Month: March 2024

Abstract

Water scarcity and its geopolitical implications have been a cornerstone of scholarly discourse. However, literature often overlooks the nuanced relationship between human traits and water management. Addressing this oversight, this study synthesized data from 149 articles (1991–2023), revealing a substantial connection between human actions and water management dynamics. From this data, a unique comprehensive framework was developed, focusing on the intricate interplay of human behaviors, leadership dynamics, economic factors, and technological advancements in water management. Unlike previous works, this framework holistically integrates these components, offering a fresh lens through which to understand the human-centric factors underpinning global water scarcity. This study underscores the framework’s vital role in guiding sustainable water management and strategy, making it an indispensable tool for stakeholders, from policymakers to environmentalists. In essence, this research not only bridges a knowledge gap but also serves as a beacon for addressing pressing water scarcity challenges in today’s world.

Abstract

Sea level rise (SLR) is among the major climate change effects threating the coasts of the Mediterranean basin, which are increasingly exposed to coastal flooding, especially along the low lying coastal plains, river deltas, lagoons and reclamation areas. Coastal erosion, beach retreat and marine flooding are already causing unprecedented environmental and socio-economic impacts on coastal populations. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) these effects are expected to worsen by 2100 and beyond with a projected global SLR up to about 1 m above the current level. This study provides an overview of the Mediterranean basin, focusing on the vulnerable city of Venice, which is particularly exposed to marine flooding due to SLR and land subsidence. We show the current and future sea level trend as well as a flooding scenarios in the absence of the Experimental Electromechanical Module (MoSE), which is protecting the city of Venice since 2020. To understand the awareness of citizens in Venice to address SLR, we have engaged a group of stakeholders through a structured participatory process to develop solution-oriented, case-specific and site-specific Policy Tools. Our results show that the Policy Tools contain relevant, effective and implementable actions stemming from stakeholder interaction and consensus building, identifying relevant issues that should be considered for SLR adaptation policies. A more extensive participation in public processes is required to materialize the Policy Tools into concrete actions to help vulnerable areas adapt to the expected SLR by the end of this century.

Abstract

There is a need for a paradigm shift to circular, sustainable textile systems. The transition will have impacts on people and businesses around the world, yet research on the circular economy has been overly focused on the economic and environmental dimension, lacking in the social dimension. Without design for comprehensive justness, the transition can reproduce or lead to novel injustices. We use distributive, procedural, and recognative justice dimensions to analyze and uncover justness aspects related to the circular transition in the textile industry in Tamil Nadu, India. Our qualitative analysis is based on interviews with stakeholders of the industry. We uncover several justness tensions related to economic, social, power, value, epistemic, and governance issues. For the just circular transition to succeed, the tensions should at the very least be acknowledged, and ameliorated or dealt with when possible. The building blocks for this process are, for example, codesign of private governance systems, sharing the costs of the transition more equally and inclusion of various voices in knowledge production. As a step forward from the current situation in which a circularity focused approach and a justness focused approach emphasize different aspects, we present a new framework for designing just circular transitions, one that bring these important perspectives together.

Abstract

This study introduces the concept of gonzo expertise to contextualize the rhetorical techniques used by Donald Trump to frame himself as a credible expert on any topic regardless of his intellectual interest or actual knowledge of those matters. Using a sample of 57 interview and public event transcripts, four rhetorical framing techniques are identified that validate Trump’s problem-solving expertise and authenticate himself as the primary definer of what is real and represents truth for millions of Americans, while simultaneously casting doubt on social reality by attacking facts and delegitimizing the social actors and institutions that confer status and legitimacy on traditional experts who validate those facts. First, Trump establishes hyper-masculine dominance over factual reality. Second, he directs focus away from rationality and logic by appealing to emotion, outrage, and fear. Third, Trump uses populist savior imagery to foster cohesion, trust, and compliance among supporters. Finally, Trump articulates an us-versus-them worldview that frames his truth as a moral imperative that must be believed without equivocation.

Abstract

Background

There are clear inequalities in COVID − 19 vaccination rates amongst marginalised groups, with lower rates for some minoritised ethnic and religious groups, younger people, those living in more deprived areas, and with lower socio-economic status. Existing research focuses on psychological and socio-economic factors that influence vaccine uptake and does not explore broader social and historical contexts. Understanding inequalities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake requires a critical examination of the drivers of, and barriers to, vaccination.

Methods

We present findings from a co-designed qualitative research study undertaken during the COVID-19 pandemic. Focus groups and interviews were used to examine the context underpinning responses to the COVID-19 vaccination in Greater Manchester, particularly focussing on experiences of marginalisation. Thematic framework analysis was used to analyse the data.

Results

We found that the public’s responses to the COVID-19 vaccination programme are intertwined with a longstanding history of institutional distrust and disenfranchisement, resulting from experiences of marginalisation and social inequalities. This was exacerbated further by the disproportionate impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on minoritised ethnic groups, younger people, and those with existing health conditions.

Conclusions

Histories of structural inequalities experienced by minoritised groups invoked feelings of suspicion and scepticism at the motivations of the agencies behind the vaccination rollout. This highlights the need for a contextualised analysis of attitudes to vaccines, considering pre-existing inequalities, which may be especially relevant for conceptualising public responses to the vaccination programme. Finally, our study shows the important ways in which public (dis)trust can impact public health policies. We recommend this should be incorporated into responses to future public health crises.

Abstract

Background

There are clear inequalities in COVID − 19 vaccination rates amongst marginalised groups, with lower rates for some minoritised ethnic and religious groups, younger people, those living in more deprived areas, and with lower socio-economic status. Existing research focuses on psychological and socio-economic factors that influence vaccine uptake and does not explore broader social and historical contexts. Understanding inequalities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake requires a critical examination of the drivers of, and barriers to, vaccination.

Methods

We present findings from a co-designed qualitative research study undertaken during the COVID-19 pandemic. Focus groups and interviews were used to examine the context underpinning responses to the COVID-19 vaccination in Greater Manchester, particularly focussing on experiences of marginalisation. Thematic framework analysis was used to analyse the data.

Results

We found that the public’s responses to the COVID-19 vaccination programme are intertwined with a longstanding history of institutional distrust and disenfranchisement, resulting from experiences of marginalisation and social inequalities. This was exacerbated further by the disproportionate impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on minoritised ethnic groups, younger people, and those with existing health conditions.

Conclusions

Histories of structural inequalities experienced by minoritised groups invoked feelings of suspicion and scepticism at the motivations of the agencies behind the vaccination rollout. This highlights the need for a contextualised analysis of attitudes to vaccines, considering pre-existing inequalities, which may be especially relevant for conceptualising public responses to the vaccination programme. Finally, our study shows the important ways in which public (dis)trust can impact public health policies. We recommend this should be incorporated into responses to future public health crises.