerosis strongly associated with a high risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. In a considerable proportion of patients with PAOD, revascularization either by endovascular means or by open surgery combined with best possible risk factor modification does not achieve limb salvage or relief of ischaemic rest pain. As a consequence, novel therapeutic strategies have been developed over the last two decades aiming to promote neovascularization and remodelling of collaterals. Gene and stem cell therapy are the main directions for clinical investigation concepts. For both, preclinical studies have shown promising results using a wide variety of genes encoding for growth factors and populations of adult stem cells, respectively. As a consequence, clinical trials have been performed applying gene and stem cell-based concepts. However, it has become apparent that a straightforward translation into humans is not possible. While several trials reported relief of symptoms and functional improvement, other trials did not confirm this early promise of efficacy. Ongoing clinical trials with an improved study design are needed to confirm the potential that gene and cell therapy may have and to prevent the gaps in our scientific knowledge that will jeopardize the establishment of angiogenic therapy as an additional medical treatment of PAOD. This review summarizes the experimental background and presents the current status of clinical applications and future perspectives of the therapeutic use of gene and cell therapy strategies for PAOD.

[Neither Descartes nor Freud? current pain models in psychosomatic medicine]

Models explaining chronic pain based on the mere presence or absence of peripheral somatic findings or which view pain of psychological origin when there is no somatic explanation, have their shortcomings. Current scientific knowledge calls for distinct pain concepts, which integrate neurobiological and neuropsychological aspects of pain processing.

Handbook of Swiss Politics

Approaching Switzerland as a “laboratory” for democracy, this Handbook contributes to a refined understanding of the res publica. Over the years, the Handbook of Swiss Politics has established itself as a classic work. This new and extended second edition of the Handbook comprises 32 chapters, all by leading Swiss political scientists. The contributors write about fundamentals, institutions, interest groups, political parties, new social movements, the cantons and municipalities, elections, popular votes, policy processes and public policies. They address several important issues in the current international debates, such as the internationalization of domestic politics, multi-level governance, and the role of metropolitan agglomerations. Nine new chapters enrich this second, completely updated version. The section on public policies has been significantly extended, and covers a dozen of policy domains. Grounded on the latest scientific knowledge, this volume also serves as an indispensable reference for a non-academic audience of decision-makers, diplomats, senior officials and journalists.

Appraising and selecting conservation measures to mitigate desertification and land degradation based on stakeholder participation and global best practices

Most desertification research focuses on degradation assessments without putting sufficient emphasis on prevention and mitigation strategies, although the concept of Sustainable Land Management (SLM) is increasingly being acknowledged. A variety of already applied conservation measures exist at the local level, but they are not adequately recognised, evaluated and shared, either by land users, technicians, researchers, or policy makers. Likewise, collaboration between research and implementation is often insufficient. The aim of this paper is to present a new methodology for a participatory process of appraising and selecting desertification mitigation strategies, and to present first experiences from its application in the EU-funded DESIRE project. The methodology combines a collective learning and decision approach with the use of evaluated global best practices. In three parts, it moves through a concise process, starting with identifying land degradation and locally applied solutions in a stakeholder workshop, leading to assessing local solutions with a standardised evaluation tool, and ending with jointly selecting promising strategies for implementation with the help of a decision support tool. The methodology is currently being applied in 16 study sites. Preliminary analysis from the application of the first part of the methodology shows that the initial stakeholder workshop results in a good basis for stakeholder cooperation, and in promising land conservation practices for further assessment. Study site research teams appreciated the valuable results, as burning issues and promising options emerged from joint reflection. The methodology is suitable to initiate mutual learning among different stakeholder groups and to integrate local and scientific knowledge.