Search

Land is an essential natural resource for climate mitigation and peace. It is commonly connected with sources of GHG emissions and with drivers of (violent) conflict. Therefore, climate mitigation and peacebuilding strategies are co-designing sustainable land-use systems (SLUS) with affected communities to integrate land-based climate mitigation and peacebuilding objectives. SLUS is practiced within agricultural production systems that meet sustainability principles (environmental, social, and economic). Nevertheless, there needs to be more program evaluation frameworks, especially measurable indicators, that integrate these two objectives (achieving peace and climate mitigation). This study aims to develop a methodology and criteria to evaluate the precise mechanisms of SLUS influencing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and drivers of conflict. A mix-method approach was used in two case study regions, Cesar and Caquetá, Colombia, where SLUS strategies where implemented. First, we conducted three workshops, two in-person and one virtual (n = 103). Secondly, we held semi-structured interviews (n = 115) to make an analysis of the conflict. Our research focused on the drivers of land-based emissions and conflict drivers targeted by the SLUS implementation. Lastly, through a household survey (n = 929), we illustrated the impacts of SLUS in peacebuilding at the farm level. Results show that SLUS, such as cocoa agroforestry, can contribute to climate change mitigation and deliver co-benefits in four core factors: (i) socio-economic inclusion by creating jobs and diversifying livelihoods, (ii) dialogue and conflict transformation by allowing negotiations around the participatory design of farms, including conservation agreements, (iii) natural resource governance, and (iv) cooperation by creating knowledge exchange and a community of practice.

The common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) provides numerous benefits for the rural poor. Heat tolerant varieties require rapid adoption of new seeds to replace traditional varieties. However, a numbe...

Voluntary uptake of climate-adapted beans is driven by farmers’ climate change perceptions. Identifying these perceptions and understanding their determinants help public agencies and seed supplier...

Climate variability largely affects agriculture in the developing world where rainfed agriculture is highly prevalent, and farmers rely on favourable climatic conditions to grow their crops. In Colombia, interannual climate variability can increase human vulnerabilities. Evidence on the vulnerability of farming households to climate variability at the local scale is, however, scarce. Here, we assessed the climate vulnerability and its determinants for a representative sample of 567 bean growing households in Santander, Colombia. We first applied Multiple Correspondence Analysis to calculate a vulnerability index and its components (exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity). The vulnerability index is in turn used to classify households into three vulnerability groups, namely, high, medium, and low. We then estimated a Generalized Ordered Probit Model to assess the probability of falling into each vulnerability category according to the household and farm management characteristics. We find that vulnerability is highly variable in the study region, with up to 65% of households classified as highly vulnerable. Geography, access to agronomic training, crop diversification, the percentage of household members making productive decisions and the gender of the household head are the most important factors determining the probability of being more or less vulnerable.

Silvopastoral systems (SPS)—production systems integrating trees, forages, and livestock within the same land area—are recognized as critical for reducing tropical deforestation and improving livelihoods, ecosystem services, and carbon sinks. Yet, research on how scaling SPS influences forest cover changes at large geographical scales is scant. Our study delves deeper into the interlinkages between scaling SPS and deforestation. In two surveys conducted among 144 Colombian Amazon livestock producers with traditional or SPS farms, we assessed changes in herd composition between 2016 and 2020. Results showed a change in herd composition, with fewer males and more cows/heifers, suggesting a shift toward specializing in milk production, which, with the appropriate environmental incentives and safeguards, would unlikely broaden deforestation. However, interlinkages between the dairy and beef value chains suggest that extra male cattle from SPS intensification would be moved for fattening as a source of beef to new pastures at the forest border. If SPS scaling interventions in the Colombian Amazon are to be truly deforestation‐free, they need to be designed based on a clear understanding of the interlinkages between food and land systems. Therefore, policies advancing the livestock and land‐use agenda must create mechanisms that support deforestation‐free livestock intensification, based on biophysical and socioeconomic evaluations. While our research results support previous findings, indicating that silvopastoral systems offer ecological and economic benefits at farm level, they also urge that environmental safeguards be put in place to prevent possible deforestation leakage due to the aggregated effects of farm‐level changes in herd composition from broader adoption of sustainable livestock production systems.

