Landscapes of Poverty and Environment in Lao PDR

A key challenge for land change science is linking land cover information to human-environment interactions over larger spatial areas. Crucial information on land use types and people involved is still lacking. In Lao PDR, a country facing rapid and multilevel land change processes, this lack of information hinders evidence-based policy- and decision-making. We present a new approach for the description of landscape mosaics on national level and relate it to village level Population Census information. Results showed that swidden agricultural landscapes, involving 17% of the population, dominate 28% of the country, while permanent agricultural landscapes involve 74% of the population in 29% of the country.

The Centre for Development and Environment (CDE), University of Bern

The Centre for Development and Environment (CDE) is the University of Bern's center for sustainable development research. Founded in 1988 as a part of the Institute of Geography, CDE became an interdisciplinary university center in 2009. Its current overall aim is to foster sustainable development-oriented research across various institutes and departments of the University of Bern. In view of this new mandate, CDE devised a new strategy focusing on 6 strategic themes. These are explored and advanced by groups of researchers organized in thematic clusters. Three of the 6 clusters address sustainable development from a comprehensive perspective: global change impacts, innovations for sustainable development, and education for sustainable development. These clusters are complemented by 3 clusters that investigate sustainable development with a specialized perspective: natural resources and ecosystem services, multidimensional disparities, and governance of land and natural resources.

What's Happening? Allan Kaprow and Claes Oldenburg Argue About Art And Life

In 1961 Allan Kaprow (1927–2006) and Claes Oldenburg (b. 1929) exchanged a number of letters in which they argued about the definition of their avant-garde practices as Happenings. Kaprow, who first introduced this "root-metaphor," as he would later call it, describes with it the necessity of the respective activity to be as far removed as possible from all motives, materials, and formats conventionally connected to art. Oldenburg, who at the time of this exchange was just as active in the New York performance scene as Kaprow, disagrees with his colleague's removal of their practice from the artistic sphere. Oldenburg is also dissatisfied with the fact that Kaprow, through his writings, launches a critical discourse that follows his own definition of the Happening. The two artists thus argue just as much about the positioning of their practices with respect to art as over the authority to establish such a position. This essay traces their argument through their written conversation and in doing so exposes the immense influence Kaprow's rhetoric had on the subsequent art-historical canonization of their respective practices: Oldenburg's more ambivalent position is today amalgamated with Kaprow's theoretical stance.