Search results

International hydroacoustic surveys have been conducted in the Baltic Sea since 1978. The starting point was the cooperation between the Institute of Marine Research (IMR) in Lysekil, Sweden, and the Institute fur Hochseefisherei und Fishverarbeitung in Rostock, German Democratic Republic, in October ¨ 1978, which produced the first acoustic estimates of total biomass of herring and sprat in the Baltic main basin (Håkansson et al., 1979). Since then there has been at least one annual hydroacoustic survey for herring and sprat and results have been reported to ICES. The Baltic International Acoustic Survey (BIAS), is mandatory for the countries that have exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in the Baltic Sea, and is a part of the Data Collection Framework as stipulated by the European Council and the Commission (Council Regulation (EC) No 199/2008 and the Commission Data Collection Framework (DCF) web page1 ). The IMR in Lysekil is part of the Department of Aquatic Resources within Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences and is responsible for the Swedish part of the EU DCF and surveys in the marine environment. The Institute assesses the status of the marine ecosystems, develops and provides biological advices for the sustainable use of the aquatic resources. The BIAS survey is co-ordinated and managed by the ICES working group WGBIFS. The main objective of BIAS is to assess herring and sprat resources in the Baltic Sea. The survey provides data to the ICES Baltic Fisheries Assessment Working Group (WGBFAS).

International hydroacoustic surveys have been conducted in the Baltic Sea since 1978. The starting point was the cooperation between Institute of Marine Research (IMR) in Lysekil, Sweden and the Institute fur Hochseefisherei und Fishverarbeitung in Rostock, German Democratic Republic in October 1978, ¨ which produced the first acoustic estimates of total biomass of herring and sprat in the Baltic Main basin (H˚akansson et al., 1979). Since then there has been at least one annual hydroacoustic survey for herring and sprat stocks and results have been reported to ICES. The Baltic International Acoustic Survey (BIAS), is mandatory for the countries that have exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in the Baltic Sea, and is a part of the Data Collection Framework as stipulated by the European Council and the Commission (Council Regulation (EC) No 199/2008 and the Commission Data Collection Framework (DCF) web page1 ). IMR in Lysekil is part of the Department of Aquatic Resources within Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences and is responsible for the Swedish part of the EU DCF and surveys in the marine environment. The Institute assesses the status of the marine ecosystems, develops and provides biological advices for managers for the sustainable use of aquatic resources. The BIAS survey are co-ordinated and managed by the ICES working group WGBIFS. The main objective of BIAS is to assess herring and sprat resources in the Baltic Sea. The survey will provide data to the ICES Baltic Fisheries Assessment Working Group (WGBFAS).

The IENE 2014 conference puts emphasis on the "greening" of transport infrastructure: both in respect to a wiser use of marginal infrastructure habitats to favour biodiversity and certain ecosys- tem services, and in respect to a more permeable and safer infrastructure that minimises the direct impact on wildlife. Transportation and infrastructure are recognised as signi cant drivers in the global loss of biodiverity. Their impacts on nature are well described and there is ample evidence for the negative effects of traffic and transportation infrastructure on nature. Even though roads and railroads may occupy but a small proportion of an area, they a ect the entire landscape, cause the death of millions of wild animals, and disturb surrounding habitats through pollution, noise and alien species. The overall impact is evident, but there are means to minimise the pressure, to adjust infrastructure facilities and, to some degree, introduce beneficial services for wildlife. Such measures can and should be implemented as a standard in infrastructure development and maintenance. Knowledge about their functionality and e cacy is, however, not always satisfying. Technical innovations and new mitigation concepts need to be tested and evaluated. Their func- tionality and e ectiveness also depends on the interplay between the transport sector and other sectors of society. Communication, knowledge transfer, and public education are just as essential here, as legal frameworks, policy, technical development and environmental science. European policy (e.g., Green Infrastructure) is developing clearly in this direction, recognizing the transport sector and transportation facilities as important players in the endeavour towards a greener and sustainable future. Obviously, this calls for international collaboration in research and practice, for enhanced exchange of knowledge between disciplines, and for the development of harmonised standards and pro- cedures that can be referred to by international actors. IENE provides this interdisciplinary arena through its conferences and workshops. The IENE 2014 international conference emphasises that transport infrastructure can be planned and designed as an ecologically well-adopted, safe and e cient system, while acknowledging that certain impacts can never be avoided. IENE, together with the Swedish Transport Administration, the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, the Danish Road Directorate and numerous other partners, invites scientists, practitioners and planners, governmental agencies and private companies, NGO's and anybody with an interest in the above to the IENE 2014 conference in Sweden. We welcome new partner- and sponsorships and o er a well-approved and international network for communication and presentation.