The global community recognizes that silvopastoral systems (SPS), which are considered a form of sustainable land use, could reduce forest loss. Studies indicate that SPS can improve livelihoods, provide ecosystem services and act as carbon sinks. What has been missing from the literature, however, is how scaling SPS influences forest cover. Our research results from the Colombian Amazon point to possible unintended deforestation due to aggregated effects of farm-level changes in herd composition from broader SPS adoption with the absence of safeguards, appropriate incentives and government agencies devoted to implementing traceability of dairy and beef products to their deforestation-free origins. Our conclusions are drawn from surveying 144 livestock producers with traditional or SPS farms in Caquetá, one of the departments with the highest deforestation rates in Colombia. Land grabbing, in tandem with cattle pasture, is one of the major deforestation and conflict drivers in Colombia. We surveyed the farmers twice, both in 2016 and 2020, to determine the impact of SPS on herd composition. Our results show that surveyed SPS farmers reduced the number of male cattle and increased the number of lactating cows and calves in the herd. This suggests that these farmers specialize in producing milk, a move that constitutes a process of intensification that with the proper safeguards and incentives would unlikely broaden deforestation at the local scale. The availability of more calves and male cattle from SPS adoption, though, may exacerbate the drivers of deforestation because there is a risk that these extra calves and males would be moved to new pastures at the forest border, where they can be fattened as a source of beef. Our findings, as such, warrant a further investigation into the risk of unintended deforestation from scaling SPS and on how to mitigate that risk to make the process deforestation-free.

Gestation is considered biologically, psychologically and socially a normal process, the health conditions of the mother, the family environment and the social context in which it is carried out contribute to its evolution, and the mother and the fetus should be monitored through health programs. For many years ago, the pregnant woman received care only at the time of delivery, omitting the other stages that includes labor, where the woman also requires attention. In 1929 hypnosugestive measures were used for "the pains of childbirth" and in 1951 the psycho-prophylactic method perfectly arranged and demonstrated on a scientific basis was released, thus improving the attitude of the pregnant woman in labor. The education provided for childbirth will allow the pregnant woman to cope with the stress caused, thus reducing pain.

This research based on social, health and especially educational reality, involves us professionally in view of the fact that the majority of professional people, especially teachers, are not familiar with autism spectrum disorder, specifically with Asperger's Syndrome. and they may come to think that a child with an autistic ability behaves in a different way, and they find it difficult to interact with other classmates, therefore this may be difficult to understand conventional social rules and may seem of little importance for society, people with Asperger Syndrome (SA), in English Asperger syndrome (AS), have an average IQ and are likely to have teaching and learning problems like those who do not, however, have their learning needs They may be different from those of other children. Asperger's syndrome is a type of autism. Autism affects the way in which a person interprets the language, communicates and socializes. Until 2013, this syndrome used to be considered a condition in itself, with its own diagnosis. From that moment on, the guide used by doctors, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, commonly known as DSM-5, changed the classification of Asperger's syndrome.

Through a systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature, this paper analyzes evidence of the livelihood impacts of Payments for Environmental Services (PES). Forty-six studies assessed PES livelihood impacts. The assessments presented more positive livelihood impacts than negative ones, focusing on financial benefits. Non-monetary and non-material impacts of PES were largely understudied. Most reviews focused on ES providers, hindering the understanding of broader societal impacts. The review yielded examples where participants lost from their participation or where improvements in one livelihood dimension paralleled deterioration in another. Consequently, we identified key research gaps in: i) understanding the social and cultural impacts of PES, ii) evaluating environmental and economic additionality from improving other ES at the expense of cultural ones, iii) and assessing PES impacts in terms of trade-offs between multiple livelihood dimensions. Moreover, increased knowledge is needed on the impact of PES on changes in household expenditure and choice, and on trade-offs between household income and inequality in ES provider communities. Finally, if PES schemes are implemented to sustainably improve livelihoods, targeting disaggregated populations, understanding equity and social power relations within and between ES providers and users, and better monitoring and evaluation systems that consider locally relevant livelihood dimensions are needed.