Your search found 25 records
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: 628.53 G744 MET Record No: H014851)
2 Scherer, T. F.; Slack, D. C.; Eshenaur, W. C. 1983. Automated data collection for irrigation scheduling using canopy-air temperature difference. Paper presented at the Winter Meeting, ASAE, Chicago, Illinois, 13-16 December 1983. 17p. (ASAE paper no.83-2587)
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: P 3994 Record No: H04124)
3 Lincoln Environmental. 1997. Indicators of sustainable irrigated agriculture: Report to MAF policy. Unpublished report, no.2720/1. iv, 48p.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: P 4852 Record No: H022372)
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: 333.7 G000 WOR Record No: H023089)
5 Agarwal, A.; Narain, S.; Sen, S. (Eds.) 1999. State of India's environment 5: The citizens' fifth report. Part II - Statistical database. New Delhi, India: Centre for Science and Environment. iv, 256p.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: 363.7 G635 AGA Record No: H024784)
6 Agarwal, A.; Narain, S.; Sen, S. (Eds.) 1999. State of India's environment 5: The citizens' fifth report. Part I - National overview. New Delhi, India: Centre for Science and Environment. viii, 440p.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: 363.7 G635 AGA Record No: H024783)
7 Nieuwenhuis, G. J. A.; Vaughan, R. A.; Molenaar, M. (Eds.) 1999. Operational remote sensing for sustainable development: Proceedings of the 18th EARSeL Symposium on Operational Remote Sensing for Sustainable Development, Enschede, Netherlands, 11-14 May 1998. Rotterdam, Netherlands: A. A. Balkema. xxii, 497p.
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: 621.3678 G000 NIE Record No: H024845)
8 Sam, P. A. 1999. International environmental consulting practice: How and where to take advantage of global opportunities. New York, NY, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. xv, 300p.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: 363.7 G000 SAM Record No: H025222)
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: 574.5 G000 ADB Record No: H025636)
10 Mekong River Commission. 1997. Mekong River Basin diagnostic study – Final report. Bangkok, Thailand: Mekong River Commission. v.p.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: 333.91 G800 MEK Record No: H031451)
11 UNEP. 2002. Africa environment outlook: Past, present and future perspectives. Stevenage, UK: Earthprint Limited. xxii, 422p.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: 363.7 G100 UNE Record No: H031929)
12 Bergstrom, J. C. 1990. Concepts and measures of the economic value of environmental quality: A review. Journal of Environmental Management, 31:215-228.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: P 6380 Record No: H032497)
13 Yandle, B.; Bhattarai, M.; Vijayaraghavan, M. 2004. Environmental Kuznets Curves: a review of findings, methods, and policy implications. PERC Research study 02-1 update. Bozeman, MT, USA: Property and Environment Research Center (PERC). 38p.
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H044740)
(0.16 MB) (165KB)
14 Ribaudo, M.; Weinberg, M. 2005. Improving air and water quality can be two sides of the same coin. Amber Waves, (July):39-45.
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H044776)
(0.63 MB) (888.94 KB)
15 Buckley, R. 1994. Cumulative environmental impacts: problems, policy and planning law. Environmental and Planning Law Journal, 11:344-347.
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H045040)
(0.33 MB)
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: 577 G178 BOH Record No: H047357)
(7.80 MB) (7.80 MB)
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H049457)
(28.30 MB) (28.3 MB)
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy SF Record No: H049478)
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H049899)
(1.29 MB)
This research aims to show the positive and negative indirect effects of COVID-19 on the environment, particularly in the most affected countries such as China, USA, Italy, and Spain. Our research shows that there is a significant association between contingency measures and improvement in air quality, clean beaches and environmental noise reduction. On the other hand, there are also negative secondary aspects such as the reduction in recycling and the increase in waste, further endangering the contamination of physical spaces (water and land), in addition to air. Global economic activity is expected to return in the coming months in most countries (even if slowly), so decreasing GHG concentrations during a short period is not a sustainable way to clean up our environment.
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H049942)
(0.47 MB) (480 KB)
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) purport to report holistically on progress towards sustainability and do so using more than 231 discrete indicators, with a primary objective to achieve a balance between the environment, social and economic aspects of development. The research question underpinning the analyses presented in this paper is: are the indicators in the SDGs sufficient and fit for purpose to assess the trajectory of natural resources towards sustainability? We extracted the SDG indicators that monitor the state of natural resources, or alternately support policy or governance for their protection, and determined whether these are adequate to provide the essential data on natural resources to achieve the aims of the SDGs. The indicators are clustered into four natural resource categories—land, water (both marine and freshwater), air and biodiversity. Indicators for monitoring land resources show that the most comprehensive land resource indicator for degraded land is not fully implemented and that missing from land monitoring is an evaluation of vegetation health outside of forests and mountains, the condition of soils, and most importantly the overall health of terrestrial ecosystems. Indicators for monitoring water resources have substantial gaps, unable to properly monitor water quality, water stress, many aspects of marine resources and, most significantly, the health of fresh and salt water ecosystems. Indicators for monitoring of air have recently become more comprehensive, but linkage to IPCC results would benefit both programs. Monitoring of biodiversity is perhaps the greatest weakness of the SDG Agenda, having no comprehensive assessment even though narrow aspects are monitored. Again, deliberate linkages to other global biodiversity programs (e.g., CBD and the Post-2020 Biodiversity Framework, IPBES, and Living Planet) are recommended on condition that data can be defined at a country level. While the SDG list of indicators in support of natural resource is moderately comprehensive, it lacks holistic monitoring in relation to evaluation of ecosystems and biodiversity to the extent that these missing but vital measures of sustainability threaten the entire SDG Agenda. In addition, an emerging issue is that even where there are appropriate indicators, the amount of country-level data remains inadequate to fully evaluate sustainability. This signals the delicate balance between the extent and complexity of the SDG Agenda and uptake at a country level.
Powered by DB/Text
WebPublisher, from