Introduction XXIX European Seminar in Ethnomusicology: Cultural Mapping and Musical Diversity

«Cultural mapping» has become a central keyword in the UNESCO strategy to protect world cultural and natural heritage. It can be described as a tool to increase the awareness of cultural diversity. As Crawhall (2009) pointed out, cultural mapping was initially considered to represent the «landscapes in two or three dimensions from the perspectives of indigenous and local peoples». It thus transforms the intangible cultural heritage to visible items by establishing profiles of cultures and communities, including music traditions. Cultural mapping is used as a resource for a variety of purposes as broad as peace building, adaptation to climate change, sustainability management, heritage debate and management, but can also become highly useful in the analysis of conflict points. Music plays a significant role in each of these aspects. This year’s symposium invites to highlight, yet also to critically reassess this topic from the following ethnomusicological perspectives: - The method of cultural mapping in ethnomusicology What approaches and research techniques have been used so far to establish musical maps in this context? What kinds of maps have been developed (and, for example, how far do these relate to indigenous mental maps that have only been transmitted orally)? How far do these modern approaches deviate from the earlier cultural mapping approaches of the cultural area approaches that were still evident with Alan P. Merriam and in Alan Lomax` Cantometrics? In how far are the methods of cultural mapping and of ethnomusicological fieldwork different and how can they benefit from each other? - Intangible cultural heritage and musical diversity As the 2003 UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage pointed out in Article 12, each state signing the declaration «shall draw up, in a manner geared to its own situation, one or more inventories of the intangible cultural heritage, present in its territory and monitor these.» This symposium calls for a critical re-assessment of the hitherto established UNESCO intangible cultural heritage lists. The idea is to highlight the sensitive nature and the effects of the various heritage representations. «Heritage» is understood here as a selection from a selection – a small subset of history that relates to a given group of people in a particular place, at a specific time (Dann and Seaton 2001:26). This can include presentations of case studies, yet also a critical re-analysis of the selection process, e.g. who was included – or even excluded (and why)? Who were the decision makers? How can the role of ethnomusicology be described here? Where are the (existent and possible) conflict points (politically, socially, legally, etc.)? What kinds of solution strategies are available to us? How is the issue of diversity – that has been so strongly emphasized in the UNESCO declarations – reflected in the approaches? How might diversity be represented in future approaches? How does the selection process affect musical canonization (and exclusion)? What is the role of archives in this process? - Cultural landscape and music As defined by the World Heritage Committee, cultural landscapes can be understood as a distinct geographical area representing the «combined work of nature and man» (http://whc.unesco.org/en/culturallandscape/). This sub-topic calls for a more detailed – and general – exploration of the exact relation between nature/landscape (and definition of such) and music/sound. How exactly is landscape interrelated with music – and identified (and vice versa)? How is this interrelation being applied and exploited in a (inter-)national context?

Future water quality monitoring--adapting tools to deal with mixtures of pollutants in water resource management.

Environmental quality monitoring of water resources is challenged with providing the basis for safeguarding the environment against adverse biological effects of anthropogenic chemical contamination from diffuse and point sources. While current regulatory efforts focus on monitoring and assessing a few legacy chemicals, many more anthropogenic chemicals can be detected simultaneously in our aquatic resources. However, exposure to chemical mixtures does not necessarily translate into adverse biological effects nor clearly shows whether mitigation measures are needed. Thus, the question which mixtures are present and which have associated combined effects becomes central for defining adequate monitoring and assessment strategies. Here we describe the vision of the international, EU-funded project SOLUTIONS, where three routes are explored to link the occurrence of chemical mixtures at specific sites to the assessment of adverse biological combination effects. First of all, multi-residue target and non-target screening techniques covering a broader range of anticipated chemicals co-occurring in the environment are being developed. By improving sensitivity and detection limits for known bioactive compounds of concern, new analytical chemistry data for multiple components can be obtained and used to characterise priority mixtures. This information on chemical occurrence will be used to predict mixture toxicity and to derive combined effect estimates suitable for advancing environmental quality standards. Secondly, bioanalytical tools will be explored to provide aggregate bioactivity measures integrating all components that produce common (adverse) outcomes even for mixtures of varying compositions. The ambition is to provide comprehensive arrays of effect-based tools and trait-based field observations that link multiple chemical exposures to various environmental protection goals more directly and to provide improved in situ observations for impact assessment of mixtures. Thirdly, effect-directed analysis (EDA) will be applied to identify major drivers of mixture toxicity. Refinements of EDA include the use of statistical approaches with monitoring information for guidance of experimental EDA studies. These three approaches will be explored using case studies at the Danube and Rhine river basins as well as rivers of the Iberian Peninsula. The synthesis of findings will be organised to provide guidance for future solution-oriented environmental monitoring and explore more systematic ways to assess mixture exposures and combination effects in future water quality monitoring.

Expert Opinion on the Perceived Effectiveness and Importance of On-Farm Biosecurity Measures for Cattle and Swine Farms in Switzerland.

Biosecurity is crucial for safeguarding livestock from infectious diseases. Despite the plethora of biosecurity recommendations, published scientific evidence on the effectiveness of individual biosecurity measures is limited. The objective of this study was to assess the perception of Swiss experts about the effectiveness and importance of individual on-farm biosecurity measures for cattle and swine farms (31 and 30 measures, respectively). Using a modified Delphi method, 16 Swiss livestock disease specialists (8 for each species) were interviewed. The experts were asked to rank biosecurity measures that were written on cards, by allocating a score from 0 (lowest) to 5 (highest). Experts ranked biosecurity measures based on their importance related to Swiss legislation, feasibility, as well as the effort required for implementation and the benefit of each biosecurity measure. The experts also ranked biosecurity measures based on their effectiveness in preventing an infectious agent from entering and spreading on a farm, solely based on transmission characteristics of specific pathogens. The pathogens considered by cattle experts were those causing Bluetongue (BT), Bovine Viral Diarrhea (BVD), Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) and Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitis (IBR). Swine experts expressed their opinion on the pathogens causing African Swine Fever (ASF), Enzootic Pneumonia (EP), Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome (PRRS), as well as FMD. For cattle farms, biosecurity measures that improve disease awareness of farmers were ranked as both most important and most effective. For swine farms, the most important and effective measures identified were those related to animal movements. Among all single measures evaluated, education of farmers was perceived by the experts to be the most important and effective for protecting both Swiss cattle and swine farms from disease. The findings of this study provide an important basis for recommendation to farmers and policy makers.

A world soils agenda: Discussing international actions for the sustainable use of soils

Promoting sustainable forms of natural resource management is a challenge land users are unable to tackle solely on their own initiative. Soil and land degradation remains an unresolved problem of global environmental change. There is a need for concerted international action that directly addresses this issue at the global level. A discussion of action to promote the sustainable use of soils and land took place in a working group established by the International Union of Soil Sciences (IUSS) in 1998. The present publication reports on the results of this discussion and proposes that the international community establish a ‘world soils agenda’ that will enable the scientific community, international institutions and their national partners to work together towards the common goal of safeguarding soils and land as resources central to our own survival as well as the Earth’s biological wealth.