Nature-rich nations push for biodata payout

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Lee Harris: “Before the current generation of weight-loss drugs, there was hoodia, a cactus that grows in southern Africa’s Kalahari Desert, and which members of the region’s San tribe have long used to stave off hunger. UK-based Phytopharm licensed the active ingredient in the cactus in 1996, and made numerous attempts to commercialise weight-loss products derived from it.

The company won licensing deals with Pfizer and Unilever, but drew outrage from campaigners who argued that the country was ripping off indigenous groups that had made the discovery. Indignation grew after the chief executive said it could not compensate local tribes because “the people who discovered the plant have disappeared”. (They had not).

This is just one example of companies using biological resources discovered in other countries for financial gain. The UN has attempted to set fairer terms with treaties such as the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity, which deals with the sharing of genetic resources. But this approach has been seen by many developing countries as unsatisfactory. And earlier tools governing trade in plants and microbes may become less useful as biological data is now frequently transmitted in the form of so-called digital sequence information — the genetic code derived from those physical resources.

Now, the UN is working on a fund to pay stewards of biodiversity — notably communities in lower-income countries — for discoveries made with genetic data from their ecosystems. The mechanism was established in 2022 as part of the Conference of Parties to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, a sister process to the climate “COP” initiative. But the question of how it will be governed and funded will be on the table at the October COP16 summit in Cali, Colombia.

If such a fund comes to fruition — a big “if” — it could raise billions for biodiversity goals. The sectors that depend on this genetic data — notably, pharmaceuticals, biotech and agribusiness — generate revenues exceeding $1tn annually, and African countries plan to push for these sectors to contribute 1 per cent of all global retail sales to the fund, according to Bloomberg.

There’s reason to temper expectations, however. Such a fund would lack the power to compel national governments or industries to pay up. Instead, the strategy is focused around raising ambition — and public pressure — for key industries to make voluntary contributions…(More)”.

Discounting the Future: The Ascendency of a Political Technology

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Book by Liliana Doganova: “Forest fires, droughts, and rising sea levels beg a nagging question: have we lost our capacity to act on the future? Liliana Doganova’s book sheds new light on this anxious query. It argues that our relationship to the future has been trapped in the gears of a device called discounting. While its incidence remains little known, discounting has long been entrenched in market and policy practices, shaping the ways firms and governments look to the future and make decisions accordingly. Thus, a sociological account of discounting formulas has become urgent.

Discounting means valuing things through the flows of costs and benefits that they are likely to generate in the future, with these future flows being literally dis-counted as they are translated in the present. How have we come to think of the future, and of valuation, in such terms? Building on original empirical research in the historical sociology of discounting, Doganova takes us to some of the sites and moments in which discounting took shape and gained momentum: valuation of European forests in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries; economic theories devised in the early 1900s; debates over business strategies in the postwar era; investor-state disputes over the nationalization of natural resources; and drug development in the biopharmaceutical industry today. Weaving these threads together, the book pleads for an understanding of discounting as a political technology, and of the future as a contested domain…(More)”

First-of-its-kind dataset connects greenhouse gases and air quality

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

NOAA Research: “The GReenhouse gas And Air Pollutants Emissions System (GRA²PES), from NOAA and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), combines information on greenhouse gas and air quality pollutant sources into a single national database, offering innovative interactive map displays and new benefits for both climate and public health solutions.

A new U.S.-based system to combine air quality and greenhouse gas pollution sources into a single national research database is now available in the U.S. Greenhouse Gas Center portal. This geospatial data allows leaders at city, state, and regional scales to more easily identify and take steps to address air quality issues while reducing climate-related hazards for populations.

The dataset is the GReenhouse gas And Air Pollutants Emissions System (GRA²PES). A research project developed by NOAA and NIST, GRA²PES captures monthly greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions activity for multiple economic sectors to improve measurement and modeling for both GHG and air pollutants across the contiguous U.S.

Having the GHG and air quality constituents in the same dataset will be exceedingly helpful, said Columbia University atmospheric scientist Roisin Commane, the lead on a New York City project to improve emissions estimates…(More)”.

