Suchergebnisse

Oaxaca shows an exceptional biodiversity, although a high rate of natural habitat loss threatens its conservation. Here we analyze different initiatives for conservation, their extension and vegetation representativeness in Oaxaca, until 2008. We compiled different initiatives from governmental, non-governmental, and academic and private institutions and analyzed their geographic overlap. Conservation initiatives were classified in three groups: two initiatives with support and recognition of the Mexican government (official conservation initiatives) and a third one stemming from indigenous communities known as voluntarily preserved areas. The results showed that the official conservation initiatives covered approximately 40 % of Oaxaca, showing 19 % of overlap. Official conservation initiatives adequately represented pine-oak forests; nonetheless, open forests, with secondary vegetation of shrubs and herbs are poorly represented. The conservation initiative showing the highest extension were communities supported by the Payment for Environmental Services Program, while the voluntarily preserved areas had the smallest extension in Oaxaca. ; El estado de Oaxaca al sur de México, posee una excepcional biodiversidad, pero una alta pérdida de hábitat natural amenaza su conservación. Este estudio presenta un análisis de las distintas iniciativas de conservación existentes, su extensión territorial y los tipos de vegetación que representan en Oaxaca, con base en consultas a diversas organizaciones gubernamentales y no gubernamentales, instituciones académicas y privadas, así como en literatura científica publicada hasta el año 2008. Se analizó, por medio de un sistema de información geográfica, la superposición de las diversas iniciativas de conservación. Estas iniciativas se clasificaron en tres grupos: dos iniciativas con respaldo y reconocimiento de parte del gobierno mexicano y una más constituida por iniciativas particulares de comunidades indígenas, denominadas áreas voluntarias para la conservación. Los resultados indicaron que los tres tipos de iniciativas de conservación, en conjunto, ocupan aproximadamente 40 % de la superficie de Oaxaca; se observó una sobreposición de 19 % de la superficie entre estas iniciativas, principalmente en tierras cubiertas por bosque de pino-encino. No se detectaron iniciativas de conservación en el bosque bajo-abierto con vegetación secundaria arbustiva y herbácea. La iniciativa que abarcó la mayor extensión territorial en Oaxaca fue la de las comunidades apoyadas por el Programa de Pago por Servicios Ambientales, en tanto que las áreas voluntarias de conservación, se caracterizan por haber cubierto la menor extensión territorial de Oaxaca.

A level playing field is key for global participation in science and scholarship, particularly with regard to how scientific publications are financed and subsequently accessed. However, there are potential pitfalls of the so-called "Gold" open-access (OA) route, in which author-paid publication charges cover the costs of production and publication. Gold OA plans in which author charges are required may not solve the access problem, but rather may shift the access barrier from reader to writer. Under such plans, everyone may be free to read papers, but it may still be prohibitively expensive to publish them. In a scholarly community that is increasingly global, spread over more and more regions and countries of the world, these publication access barriers may be quite significant. In the present paper, a global suite of colleagues in academe joins this debate. The group of colleagues, a network of researchers active in scholarly publishing, spans four continents and multiple disciplines in the natural sciences, humanities, and social sciences, as well as diverse political and economic situations. We believe that this global sampling of researchers can provide the nuance and perspective necessary to grasp this complex problem. The group was assembled without an attempt to achieve global coverage through random sampling. This contribution differs from other approaches to the open-access problem in several fundamental ways. (A) It is scholar-driven, and thus can represent the 'other side of the coin' of scholarly communication. (B) It focuses on narrative report, where scholars were free to orient their responses as they saw fit, rather than being confined to binary or scalar choices. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, (C) it distinguishes among institutions and countries and situations, highlighting inequalities of access among wealthy and economically-challenged nations, and also within countries depending on the size and location of particular institutions.