La collecte de l'eau: directives pour de bonnes pratiques

La collecte de l’eau est réalisée avec succès depuis des millénaires dans les régions du monde entier – certaines interventions récentes ont également eu un impact local significatif. Pourtant, le potentiel de cette technique reste largement inconnu, non reconnu et non apprécié. Il est temps de transposer à plus grande échelle les « bonnes pratiques » de collecte de l’eau, celles qui ont survécu au temps ou qui ont émergé des nouvelles expériences, après des décennies de focalisation presque exclusive sur la maîtrise des flux d’eau douce dans les rivières et les lacs grâce à des investissements dans des infrastructures d’irrigation.La collecte de l’eau offre des opportunités sous-exploitées pour les systèmes principalement d’exploitation pluviale des zones arides dans le monde en développement. Celle-ci fonctionne mieux précisément dans les zones où la pauvreté rurale est la pire. Quand elle est bien réalisée, son impact est à la fois de réduire la faim et de lutter contre la pauvreté, tout en améliorant la résilience de l’environnement. Ces connaissances sur les technologies de collecte d’eau et sur les milieux dans lesquels elles ont tendance à donner de meilleurs résultats, représentent une véritable richesse cachée. Pour la première fois, ces connaissances sont traitées, rassemblées et rendues disponibles à travers un tel outil organisé, illustré et instructif reliant les technologies aux réseaux des connaissances, outil qui servira aux utilisateurs présumés de ces directives pratiques pour mieux comprendre et mettre en oeuvre leurs choix

Water harvesting: guidelines to good practice

These guidelines provide an overview of proven good practice in water harvesting from all over the world. They form a practical reference guide while providing support and specific technical expertise for the integration of water harvesting technologies into the planning and design of projects. Thus existing information and experience is strengthened. On a broader scale, the guidelines’ objective is to facilitate, share and upscale good practice in water harvesting given the state of current knowledge. Targeted end users include local and regional planners / advisors, rural development consultants, rainwater harvesting networks and communitiesof- practice, project managers, extension agents and other implementing staff. Through informing these professionals, the aim is to stimulate discussion and new thinking about improved water management in general, and water harvesting in particular, within rainfed agriculture, particularly in the drylands. The ultimate goal is to contribute to lifting 80 million rural people out of poverty by 2015: water security is a prerequisite to achieve food security for these people.

Tools for better SLM knowledge management and informed decision-making in addressing land degradation at different scales: the WOCAT–LADA–DESIRE methodology

Desertification research conventionally focuses on the problem – that is, degradation – while neglecting the appraisal of successful conservation practices. Based on the premise that Sustainable Land Management (SLM) experiences are not sufficiently or comprehensively documented, evaluated, and shared, the World Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies (WOCAT) initiative (www.wocat.net), in collaboration with FAO’s Land Degradation Assessment in Drylands (LADA) project (www.fao.org/nr/lada/) and the EU’s DESIRE project (http://www.desire-project.eu/), has developed standardised tools and methods for compiling and evaluating the biophysical and socio-economic knowledge available about SLM. The tools allow SLM specialists to share their knowledge and assess the impact of SLM at the local, national, and global levels. As a whole, the WOCAT–LADA–DESIRE methodology comprises tools for documenting, self-evaluating, and assessing the impact of SLM practices, as well as for knowledge sharing and decision support in the field, at the planning level, and in scaling up identified good practices. SLM depends on flexibility and responsiveness to changing complex ecological and socioeconomic causes of land degradation. The WOCAT tools are designed to reflect and capture this capacity of SLM. In order to take account of new challenges and meet emerging needs of WOCAT users, the tools are constantly further developed and adapted. Recent enhancements include tools for improved data analysis (impact and cost/benefit), cross-scale mapping, climate change adaptation and disaster risk management, and easier reporting on SLM best practices to UNCCD and other national and international partners. Moreover, WOCAT has begun to give land users a voice by backing conventional documentation with video clips straight from the field. To promote the scaling up of SLM, WOCAT works with key institutions and partners at the local and national level, for example advisory services and implementation projects. Keywords: Sustainable Land Management (SLM), knowledge management, decision-making, WOCAT–LADA–DESIRE methodology.

Desertification mitigation and water harvesting based on sustainable land management

Traditionally, desertification research has focused on degradation assessments, whereas prevention and mitigation strategies have not sufficiently been emphasised, although the concept of sustainable land management (SLM) is increasingly being acknowledged. SLM strategies are interventions at the local to regional scale aiming at increasing productivity, protecting the natural resource base, and improving livelihoods. The global WOCAT initiative and its partners have developed harmonized frameworks to compile, evaluate and analyse the impact of SLM practices around the globe. Recent studies within the EU research project DESIRE developed a methodological framework that combines a collective learning and decision-making approach with use of best practices from the WOCAT database. In-depth assessment of 30 technologies and 8 approaches from 17 desertification sites enabled an evaluation of how SLM addresses prevalent dryland threats such as water scarcity, soil and vegetation degradation, low production, climate change, resource use conflicts and migration. Among the impacts attributed to the documented technologies, those mentioned most were diversified and enhanced production and better management of water and soil degradation, whether through water harvesting, improving soil moisture, or reducing runoff. Water harvesting offers under-exploited opportunities for the drylands and the predominantly rainfed farming systems of the developing world. Recently compiled guidelines introduce the concepts behind water harvesting and propose a harmonised classification system, followed by an assessment of suitability, adoption and up-scaling of practices. Case studies go from large-scale floodwater spreading that make alluvial plains cultivable, to systems that boost cereal production in small farms, as well as practices that collect and store water from household compounds. Once contextualized and set in appropriate institutional frameworks, they can form part of an overall adaptation strategy for land users. More field research is needed to reinforce expert assessments of SLM impacts and provide the necessary evidence-based rationale for investing in SLM. This includes developing methods to quantify and value ecosystem services, both on-site and off-site, and assess the resilience of SLM practices, as currently aimed at within the new EU CASCADE project.