Challenging the neutrality myth in climate science and activism

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Christel W. van Eck, Lydia Messling & Katharine Hayhoe: “The myth of a scientist as a purely rational thinker, a “brain in a jar” devoid of emotions and values, still exists in some scientific circles. However, philosophers of science have long shown that it is a fundamental misconception to believe that science can be entirely free of social, political, and ethical values, and function as a neutral entity. As Lynda Walsh explains compellingly in “Scientists as Prophets,” the question of how scientists ought to engage with society is a value judgement itself3. This is particularly true in complex crises like climate change where traditional democratic debate alone cannot ascertain the optimal course of action. Scientists often play a crucial role in such crises, not only through conducting rigorous research, but also through engaging in dialogue with society by framing their research in terms of societal values – which includes rejecting the notion of morally neutral engagement.

This school of thought was recently challenged in a comment in Nature Climate Action titled “The importance of distinguishing climate science from climate activism” In it, Ulf Büntgen, a Professor of Environmental Systems Analysis at Cambridge University, communicated his personal concerns about climate scientists engaging in activism. The comment sparked considerable debate on social media, particularly among climate scientists, many of whom reject the views presented by Büntgen.

We believe a response is necessary, as many of Büntgen’s assumptions are unnuanced or unjustified. It is difficult to provide a full critique when Büntgen has not clearly defined what he means by ‘climate activism’, ‘quasi-religious belief’, or ‘a priori interests’, nor explicit examples evidencing what sort of interaction he finds to be objectionable. However, whether scientists consider certain activities to be activism, and their opinions on colleagues who engage in such activities, along with the general public’s perception of these activities, has been the subject of multiple research studies. While the opinion of an individual scientist is interesting, we argue it is not representative of the broader community’s views nor does it reflect the efficacy of such actions. Furthermore, by making unilateral value-based judgements, we propose that Büntgen is engaging in precisely the activity he deprecates…(More)”

Citizen scientists will be needed to meet global water quality goals

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

University College London: “Sustainable development goals for water quality will not be met without the involvement of citizen scientists, argues an international team led by a UCL researcher, in a new policy brief.

The policy brief and attached technical brief are published by Earthwatch Europe on behalf of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP)-coordinated World Water Quality Alliance that has supported citizen science projects in Kenya, Tanzania and Sierra Leone. The reports detail how policymakers can learn from examples where citizen scientists (non-professionals engaged in the scientific process, such as by collecting data) are already making valuable contributions.

The report authors focus on how to meet one of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals around improving water quality, which the UN states is necessary for the health and prosperity of people and the planet…

“Locals who know the water and use the water are both a motivated and knowledgeable resource, so citizen science networks can enable them to provide large amounts of data and act as stewards of their local water bodies and sources. Citizen science has the potential to revolutionize the way we manage water resources to improve water quality.”…

The report authors argue that improving water quality data will require governments and organizations to work collaboratively with locals who collect their own data, particularly where government monitoring is scarce, but also where there is government support for citizen science schemes. Water quality improvement has a particularly high potential for citizen scientists to make an impact, as professionally collected data is often limited by a shortage of funding and infrastructure, while there are effective citizen science monitoring methods that can provide reliable data.

The authors write that the value of citizen science goes beyond the data collected, as there are other benefits pertaining to education of volunteers, increased community involvement, and greater potential for rapid response to water quality issues…(More)”.

Climate and health data website launched

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Susan Cosier: “A new website of data resources, tools, and training materials that can aid researchers in studying the consequences of climate change on the health of communities nationwide is now available. At the end of July, NIEHS launched the Climate and Health Outcomes Research Data Systems (CHORDS) website, which includes a catalog of environmental and health outcomes data from various government and nongovernmental agencies.

The website provides a few resources of interest, including a catalog of data resources to aid researchers in finding relevant data for their specific research projects; an online training toolkit that provides tutorials and walk-throughs of downloading, integrating, and visualizing health and environmental data; a listing of publications of note on wildfire and health research; and links to existing resources, such as the NIEHS climate change and health glossary and literature portal.

The catalog includes a listing of dozens of data resources provided by different federal and state environmental and health sources. Users can sort the listing based on environmental and health measures of interest — such as specific air pollutants or chemicals — from data providers including NASA and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency with many more to come…(More)”.

A Diamond in the Rough: How Energy Consumption Data Can Boost Artificial Intelligence Startups and Accelerate the Green Transition

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Policy brief by David Osimo and Anna Pizzamiglio: “…explores how the reuse of energy consumption data can foster a dynamic cleantech ecosystem and contribute to achieving the goals of the European Green Deal. Drawing on insights from EDDIE, a decentralised platform that standardises data formats and enhances data management across Europe, the brief outlines five key recommendations for shifting from a focus on data regulation to fostering innovation. These recommendations include: Enhancing User Experience, Nurturing the Cleantech Ecosystem, Strengthening Data Stewardship, Clarifying GDPR Guidelines, Eliminating Barriers to the Single Market…(More)”.

