Adapting to new challenges: extension theory and practice for the 21st century

Twenty first century challenges facing agriculture include climate change, threats to food security for a growing population and downward economic pressures on rural livelihoods. Addressing these challenges will require innovation in extension theory, policy and education, at a time when the dominance of the state in the provision of knowledge and information services to farmers and rural entrepreneurs continues to decline. This paper suggests that extension theory is catching up with and helping us to understand innovative extension practice, and therefore provides a platform for improving rural development policies and strategies. Innovation is now less likely to be spoken of as something to be passed on to farmers, than as a continuing process of creativity and adaptation that can be nurtured and sustained. Innovation systems and innovation platforms are concepts that recognise the multiple factors that lead to farmers’ developing, adapting and applying new ideas and the importance of linking all actors in the value chain to ensure producers can access appropriate information and advice for decision making at all stages in the production process. Concepts of social learning, group development and solidarity, social capital, collective action and empowerment all help to explain and therefore to apply more effectively group extension approaches in building confidence and sustaining innovation. A challenge facing educators is to ensure the curricula for aspiring extension professionals in our higher education institutions are regularly reviewed and keep up with current and future developments in theory, policy and practice.

Decision theory and real estate development: a note on uncertainty

Real estate development appraisal is a quantification of future expectations. The appraisal model relies upon the valuer/developer having an understanding of the future in terms of the future marketability of the completed development and the future cost of development. In some cases the developer has some degree of control over the possible variation in the variables, as with the cost of construction through the choice of specification. However, other variables, such as the sale price of the final product, are totally dependent upon the vagaries of the market at the completion date. To try to address the risk of a different outcome to the one expected (modelled) the developer will often carry out a sensitivity analysis on the development. However, traditional sensitivity analysis has generally only looked at the best and worst scenarios and has focused on the anticipated or expected outcomes. This does not take into account uncertainty and the range of outcomes that can happen. A fuller analysis should include examination of the uncertainties in each of the components of the appraisal and account for the appropriate distributions of the variables. Similarly, as many of the variables in the model are not independent, the variables need to be correlated. This requires a standardised approach and we suggest that the use of a generic forecasting software package, in this case Crystal Ball, allows the analyst to work with an existing development appraisal model set up in Excel (or other spreadsheet) and to work with a predetermined set of probability distributions. Without a full knowledge of risk, developers are unable to determine the anticipated level of return that should be sought to compensate for the risk. This model allows the user a better understanding of the possible outcomes for the development. Ultimately the final decision will be made relative to current expectations and current business constraints, but by assessing the upside and downside risks more appropriately, the decision maker should be better placed to make a more informed and “better”.

Atrocities in theory and practice: An introduction

Classical counterinsurgency theory – written before the 19th century – has generally strongly opposed atrocities, as have theoreticians writing on how to conduct insurgencies. For a variety of reasons – ranging from pragmatic to religious or humanitarian – theoreticians of both groups have particularly argued for the lenient treatment of civilians associated with the enemy camp, although there is a marked pattern of exceptions, for example, where heretics or populations of cities refusing to surrender to besieging armies are concerned. And yet atrocities – defined here as acts of violence against the unarmed (non-combatants, or wounded or imprisoned enemy soldiers), or needlessly painful and/or humiliating treatment of enemy combatants, beyond any action needed to incapacitate or disarm them – occur frequently in small wars. Examples abound where these exhortations have been ignored, both by forces engaged in an insurgency and by forces trying to put down a rebellion. Why have so many atrocities been committed in war if so many arguments have been put forward against them? This is the basic puzzle for which the individual contributions to this special issue are seeking to find tentative answers, drawing on case studies.

A holistic method to assess building energy efficiency combining D-S theory and the evidential reasoning approach

The assessment of building energy efficiency is one of the most effective measures for reducing building energy consumption. This paper proposes a holistic method (HMEEB) for assessing and certifying building energy efficiency based on the D-S (Dempster-Shafer) theory of evidence and the Evidential Reasoning (ER) approach. HMEEB has three main features: (i) it provides both a method to assess and certify building energy efficiency, and exists as an analytical tool to identify improvement opportunities; (ii) it combines a wealth of information on building energy efficiency assessment, including identification of indicators and a weighting mechanism; and (iii) it provides a method to identify and deal with inherent uncertainties within the assessment procedure. This paper demonstrates the robustness, flexibility and effectiveness of the proposed method, using two examples to assess the energy efficiency of two residential buildings, both located in the ‘Hot Summer and Cold Winter’ zone in China. The proposed certification method provides detailed recommendations for policymakers in the context of carbon emission reduction targets and promoting energy efficiency in the built environment. The method is transferable to other countries and regions, using an indicator weighting system to modify local climatic, economic and social factors.