Effect of human disturbance on long-term habitat use and breeding success of the European Nightjar, Caprimulgus europaeus

Land managers often respond to declining numbers of target species by creating additional areas of habitat. If these habitats are also subject to human disturbance, then their efforts may be wasted. The European Nightjar (Caprimulgus europaeus) is a ground-nesting bird that is listed as a species of European Conservation Concern. It appears to be susceptible to human disturbance during the breeding season. We examined habitat use and reproductive success over 10 years in a breeding population on 1335 ha of managed land in Nottinghamshire, England. The study site was divided into a heavily disturbed section and a less disturbed section of equal habitat availability, forming a natural long-term experiment. The site is open to the public, and visitor numbers approximately doubled during the study. We found that overall Nightjar density was significantly lower and there were significantly fewer breeding pairs in the heavily disturbed habitat compared with the less disturbed habitat. However, average breeding success per pair, in terms of eggs and fledglings produced, was not significantly different between the two sections across years. Our findings suggest that human recreational disturbance may drastically alter settlement patterns and nest site selection of arriving females in some migratory ground-nesting species and may reduce the utility of apparently suitable patches of remnant and created habitat. Land managers should bear this in mind when creating new areas of habitat that will also be accessible to the public. Our study also highlights the value of long-term population monitoring, which can detect trends that short-term studies may miss.

Language, education and ethnicity: whose rights will prevail in an age of globalisation?

Education and ethnicity cannot be discussed without taking language into account. This paper will argue that any discussion of ethnic minorities cannot ignore the question of language, nor can any discussion of human rights ignore the question of language rights. Unfortunately, in today's globalised world, governments and minorities are faced with conflicting pressures: on the one hand, for the development and use of education in a global/international language; on the other for the use and development of mother tongue, local or indigenous languages in education. Language complexity and ethnic plurality were largely brought about as a result of the creation of nation-states, which were spread around the world as a result of European colonialism. European languages and formal education systems were used as a means of political and economic control. The legacy that was left by the colonial powers has complicated ethnic relations and has frequently led to conflict. While there is now greater recognition of the importance of language both for economic and educational development, as well as for human rights, the forces of globalisation are leading towards uniformity in the languages used, in culture and even in education. They are working against the development of language rights for smaller groups. We are witnessing a sharp decline in the number of languages spoken. Only those languages which are numerically, economically and politically strong are likely to survive. As a result many linguistic and ethnic groups are in danger of being further marginalised. This paper will illustrate this thesis both historically and from several contemporary societies, showing how certain policies have exacerbated ethnic conflict while others are seeking to promote harmony and reconciliation. Why this should be so will be explored. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Drug control, human rights, and the right to the highest attainable standard of health: a reply to Saul Takahashi

A recent article in this journal challenged claims that a human rights framework should be applied to drug control. This article questions the author’s assertions and reframes them in the context of socio-legal drug scholarship, aiming to build on the discourse concerning human rights and drug use. It is submitted that a rights-based approach is a necessary, indeed obligatory, ethical and legal framework through which to address drug use and that international human rights law provides the proper scope for determining where interferences with individual human rights might be justified on certain, limited grounds.

The role of necessity in international humanitarian and human rights law

The nature of armed conflict has changed dramatically in recent decades. In particular, it is increasingly the case that hostilities now occur alongside ‘everyday’ situations. This has led to a pressing need to determine when a ‘conduct of hostilities’ model (governed by international humanitarian law—IHL) applies and when a ‘law enforcement’ model (governed by international human rights law—IHRL) applies. This in turn raises the question of whether these two legal regimes are incompatible or whether they might be applied in parallel. It is on this question that the current paper focuses, examining it at the level of principle. Whilst most accounts of the principles underlying these two areas of law focus on humanitarian considerations, few have compared the role played by necessity in each. This paper seeks to address this omission. It demonstrates that considerations of necessity play a prominent role in both IHL and IHRL, albeit with differing consequences. It then applies this necessity-based analysis to suggest a principled basis for rationalising the relationship between IHL and IHRL, demonstrating how this approach would operate in practice. It is shown that, by emphasising the role of necessity in IHL and IHRL, an approach can be adopted that reconciles the two in a manner that is sympathetic to their object and purpose.