On Slicks and Satellites: An Open Source Guide to Marine Oil Spill Detection

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Wim Zwijnenburg: “The sheer scale of ocean oil pollution is staggering. In Europe, a suspected 3,000 major illegal oil dumps take place annually, with an estimated release of between 15,000 and 60,000 tonnes of oil ending up in the North Sea. In the Mediterranean, figures provided by the Regional Marine Pollution Emergency Response Centre estimate there are 1,500 to 2,000 oil spills every year.

The impact of any single oil spill on a marine or coastal ecosystem can be devastating and long-lasting. Animals such as birds, turtles, dolphins and otters can suffer from ingesting or inhaling oil, as well as getting stuck in the slick. The loss of water and soil quality can be toxic to both flora and fauna. Heavy metals enter the food chain, poisoning everything from plankton to shellfish, which in turn affects the livelihoods of coastal communities dependent on fishing and tourism.

However, with a wealth of open source earth observation tools at our fingertips, during such environmental disasters it’s possible for us to identify and monitor these spills, highlight at-risk areas, and even hold perpetrators accountable. …

There are several different types of remote sensing sensors we can use for collecting data about the Earth’s surface. In this article we’ll focus on two: optical and radar sensors. 

Optical imagery captures the broad light spectrum reflected from the Earth, also known as passive remote sensing. In contrast, Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) uses active remote sensing, sending radio waves down to the Earth’s surface and capturing them as they are reflected back. Any change in the reflection can indicate a change on ground, which can then be investigated. For more background, see Bellingcat contributor Ollie Ballinger’s Remote Sensing for OSINT Guide…(More)”.

Children and Young People’s Participation in Climate Assemblies

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Guide by KNOCA: “This guide draws on the experiences and advice of children, young people and adults involved in citizens’ assemblies that have taken place at national, city and community levels across nine countries, highlighting that:

  • Involving children and young people can enrich the intergenerational legitimacy and impact of climate assemblies: adult assembly members are reminded of their responsibilities to younger and future generations, and children and young people feel listened to, valued and taken seriously.
  • Involving children and young people has significant potential to strengthen the future of democracy and climate governance by enhancing democratic and climate literacy within education systems.
  • Children and young people can and should be involved in climate assemblies in different ways. Most importantly, children and young people should be involved from the very beginning of the process to ensure it reflects children and young people’s own ideas.
  • There are practical, ethical and design factors to consider when working with children and young people which can often be positively navigated by taking a child rights-based approach to the conceptualisation, design and delivery of climate assemblies…(More)”.

Under which conditions can civic monitoring be admitted as a source of evidence in courts?

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Blog by Anna Berti Suman: “The ‘Sensing for Justice’ (SensJus) research project – running between 2020 and 2023 – explored how people use monitoring technologies or just their senses to gather evidence of environmental issues and claim environmental justice in a variety of fora. Among the other research lines, we looked at successful and failed cases of civic-gathered data introduced in courts. The guiding question was: what are the enabling factors and/or barriers for the introduction of civic evidence in environmental litigation?

Civic environmental monitoring is the use by ordinary people of monitoring devices (e.g., a sensor) or their bare senses (e.g., smell, hearing) to detect environmental issues. It can be regarded as a form of reaction to environmental injustices, a form of political contestation through data and even as a form of collective care. The practice is fast growing, especially thanks to the widespread availability of audio and video-recording devices in the hand of diverse publics, but also due to the increase in public literacy and concern on environmental matters.

Civic monitoring can be a powerful source of evidence for law enforcement, especially when it sheds light on official informational gaps associated with the shortages of public agencies’ resources to detect environmental wrongdoings. Both legal scholars and practitioners as well as civil society organizations and institutional actors should look at the practice and its potential applications with attention.

Among the cases explored for the SensJus project, the Formosa case, Texas, United States, stands out as it sets a key precedent: issued in June 2019, the landmark ruling found a Taiwanese petrochemical company liable for violating the US Clean Water Act, mostly on the basis of citizen-collected evidence involving volunteer observations of plastic contamination over years. The contamination could not be proven through existing data held by competent authorities because the company never filed any record of pollution. Our analysis of the case highlights some key determinants of the case’s success…(More)”.