Sustainable Development Appraisal (SDA): A methodological tool for the participatory assessment of sustainability from local to regional planning levels

The term 'sustainable development' is receiving increasing attention in development co-operation and at the global level. However, practical tools which can help local users and multi-disciplinary teams to work together and apply this general concept at the local to regional levels have' emerged only very recently. This paper describes a tool called 'Sustainable Development Appraisal' (SDA), which is based on the principles of sustainable development, and can be applied by small interdisciplinary teams using a transdisciplinary approach, i.e. in participation with local land users and other stakeholders at various levels of intervention. The SDA has been applied in different parts of the globe. It is receiving considerable attention, and may fulfil most requirements contained in the concept of sustainable development, and yet be practically applicable and useful in the local to regional context. Examples from Eritrea and Ethiopia are used in this paper 'to illustrate the practicability of SDA for development planning and implementation.

Health risk appraisal for older people 4: case finding for hypertension, hyperlipidaemia and diabetes mellitus in older people in English general practice before the introduction of the Quality and Outcomes Framework

Early intervention can help to reduce the burden of disability in the older population, but many do not access preventive care. There is uncertainty over what factors influence case finding in older patients in general practice.

A randomized trial of effects of health risk appraisal combined with group sessions or home visits on preventive behaviors in older adults

Background. To explore effects of a health risk appraisal for older people (HRA-O) program with reinforcement, we conducted a randomized controlled trial in 21 general practices in Hamburg, Germany. Methods. Overall, 2,580 older patients of 14 general practitioners trained in reinforcing recommendations related to HRA-O-identified risk factors were randomized into intervention (n = 878) and control (n = 1,702) groups. Patients (n = 746) of seven additional matched general practitioners who did not receive this training served as a comparison group. Patients allocated to the intervention group, and their general practitioners, received computer-tailored written recommendations, and patients were offered the choice between interdisciplinary group sessions (geriatrician, physiotherapist, social worker, and nutritionist) and home visits (nurse). Results. Among the intervention group, 580 (66%) persons made use of personal reinforcement (group sessions: 503 [87%], home visits: 77 [13%]). At 1-year follow-up, persons in the intervention group had higher use of preventive services (eg, influenza vaccinations, adjusted odds ratio 1.7; 95% confidence interval 1.4–2.1) and more favorable health behavior (eg, high fruit/fiber intake, odds ratio 2.0; 95% confidence interval 1.6–2.6), as compared with controls. Comparisons between intervention and comparison group data revealed similar effects, suggesting that physician training alone had no effect. Subgroup analyses indicated favorable effects for HRA-O with personal reinforcement, but not for HRA-O without reinforcement. Conclusions. HRA-O combined with physician training and personal reinforcement had favorable effects on preventive care use and health behavior.

Researchers' roles in knowledge co-production: experience from sustainability research in Kenya, Switzerland, Bolivia and Nepal

Co-production of knowledge between academic and non-academic communities is a prerequisite for research aiming at more sustainable development paths. Sustainability researchers face three challenges in such co-production: (a) addressing power relations; (b) interrelating different perspectives on the issues at stake; and (c) promoting a previously negotiated orientation towards sustainable development. A systematic comparison of four sustainability research projects in Kenya (vulnerability to drought), Switzerland (soil protection), Bolivia and Nepal (conservation vs. development) shows how the researchers intuitively adopted three different roles to face these challenges: the roles of reflective scientist, intermediary, and facilitator of a joint learning process. From this systematized and iterative self-reflection on the roles that a researcher can assume in the indeterminate social space where knowledge is co-produced, we draw conclusions regarding training.

Reshaping Rural Extension: Learning for Sustainability (LforS): An Integrative and Learning-Based Advisory Approach for Rural Extension with Small-Scale Farmers

This publication offers concrete suggestions for implementing an integrative and learning-oriented approach to agricultural extension with the goal of fostering sustainable development. It targets governmental and non-governmental organisations, development agencies, and extension staff working in the field of rural development. The book looks into the conditions and trends that influence extension today, and outlines new challenges and necessary adaptations. It offers a basic reflection on the goals, the criteria for success and the form of a state-of-the-art approach to extension. The core of the book consists of a presentation of Learning for Sustainability (LforS), an example of an integrative, learning-oriented approach that is based on three crucial elements: stakeholder dialogue, knowledge management, and organizational development. Awareness raising and capacity building, social mobilization, and monitoring & evaluation are additional building blocks. The structure and organisation of the LforS approach as well as a selection of appropriate methods and tools are presented. The authors also address key aspects of developing and managing a learning-oriented extension approach. The book illustrates how LforS can be implemented by presenting two case studies, one from Madagascar and one from Mongolia. It addresses conceptual questions and at the same time it is practice-oriented. In contrast to other extension approaches, LforS does not limit its focus to production-related aspects and the development of value chains: it also addresses livelihood issues in a broad sense. With its focus on learning processes LforS seeks to create a better understanding of the links between different spheres and different levels of decision-making; it also seeks to foster integration of the different actors’ perspectives.