36 resultados para Sharing Ink
Resumo:
For successful implementation of any soil and water conservation (SWC) or sustainable land management practice, it is essential to have a proper understanding of the natural and human environment in which these practices are applied. This understanding should be based on comprehensive information concerning the application of the technologies and not solely on the technological details. The World Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies (WOCAT) is documenting and evaluating SWC practices worldwide, following a standardised methodology that facilitates exchange and comparison of experiences. Notwithstanding this standardisation, WOCAT allows flexible use of its outputs, adapted to different users and different environments. WOCAT offers a valuable tool for evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of SWC practices and their potential for application in other areas. Besides collecting a wealth of information, gaps in available information are also exposed, showing the need for more research in those fields. Several key issues for development- oriented research have been identified and are being addressed in collaboration with a research programme for mitigating syndromes of global change.
Resumo:
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.
Resumo:
Electronic books (e-book) are an interesting option compared to classic paper books. Most e-reading devices of the first generation were based on e-ink technology. With the appearance of the Apple iPad on the market, TFT-LCDs became important in the field of e-reading. Both technologies have advantages and disadvantages but the question remains whether one or the other technology is better for reading. In the present study we analyzed and compared reading behavior when reading on e-inkreader (e-ink displays) and on tablets (TFT-LCDs) as measured by eye-tracking. The results suggest that the reading behavior on tablets is indeed very similar to the reading behavior on e-ink-reader. Participants showed no difference in fixation duration. Significant differences in reading speed and in the proportion of regressive saccades suggest that tablets, under special artificial light conditions, may even provide better legibility.
Resumo:
E-book reading devices open new possibilities in the field of reading. More activities than just reading a book can be performed with a single electronic device. For a long time, electronic reading devices have not been favored because their active LCD displays used to have a relatively low contrast. The new generation of electronic reading devices differs from earlier ones in the nature of the display: active LCD displays have been replaced with displays based on e-ink technology, which has display properties closer to that of printed paper. Moreover, e-ink technology has higher power efficiency, thereby increasing battery life and reducing weight. At first sight, the display looks similar to paper print, but the question remains whether the reading behavior also is equal to that of reading a printed book. In the present study, we analyzed and compared reading behavior on e-reader displays and on printed paper. The results suggest that the reading behavior on e-readers is indeed very similar to the reading behavior on print. Participants shared similar proportions of regressive saccades while reading on e-readers and print. Significant differences in fixation duration suggest that e-readers, in some situations, may even provide better legibility.