Prismatine and Ferrohogbomite-2N2S in Granulite-Facies Fe-Oxide Lenses in the Eastern Ghats Belt at Venugopalapuram, Vizianagaram District, Andhra Pradesh, India: Do Such Lenses Have a Tourmaline-Enriched Lateritic Precursor?

Fluorine-rich prismatine, (square,Fe,Mg)(Mg,Al,Fe)(5)Al-4(Si,B,Al)(5)O-21(OH,F), with F/(OH+F) = 0.36-0.40 and hercynite are major constituents of a Fe-Al-B-rich lens in ultrahigh-temperature granulite-facies quartz-sillimanite-hypersthene-cordierite gneisses of the Eastern Ghats belt, Andhra Pradesh, India. Hemo-ilmenite. sapphirine, magnetite, biotite and sillimanite are subordinate. Lithium, Be and B are concentrated in prismatine (140 ppm Li, 170 ppm Be, and 2.8-3.0 wt.% B2O3). Another Fe-rich lens is dominantly magnetite, which encloses fine-grained zincian ferrohogbomite-2N2S, (Fe2+ Mg,Zn,Al)(6) (Al,Fe3+,Ti)(16)O-30(OH)(2), containing minor Ga2O3 (0.30-0.92 wt.%). Fe-Al-B-rich lenses with prismatine (or kornerupine) constitute a distinctive type of B-enrichment in granulite-facies rocks and have been reported from four other localities worldwide. A scenario involving a tourmaline-enriched lateritic precursor affected by dehydration melting is our preferred explanation for the origin of the Fe-Al-B-rich lenses at the five localities. Whole-rock analyses and field relationships at another of these localities, Bok se Puts, Namaqualand, South Africa, are consistent with this scenario. Under granulite-facies conditions, tourmaline would have broken down to give korner-upine-prismatine ( other borosilicates) plus a sodic melt containing H2O and B. Removal of this melt depleted the rock in Na and B, but the formation of ferromagnesian borosilicate phases in the restite prevented total loss of B.

Governance and the Capacity to Manage Resilience in Regional Social-Ecological Systems

The sustainability of regional development can be usefully explored through several different lenses. In situations in which uncertainties and change are key features of the ecological landscape and social organization, critical factors for sustainability are resilience, the capacity to cope and adapt, and the conservation of sources of innovation and renewal. However, interventions in social-ecological systems with the aim of altering resilience immediately confront issues of governance. Who decides what should be made resilient to what? For whom is resilience to be managed, and for what purpose? In this paper we draw on the insights from a diverse set of case studies from around the world in which members of the Resilience Alliance have observed or engaged with sustainability problems at regional scales. Our central question is: How do certain attributes of governance function in society to enhance the capacity to manage resilience? Three specific propositions were explored: ( 1) participation builds trust, and deliberation leads to the shared understanding needed to mobilize and self-organize; ( 2) polycentric and multilayered institutions improve the fit between knowledge, action, and social-ecological contexts in ways that allow societies to respond more adaptively at appropriate levels; and ( 3) accountable authorities that also pursue just distributions of benefits and involuntary risks enhance the adaptive capacity of vulnerable groups and society as a whole. Some support was found for parts of all three propositions. In exploring the sustainability of regional social-ecological systems, we are usually faced with a set of ecosystem goods and services that interact with a collection of users with different technologies, interests, and levels of power. In this situation in our roles as analysts, facilitators, change agents, or stakeholders, we not only need to ask: The resilience of what, to what? We must also ask: For whom?

Governance and the Capacity to Manage Resilience in Regional Social-Ecological Systems

The sustainability of regional development can be usefully explored through several different lenses. In situations in which uncertainties and change are key features of the ecological landscape and social organization, critical factors for sustainability are resilience, the capacity to cope and adapt, and the conservation of sources of innovation and renewal. However, interventions in social-ecological systems with the aim of altering resilience immediately confront issues of governance. Who decides what should be made resilient to what? For whom is resilience to be managed, and for what purpose? In this paper we draw on the insights from a diverse set of case studies from around the world in which members of the Resilience Alliance have observed or engaged with sustainability problems at regional scales. Our central question is: How do certain attributes of governance function in society to enhance the capacity to manage resilience? Three specific propositions were explored: ( 1) participation builds trust, and deliberation leads to the shared understanding needed to mobilize and self-organize; ( 2) polycentric and multilayered institutions improve the fit between knowledge, action, and social-ecological contexts in ways that allow societies to respond more adaptively at appropriate levels; and ( 3) accountable authorities that also pursue just distributions of benefits and involuntary risks enhance the adaptive capacity of vulnerable groups and society as a whole. Some support was found for parts of all three propositions. In exploring the sustainability of regional social-ecological systems, we are usually faced with a set of ecosystem goods and services that interact with a collection of users with different technologies, interests, and levels of power. In this situation in our roles as analysts, facilitators, change agents, or stakeholders, we not only need to ask: The resilience of what, to what? We must also ask: For whom?