• Energy Research
• 11. Sustainability close
• CA close
• BG close
• Netherlands Research Portal close

Although traditional agriculture carried out by ethnic groups is considered for its high biodiversity and important for food security and sovereignty, few studies have investigated the potential of these systems in the interest of promoting a sustainable agricultural development policy according to United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Using the FAO's Sustainability Assessment of Food and Agriculture (SAFA) methodology, this study analyzed the sustainability of four traditional agricultural systems, three indigenous (Waorani, Shuar, and Kichwa) and one migrant settler populations in the Yasuní Biosphere Reserve (YBR) and identified synergies and trade-offs among the dimensions of sustainability. The results showed different dynamics in all dimensions of sustainability-specifically, trade-offs in the dimensions of good governance with environmental integrity and social well-being, economic resilience, and social well-being. It was identified that the differences in terms of sustainability are narrowing between the indigenous Shuar people's traditional agricultural systems and those of migrant settlers, which provides policymakers with specific information to design sustainable development policies and rescue traditional agricultural systems in the Amazon region.

Diversification of production to strengthen resilience is a key tenet of climate-smart agriculture (CSA), which can help to address the complex vulnerabilities of agriculture-dependent rural communities. In this study, we investigated the relationship between the promotion of different CSA practices across four climate-smart villages (CSVs) in Myanmar. To determine the impact of the CSA practices on livelihoods and health, survey data were collected from agricultural households (n = 527) over three years. Within the time period studied, the results indicate that some the CSA practices and technologies adopted were significantly associated with changes in household dietary diversity scores (HDDS), but, in the short-term, these were not associated with improvements in the households’ food insecurity scores (HFIAS). Based on the survey responses, we examined how pathways of CSA practice adoption tailored to different contexts of Myanmar’s four agroecologies could contribute to the observed changes, including possible resulting trade-offs. We highlight that understanding the impacts of CSA adoption on household food security in CSVs will require longer-term monitoring, as most CSA options are medium- to long-cycle interventions. Our further analysis of knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAPs) amongst the households indicated a poor understanding of the household knowledge, attitudes and practices in relation to nutrition, food choices, food preparation, sanitation and hygiene. Our KAP findings indicate that current nutrition education interventions in the Myanmar CSVs are inadequate and will need further improvement for health and nutrition outcomes from the portfolio of CSA interventions.