The Global Nutrition Report (GNR) provides a global profile and country profiles on nutrition for each of the United Nations' 193 member states, and includes specific progress for each country. It will be a centerpiece of the Second International Conference on Nutrition (ICN2) in Rome on 19-21 November, organized by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization and the World Health Organization. ; Supplementary Online Materials ix Acknowledgments x Abbreviations xii Executive summary xiii Chapter 1 ntroduction 2 Chapter 2 Nutrition Is Central to Sustainable Development 7 Chapter 3 Progress toward the World Health Assembly Nutrition Targets Is Too Slow1 5 Chapter 4 The Coexistence of Different Forms of Malnutrition Is the "New Normal" 22 Chapter 5 The Coverage of Nutrition-Specific Interventions Needs to Improve 29 Chapter 6 Interventions Addressing the Underlying Determinants of Nutrition Status Are Important, but They Need to Be More Nutrition sensitive 38 Chapter 7 The Enabling Environment Is Improving, but Not Quickly Enough 47 Chapter 8 The Need to Strengthen Accountability in Nutrition 56 Chapter 9 What Are the Priorities for Investment in Improved Nutrition Data? 67 Chapter 10 Key Messages and Recommendations 71 Appendix 1 The Nutrition Country Profile: A Tool for Action 75 Appendix 2 Which Countries Are on Course to Meet Several WHA Targets? 77 Appendix 3 Which Countries Are on Course for Which WHA Targets? 79 Appendix 4 Donor Spending on Nutrition-Specific and Nutrition-Sensitive Interventions and Programs 84 Appendix 5 How Accountable Is the Global Nutrition Report? 86 Appendix 6 Availability of Data for Nutrition Country Profile Indicators 88 Notes 91 References 95 PANELS Panel 11 Types of Nutrition Investment, Lawrence Haddad 4 Panel 21 Nutrition and the Sustainable Development Goals—No Room for Complacency, Michael Anderson 11 Panel 22 Some New Data from India: What If?, Lawrence Haddad, Komal Bhatia, and Kamilla Eriksen 12 Panel 23 How Did Maharashtra Cut Child Stunting?, Lawrence Haddad 13 Panel 24 Can Improving the Underlying Determinants of Nutrition Help Meet the WHA Targets?, Lisa Smith and Lawrence Haddad 14 Panel 41 Malnutrition in the United States and United Kingdom, Jessica Fanzo 25 Panel 42 Regional Drivers of Malnutrition in Indonesia, Endang Achadi with acknowledgment to Sudarno Sumarto and Taufik Hidayat 26 Panel 43 Compiling District-Level Nutrition Data in India, Purnima Menon and Shruthi Cyriac 27 Panel 44 Targeting Minority Groups at Risk in the United States, Jennifer Requejo and Joel Gittelsohn 28 Panel 51 Measuring Coverage of Programs to Treat Severe Acute Malnutrition, Jose Luis Alvarez 37 Panel 61 Trends in Dietary Quality among Adults in the United States, Daniel Wang and Walter Willett 41 Panel 62 How Did Bangladesh Reduce Stunting So Rapidly?, Derek Headey 43 Panel 63 Using an Agricultural Platform in Burkina Faso to Improve Nutrition during the First 1,000 Days, Deanna Kelly Olney, Andrew Dillon, Abdoulaye Pedehombga, Marcellin Ouédraogo, and Marie Ruel 45 Panel 71 Is There a Better Way to Track Nutrition Spending? 48 Panel 72 Tracking Financial Allocations to Nutrition: Guatemala's Experience, Jesús Bulux, Otto Velasquez, Cecibel Juárez, Carla Guillén, and Fernando Arriola 49 Panel 73 A Tool for Assessing Government Progress on Creating Healthy Food Environments, Boyd Swinburn 51 Panel 74 Engaging Food and Beverage Companies through the Access to Nutrition Index, Inge Kauer 52 Panel 75 How Brazil Cut Child Stunting and Improved Breastfeeding Practices, Jennifer Requejo 54 Panel 81 Scaling Up Nutrition through Business, Jonathan Tench 61 Panel 82 How Civil Society Organizations Build Commitment to Nutrition, Claire Blanchard 62 Panel 83 Building Civil Society's Capacity to Push for Policies on Obesity and Noncommunicable Diseases, Corinna Hawkes 63 Panel 84 Can Community Monitoring Enhance Accountability for Nutrition?, Nick Nisbett and Dolf te Lintelo 64 Panel 85 National Evaluation Platforms: Potential for Nutrition, Jennifer Bryce and colleagues 65 Panel 86 The State of African Nutrition Data for Accountability and Learning, Carl Lachat, Joyce Kinabo, Eunice Nago, Annamarie Kruger, and Patrick Kolsteren 66 ; PR ; IFPRI1; CRP4; B Promoting healthy food systems ; DGO; A4NH; PHND ; CGIAR Research Program on Agriculture for Nutrition and Health (A4NH)

Reaffirming the importance of the U.S.-Japan relationship -- Contributing to world peace and global prosperity -- Definitive implementation of the U.S.-Japan security treaty -- Integrating hard power and soft power -- The political necessity for cooperation -- Review of bilateral cooperation on global issues -- The global partnership under the George H.W. Bush administration (1989-1993) -- The common agenda under the Clinton administration (1993-2001) -- Alliance cooperation under the George W. Bush administration (2001 -- present) -- A new framework for enhanced global security -- Promoting regional economic integration: an Asia-Pacific union -- U.S.-Japan free trade agreement -- Main areas for cooperation -- Environment and energy -- Climate change -- Energy-saving societies -- Development and Africa -- Nuclear nonproliferation -- Other possible areas for cooperation.