Drug-eluting stents vs. bare metal stents in patients with cardiogenic shock: a comparison by propensity score analysis.

BACKGROUND In patients with cardiogenic shock, data on the comparative safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents (DESs) vs. bare metal stents (BMSs) are lacking. We sought to assess the performance of DESs compared with BMSs among patients with cardiogenic shock undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS Out of 236 patients with acute coronary syndromes complicated by cardiogenic shock, 203 were included in the final analysis. The primary endpoint included death, and the secondary endpoint of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) included the composite of death, myocardial infarction, any repeat revascularization and stroke. Patients were followed for a minimum of 30 days and up to 4 years. As stent assignment was not random, we performed a propensity score analysis to minimize potential bias. RESULTS Among patients treated with DESs, there was a lower risk of the primary and secondary endpoints compared with BMSs at 30 days (29 vs. 56%, P < 0.001; 34 vs. 58%, P = 0.001, respectively) and during long-term follow-up [hazard ratio 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29-0.65, P < 0.001; hazard ratio 0.49, 95% CI 0.34-0.71, P < 0.001, respectively]. After propensity score adjustment, all-cause mortality was reduced among patients treated with DESs compared with BMSs both at 30 days [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.26, 95% CI 0.11-0.62; P = 0.002] and during long-term follow-up (adjusted hazard ratio 0.40, 95% CI 0.22-0.72; P = 0.002). The rate of MACCE was lower among patients treated with DESs compared with those treated with BMSs at 30 days (adjusted OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.19-0.95; P = 0.036). The difference in MACCEs between devices approached significance during long-term follow-up (adjusted hazard ratio 0.60, 95% CI 0.34-1.01; P = 0.052). CONCLUSION DESs appear to be associated with improved clinical outcomes, including a reduction in all-cause mortality compared with BMSs among patients undergoing PCI for cardiogenic shock, possibly because of a pacification of the infarct-related artery by anti-inflammatory drug. The results of this observational study require confirmation in an appropriately powered randomized trial.

Soils, agriculture and food security: The interplay between ecosystem functioning and human well-being

Healthy soils are critical to agriculture, and both are essential to enabling food security. Soil-related challenges include using soils and other natural resources sustainably, combating land and soil degradation, avoiding further reduction of soil-related ecosystem services, and ensuring that all agricultural land is managed sustainably. Agricultural challenges include improving the quantity and quality of agricultural outputs to satisfy rising human needs, also in a 2 degrees world; maintaining diversity in agricultural systems while supporting those farms with the highest potential for closing existing yield gaps; and providing a livelihood for about 2.6 billion mostly poor land users. The greatest needs and potentials lie in small-scale farming, although there as elsewhere, trade-offs must be negotiated within the nexus of water, energy, land and food, including the role of soil therein.

Sharing evidence of sustainable land management impacts

Ensuring sustainable use of natural resources is crucial for maintaining the basis for our livelihoods. With threats from climate change, disputes over water, biodiversity loss, competing claims on land, and migration increasing worldwide, the demands for sustainable land management (SLM) practices will only increase in the future. For years already, various national and international organizations (GOs, NGOs, donors, research institutes, etc.) have been working on alternative forms of land management. And numerous land users worldwide – especially small farmers – have been testing, adapting, and refining new and better ways of managing land. All too often, however, the resulting SLM knowledge has not been sufficiently evaluated, documented and shared. Among other things, this has often prevented valuable SLM knowledge from being channelled into evidence-based decision-making processes. Indeed, proper knowledge management is crucial for SLM to reach its full potential. Since more than 20 years, the international WOCAT network documents and promotes SLM through its global platform. As a whole, the WOCAT methodology comprises tools for documenting, evaluating, and assessing the impact of SLM practices, as well as for knowledge sharing, analysis and use for decision support in the field, at the planning level, and in scaling up identified good practices. In early 2014, WOCAT’s growth and ongoing improvement culminated in its being officially recognized by the UNCCD as the primary recommended database for SLM best practices. Over the years, the WOCAT network confirmed that SLM helps to prevent desertification, to increase biodiversity, enhance food security and to make people less vulnerable to the effects of climate variability and change. In addi- tion, it plays an important role in mitigating climate change through improving soil organic matter and increasing vegetation cover. In-depth assessments of SLM practices from desertification sites enabled an evaluation of how SLM addresses prevalent dryland threats. The impacts mentioned most were diversified and enhanced production and better management of water and soil degradation, whether through water harvesting, improving soil moisture, or reducing runoff. Among others, favourable local-scale cost-benefit relationships of SLM practices play a crucial role in their adoption. An economic analysis from the WOCAT database showed that land users perceive a large majority of the technologies as having benefits that outweigh costs in the long term. The high investment costs associated with some practices may constitute a barrier to adoption, however, where appropriate, short-term support for land users can help to promote these practices. The increased global concerns on climate change, disaster risks and food security redirect attention to, and trigger more funds for SLM. To provide the necessary evidence-based rationale for investing in SLM and to reinforce expert and land users assessments of SLM impacts, more field research using inter- and transdisciplinary approaches is needed. This includes developing methods to quantify and value ecosystem services, both on-site and off-site, and assess the resilience of SLM practices, as currently aimed at within the EU FP7 projects CASCADE and RECARE.