Suchergebnisse

In response to recent alignment of political leadership in Canada and the United States with respect to global nature conservation imperatives, a nascent and intentional dialogue has emerged on transboundary connectivity conservation between the two countries. In February and April 2021, two meetings were remotely convened, bringing together more than 160 participants from key government agencies, non-governmental organizations and Indigenous Nations engaged in conservation in both countries. Participants generated 25 concrete ideas for key next steps and 11 broad strategies that, when considered together, comprise 11 priority policy directions. Among these, four core policy imperatives include (1) prioritizing opportunities to coordinate within and among Indigenous communities, (2) creating formalized memorandums of understanding (MOUs) and funding commitments between the US and Canada, (3) mainstreaming connectivity into sectors and society, and (4) initiating systemwide changes in governance and economic structures. Together, these policy directions represent important strategies at this crucial inflection point. Only rarely are nations given historic policy alignment opportunities to redefine and reinvigorate their common conservation goals. Particularly salient is the drive to embrace transboundary connectivity conservation as a nature-based solution to climate change adaptation. We see this dialogue as a beginning in securing the peace that defines two countries and numerous Indigenous Nations that are inextricably linked by ecology and culture.

In response to recent alignment of political leadership in Canada and the United States with respect to global nature conservation imperatives, a nascent and intentional dialogue has emerged on transboundary connectivity conservation between the two countries. In February and April 2021, two meetings were remotely convened, bringing together more than 160 participants from key government agencies, non-governmental organizations and Indigenous Nations engaged in conservation in both countries. Participants generated 25 concrete ideas for key next steps and 11 broad strategies that, when considered together, comprise 11 priority policy directions. Among these, four core policy imperatives include (1) prioritizing opportunities to coordinate within and among Indigenous communities, (2) creating formalized memorandums of understanding (MOUs) and funding commitments between the US and Canada, (3) mainstreaming connectivity into sectors and society, and (4) initiating systemwide changes in governance and economic structures. Together, these policy directions represent important strategies at this crucial inflection point. Only rarely are nations given historic policy alignment opportunities to redefine and reinvigorate their common conservation goals. Particularly salient is the drive to embrace transboundary connectivity conservation as a nature-based solution to climate change adaptation. We see this dialogue as a beginning in securing the peace that defines two countries and numerous Indigenous Nations that are inextricably linked by ecology and culture.

Integrating knowledge from across the natural and social sciences is necessary to effectively address societal tradeoffs between human use of biological diversity and its preservation. Collaborative processes can change the ways decision makers think about scientific evidence, enhance levels of mutual trust and credibility, and advance the conservation policy discourse. Canada has responsibility for a large fraction of some major ecosystems, such as boreal forests, Arctic tundra, wetlands, and temperate and Arctic oceans. Stressors to biological diversity within these ecosystems arise from activities of the country's resource-based economy, as well as external drivers of environmental change. Effective management is complicated by incongruence between ecological and political boundaries and conflicting perspectives on social and economic goals. Many knowledge gaps about stressors and their management might be reduced through targeted, timely research. We identify 40 questions that, if addressed or answered, would advance research that has a high probability of supporting development of effective policies and management strategies for species, ecosystems, and ecological processes in Canada. A total of 396 candidate questions drawn from natural and social science disciplines were contributed by individuals with diverse organizational affiliations. These were collaboratively winnowed to 40 by our team of collaborators. The questions emphasize understanding ecosystems, the effects and mitigation of climate change, coordinating governance and management efforts across multiple jurisdictions, and examining relations between conservation policy and the social and economic well-being of Aboriginal peoples. The questions we identified provide potential links between evidence from the conservation sciences and formulation of policies for conservation and resource management. Our collaborative process of communication and engagement between scientists and decision makers for generating and prioritizing research questions ...

Background: Over the past 10-15 years, a substantial amount of work has been done by the scientific, regulatory, and business communities to elucidate the effects and risks of pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) in the environment. Objective: This review was undertaken to identify key outstanding issues regarding the effects of PPCPs on human and ecological health in order to ensure that future resources will be focused on the most important areas. Data sources: To better understand and manage the risks of PPCPs in the environment, we used the "key question" approach to identify the principle issues that need to be addressed. Initially, questions were solicited from academic, government, and business communities around the world. A list of 101 questions was then discussed at an international expert workshop, and a top-20 list was developed. Following the workshop, workshop attendees ranked the 20 questions by importance. Data synthesis: The top 20 priority questions fell into seven categories: a) prioritization of substances for assessment, b) pathways of exposure, c) bioavailability and uptake, d) effects characterization, e) risk and relative risk, f) antibiotic resistance, and g) risk management. Conclusions: A large body of information is now available on PPCPs in the environment. This exercise prioritized the most critical questions to aid in development of future research programs on the topic. ; Centro de Investigaciones del Medioambiente