Los nuevos sistemas inteligentes para ayudar a la transición energética y mejorar la sostenibilidad y la vida de las personas se pueden implementar a diferentes escalas, desde una casa hasta una región entera. Los campus universitarios son un tamaño intermedio interesante (lo suficientemente grande como para importar y lo suficientemente pequeño como para ser manejable) para la investigación, el desarrollo, las pruebas y la capacitación sobre la integración de la inteligencia en todos los niveles, lo que llevó a la aparición del concepto de "campus inteligente" en los últimos años. Este artículo de revisión propone un amplio análisis de la literatura científica sobre campus inteligentes de la última década (2010-2020). Las 182 publicaciones seleccionadas se distribuyen en siete categorías de inteligencia: edificio inteligente, entorno inteligente, movilidad inteligente, vida inteligente, personas inteligentes, gobierno inteligente y datos inteligentes. Las principales preguntas y desafíos abiertos con respecto a los campus inteligentes se presentan al final de la revisión y abordan la sostenibilidad y la transición energética, la aceptabilidad y la ética, los modelos de aprendizaje, las políticas de datos abiertos y la interoperabilidad. El presente trabajo se realizó en el marco de la Red de Energía de la Cumbre de Líderes Regionales (RLS-Energy) como parte de sus esfuerzos de investigación multilateral sobre regiones inteligentes. De nouveaux systèmes intelligents pour aider à la transition énergétique et améliorer la durabilité et la vie des gens peuvent être déployés à différentes échelles, allant d'une maison à une région entière. Les campus universitaires sont une taille intermédiaire intéressante (assez grande pour compter et assez petite pour être maniable) pour la recherche, le développement, les tests et la formation sur l'intégration de l'intelligence à tous les niveaux, ce qui a conduit à l'émergence du concept de « campus intelligent » au cours des dernières années. Cet article de synthèse propose une analyse approfondie de la littérature scientifique sur les campus intelligents de la dernière décennie (2010-2020). Les 182 publications sélectionnées sont réparties en sept catégories d'intelligence : smart building, smart environment, smart mobility, smart living, smart people, smart governance et smart data. Les principales questions et défis ouverts concernant les campus intelligents sont présentés à la fin de l'examen et traitent de la durabilité et de la transition énergétique, de l'acceptabilité et de l'éthique, des modèles d'apprentissage, des politiques de données ouvertes et de l'interopérabilité. Le présent travail a été réalisé dans le cadre du Réseau de l'énergie du Sommet des dirigeants régionaux (RLS-Energy) dans le cadre de ses efforts multilatéraux de recherche sur les régions intelligentes. Novel intelligent systems to assist the energy transition and improve sustainability and people's life can be deployed at different scales, ranging from a house to an entire region. University campuses are an interesting intermediate size (big enough to matter and small enough to be tractable) for research, development, test and training on the integration of smartness at all levels, which led to the emergence of the concept of "smart campus" over the last few years. This review article proposes an extensive analysis of the scientific literature on smart campuses from the last decade (2010-2020). The 182 selected publications are distributed into seven categories of smartness: smart building, smart environment, smart mobility, smart living, smart people, smart governance and smart data. The main open questions and challenges regarding smart campuses are presented at the end of the review and deal with sustainability and energy transition, acceptability and ethics, learning models, open data policies and interoperability. The present work was carried out within the framework of the Energy Network of the Regional Leaders Summit (RLS-Energy) as part of its multilateral research efforts on smart regions. يمكن نشر أنظمة ذكية جديدة للمساعدة في انتقال الطاقة وتحسين الاستدامة وحياة الناس على مستويات مختلفة، تتراوح من منزل إلى منطقة بأكملها. تعتبر الجامعات ذات حجم متوسط مثير للاهتمام (كبيرة بما يكفي لتكون مهمة وصغيرة بما يكفي لتكون قابلة للتتبع) للبحث والتطوير والاختبار والتدريب على تكامل الذكاء على جميع المستويات، مما أدى إلى ظهور مفهوم "الحرم الجامعي الذكي" على مدى السنوات القليلة الماضية. تقترح مقالة المراجعة هذه تحليلاً شاملاً للأدبيات العلمية حول الجامعات الذكية من العقد الماضي (2010-2020). يتم توزيع المنشورات الـ 182 المختارة على سبع فئات من الذكاء: البناء الذكي، والبيئة الذكية، والتنقل الذكي، والمعيشة الذكية، والأشخاص الأذكياء، والحوكمة الذكية، والبيانات الذكية. يتم تقديم الأسئلة والتحديات الرئيسية المفتوحة المتعلقة بالحرم الجامعي الذكي في نهاية المراجعة والتعامل مع الاستدامة وانتقال الطاقة والقبول والأخلاقيات ونماذج التعلم وسياسات البيانات المفتوحة وقابلية التشغيل البيني. تم تنفيذ العمل الحالي في إطار شبكة الطاقة التابعة لقمة القادة الإقليميين (RLS - Energy) كجزء من جهودها البحثية متعددة الأطراف حول المناطق الذكية.

West and East Africa experience high vari- ability of rainfall that is expected to increase with climate change. This results in fluctuations in water availability for food production and other socioeconomic activities. Water harvesting and storage can mitigate the adverse effects of rainfall variability. But past studies have shown that when investments in water storage are not guided by environ- mental health considerations, the increased availability of open water surface may increase the transmission of water- related diseases. This is demonstrated for schistosomiasis associated with small reservoirs in Burkina Faso, and for malaria in Ethiopia around large dams, small dams, and water harvesting ponds. The concern is that the rush to develop water harvesting and storage for climate change adaptation may increase the risk for already vulnerable people, in some cases more than canceling out the benefits of greater water availability. Taking health issues into account in a participatory approach to planning, design, and management of rainwater harvesting and water storage, as well as considering the full range of water storage options would enable better opportunities for enhancing resilience against climate change in vulnerable populations in sub-Saharan Africa.

Tropical reforestation (TR) has been highlighted as an important intervention for climate change mitigation because of its carbon storage potential. TR can also play other frequently overlooked, but significant, roles in helping society and ecosystems adapt to climate variability and change. For example, reforestation can ameliorate climate‐associated impacts of altered hydrological cycles in watersheds, protect coastal areas from increased storms, and provide habitat to reduce the probability of species' extinctions under a changing climate. Consequently, reforestation should be managed with both adaptation and mitigation objectives in mind, so as to maximize synergies among these diverse roles, and to avoid trade‐offs in which the achievement of one goal is detrimental to another. Management of increased forest cover must also incorporate measures for reducing the direct and indirect impacts of changing climate on reforestation itself. Here we advocate a focus on “climate‐smart reforestation,” defined as reforesting for climate change mitigation and adaptation, while ensuring that the direct and indirect impacts of climate change on reforestation are anticipated and minimized.

The implications of anthropogenic climate change, human activities and land use change (LUC) on the environment and ecosystem services in the coastal regions of Saudi Arabia were analyzed. Earth observations data was used to drive land use categories between 1970 and 2014. Next, a Markov-CA model was developed to characterize the dynamic of LUC between 2014 and 2100 and their impacts on regions' climate and environment. Non-parametric change point and trend detection algorithms were applied to temperature, precipitation and greenhouse gases data to investigate the presence of anthropogenic climate change. Lastly, climate models were used to project future climate change between 2014 and 2100. The analysis of LUC revealed that between 1970 and 2014, built up areas experienced the greatest growth during the study period, leading to a significant monotonic trend. Urban areas increased by 2349.61km2 between 1970 and 2014, an average increase of >53.4km2/yr. The projected LUC between 2014 and 2100 indicate a continued increase in urban areas and irrigated cropland. Human alteration of land use from natural vegetation and forests to other uses after 1970, resulted in a loss, degradation, and fragmentation, all of which usually have devastating effects on the biodiversity of the region. Resulting in a statistically significant change point in temperature anomaly after 1968 with a warming trend of 0.24°C/decade and a downward trend in precipitation anomaly of 12.2mm/decade. Total greenhouse gas emissions including all anthropogenic sources showed a statistically significant positive trend of 78,090Kt/decade after 1991. This is reflected in the future projection of temperature anomaly between 1900 and 2100 with a future warming trend of 0.19°C/decade. In conclusion, human activities, industrial revelation, deforestation, land use transformation and increase in greenhouse gases had significant implications on the environment and ecosystem services of the study area.

An integrated understanding of both social and ecological aspects of environmental issues is essential to address pressing sustainability challenges. An integrated social-ecological systems perspective is purported to provide a better understanding of the complex relationships between humans and nature. Despite a threefold increase in the amount of social-ecological research published between 2010 and 2015, it is unclear whether these approaches have been truly integrative. We conducted a systematic literature review to investigate the conceptual, methodological, disciplinary, and functional aspects of social-ecological integration. In general, we found that overall integration is still lacking in social-ecological research. Some social variables deemed important for addressing sustainability challenges are underrepresented in social-ecological studies, e.g., culture, politics, and power. Disciplines such as ecology, urban studies, and geography are better integrated than others, e.g., sociology, biology, and public administration. In addition to ecology and urban studies, biodiversity conservation plays a key brokerage role in integrating other disciplines into social-ecological research. Studies founded on systems theory have the highest rates of integration. Highly integrative studies combine different types of tools, involve stakeholders at appropriate stages, and tend to deliver practical recommendations. Better social-ecological integration must underpin sustainability science. To achieve this potential, future social-ecological research will require greater attention to the following: the interdisciplinary composition of project teams, strategic stakeholder involvement, application of multiple tools, incorporation of both social and ecological variables, consideration of bidirectional relationships between variables, and identification of implications and articulation of clear policy recommendations.