Background: Over the past 10-15 years, a substantial amount of work has been done by the scientific, regulatory, and business communities to elucidate the effects and risks of pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) in the environment. Objective: This review was undertaken to identify key outstanding issues regarding the effects of PPCPs on human and ecological health in order to ensure that future resources will be focused on the most important areas. Data sources: To better understand and manage the risks of PPCPs in the environment, we used the "key question" approach to identify the principle issues that need to be addressed. Initially, questions were solicited from academic, government, and business communities around the world. A list of 101 questions was then discussed at an international expert workshop, and a top-20 list was developed. Following the workshop, workshop attendees ranked the 20 questions by importance. Data synthesis: The top 20 priority questions fell into seven categories: a) prioritization of substances for assessment, b) pathways of exposure, c) bioavailability and uptake, d) effects characterization, e) risk and relative risk, f) antibiotic resistance, and g) risk management. Conclusions: A large body of information is now available on PPCPs in the environment. This exercise prioritized the most critical questions to aid in development of future research programs on the topic. ; Fil: Boxall, Alistair B. A. University of York; Reino Unido ; Fil: Rudd, Murray A. University of York; Reino Unido ; Fil: Brooks, Bryan W. Baylor University; Estados Unidos ; Fil: Caldwell, Daniel J. Johnson & Johnson; Estados Unidos ; Fil: Choi, Kyungho. Seoul National University; Corea del Sur ; Fil: Hickmann, Silke. Umweltbundesamt; Alemania ; Fil: Innes, Elizabeth. Health Canada; Canadá ; Fil: Ostapyk, Kim. Health Canada; Canadá ; Fil: Staveley, Jane P. Exponent; Estados Unidos ; Fil: Verslycke, Tim. Gradient; Estados Unidos ; Fil: Ankley, Gerald T. United States Environmental Protection Agency; Estados Unidos ; Fil: Beazley, Karen F. Dalhousie University Halifax; Canadá ; Fil: Belanger, Scott E. Procter And Gamble; Estados Unidos ; Fil: Berninger, Jason P. Baylor University; Estados Unidos ; Fil: Carriquiriborde, Pedro. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - La Plata; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas. Departamento de Química. Centro de Investigaciones del Medio Ambiente; Argentina ; Fil: Coors, Anja. Ect Oekotoxikologie Gmbh; Alemania ; Fil: DeLeo, Paul C. American Cleaning Institute; Estados Unidos ; Fil: Dyer, Scott D. Procter And Gamble; Estados Unidos ; Fil: Ericson, Jon F. Pfizer Inc.; Estados Unidos ; Fil: Gagné, François. Environment Canada; Canadá ; Fil: Giesy, John P. University of Saskatchewan; Canadá ; Fil: Gouin, Todd. Unilever; Reino Unido ; Fil: Hallstrom, Lars. University of Alberta; Canadá ; Fil: Karlsson, Maja V. University of York; Reino Unido ; Fil: Joakim Larsson, D.G. University of Göteborg; Alemania ; Fil: Lazorchak, James M. United States Environmental Protection Agency; Estados Unidos ; Fil: Mastrocco, Frank. Pfizer Inc.; Estados Unidos ; Fil: McLaughlin, Alison. Health Canada; Canadá ; Fil: McMaster, Mark E. Environment Canada; Canadá ; Fil: Meyerhoff, Roger D. Eli Lilly And Company; Estados Unidos ; Fil: Moore, Roberta. Health Canada; Canadá ; Fil: Parrott, Joanne L. Environment Canada; Canadá ; Fil: Snape, Jason R. AstraZeneca UK Ltd.; Reino Unido ; Fil: Murray-Smith, Richard. AstraZeneca UK Ltd.; Reino Unido ; Fil: Servos, Mark R. University of Waterloo; Canadá ; Fil: Sibley, Paul K. University of Guelph; Canadá ; Fil: Straub, Jürg Oliver. F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.; Suiza ; Fil: Szabo, Nora D. University of Ottawa; Canadá ; Fil: Topp, Edward. Agriculture Et Agroalimentaire Canada; Canadá ; Fil: Tetreault, Gerald R. University of Waterloo; Canadá ; Fil: Trudeau, Vance L. University of Ottawa; Canadá ; Fil: Van Der Kraak, Glen. University of Guelph; Canadá