This pilot study investigated the willingness of two generational cohorts (current baby boomers and older adults) to accept home monitoring technology. Thirty individuals (15 baby boomers and 15 older adults) of both genders and living in the community participated in structured, mixed methods interviews. The participants' opinions and views on various technologies (e.g., personal emergency response systems, fall detection systems) and sensor types (e.g., switches, motion sensors, computer vision) were determined, including locations within the home where they would be willing to install and use such technologies. Overall, it was found that these technologies would be acceptable if they allowed the participants to remain in their own homes and to age in place. Furthermore, a between-group analysis indicated that there were not many statistically significant differences between the opinions of the two cohorts with respect to preferences about types and locations of these technologies.

ABSTRACT. Challenges of governance often constitute critical obstacles to efforts to equitably improve livelihoods in social-ecological systems. Yet, just as often, these challenges go unspoken, or are viewed as fixed parts of the context, beyond the scope of influence of agricultural, development, or natural resource management initiatives. What does it take to get governance obstacles and opportunities out in the open, creating the space for constructive dialogue and collective action that can help to address them? We respond to this question by comparing experiences of participatory action research (PAR) in coastal and floodplain systems in four countries (Zambia, Solomon Islands, Bangladesh, and Cambodia) with a focus on understanding how to build more equitable governance arrangements. We found that governance improvement was often an implicit or secondary objective of initiatives that initially sought to address more technical natural resource or livelihood-related development challenges. We argue that using PAR principles of ownership, equity, shared analysis, and feedback built trust and helped to identify and act upon opportunities to address more difficult-to-shift dimensions of governance particularly in terms of stakeholder representation, distribution of authority, and accountability. Our findings suggest that the engaged and embedded approach of researcher-facilitators can help move from identifying opportunities for governance change to supporting stakeholders as they build more equitable governance arrangements.

This article outlines a methodology to help agencies better determine whether or not relief seed is needed by farmers affected by disaster. A brief review of current seed needs assessment procedures in southern Somalia and Mozambique illustrates problems of knowing which crops and households are affected, the importance of seed access (not just availability) and the need to plan interventions earlier than at present. The development of a Seed Systems Profile (SSP) is proposed to understand better both the socio-economic and agro-ecological aspects of farmers' seed systems. A five-step framework for assessing seed systems in disaster situations is also presented. These tools are currently being tested and further refined in Mozambique. A better understanding of farmers' seed systems will allow for the development of relief and rehabilitation interventions that effectively enhance the resilience and reduce the vulnerability of these systems.

No abstract

Few studies examine post-harvest fish losses using a gender lens or collect sex-disaggregated data. This mixed-methods study assessed fish losses experienced by female and male value chain actors in a fishery in western Zambia to determine who experiences losses, why, and to what extent. Results indicate that participation in the fishery value chain is gendered and most losses occur during post-harvest activities. Discussions with fishers, processors, and traders suggest the value chain is more fluid than often depicted, with people making calculated decisions to sell fresh or dried fish depending on certain conditions, and mostly driven by the need to avoid losses and attain higher prices. The study shows that gender norms shape the rewards and risks offered by the value chain. This could be the reason why a greater proportion of women than men experienced physical losses in our study sample. Female processors lost three times the mass of their fish consignments compared to male processors. Technical constraints (lack of processing technologies) and social constraints (norms and beliefs) create gender gaps in post-harvest losses. Addressing unequal gender relations in value chains, whilst also promoting the use of loss-reducing technologies, could increase fish supply and food security in small-scale fisheries.

Over the past 15 years, the distribution of seeds and tools has become a popular intervention aimed at promoting long-term food security among agricultural communities affected by disaster. By providing the inputs necessary for crop production, such interventions are seen as a novel step forward in helping farmers to reestablish their livelihoods and thereby reduce their dependence on food aid. While the technical and logistical ability of agencies to implement such interventions has improved considerably over the years, the actual impacts of emergency seed provisioning have only recently begun to be examined in detail.This collection of papers presents some of the first empirical analyses of the effectiveness of current seed relief practice, and analyses this comparatively. Case material is drawn from natural disaster and conflict situations in Rwanda, Somalia, Southern Sudan, Mozambique, Kenya, Sierra Leone, Burundi, Tanzania and The Gambia. The papers illustrate that conventional seed distribution projects often have fewer positive impacts than anticipated. Some of the papers also show that such interventions can actually decrease seed system stability and varietal diversity, while bringing with them a set of unintended negative impacts on the social and political economy of recipient communities.The papers in this special issue put forward a series of baseline practices with which to improve the effectiveness of current practice, and suggest a range of interventions to supplement the predominant seeds-and-tools paradigm. Collectively, the papers provide evidence that seed system interventions need to be designed more carefully to alleviate the specific stress at hand, rather than constituting an 'off-the-peg' response to emergencies. The diagnostic tools are now available, as are a wider range of programming interventions to move forward toward such honed practice. Below, we summarise some of the salient insights proffered by each paper. Enhancing relief aid through agricultural researchThis material drawn by Buruchara et al. from fieldwork just after the Rwandan war and genocide of 1994, documents how emergency aid actors and international and national agricultural research centres worked together to improve dramatically the effectiveness of relief aid interventions. With their long-term knowledge of local agricultural systems, such centres were able to guide implementing agencies towards appropriate and local seed procurement, assess the effects of the war on seed security and seed diversity (to determine what was 'normal' or not and in need of remedial action) and

Free distribution of seeds in selected areas of southern Sudan has been widespread as a way of increasing food security. Field research in areas targeted for seed relief found that farmer seed systems continue to meet the crop and varietal needs of farmers even following the 1998 famine. Donor investments in seed multiplication of improved sorghum have not been sustained due to a lack of effective demand for the improved seed beyond that created by the relief agencies. The article argues that rather than imposing outside solutions, whether through seed provisioning or seed production enterprises, greater attention needs to be given to building on the strengths of existing farmer systems and designing interventions to alleviate the weaknesses. The case is made to support dynamically the process of farmer experimentation through the informed introduction of new crops and varieties that can potentially reinforce the strength and diversity of local cropping systems.

ObjectiveWe sought to compare the incidence of early-onset sepsis (EOS) in infants ≥34 weeks’ gestation identified >24 hours after birth, in hospitals using the Kaiser Permanente Sepsis Risk Calculator (SRC) with hospitals using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance.Design and settingProspective observational population-wide cohort study involving all 26 hospitals with neonatal units colocated with maternity services across London (10 using SRC, 16 using NICE).ParticipantsAll live births ≥34 weeks’ gestation between September 2020 and August 2021.Outcome measuresEOS was defined as isolation ofa bacterial pathogen in the blood or cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) culture from birth to 7 days of age. We evaluated the incidence of EOS identified by culture obtained >24 hours to 7 days after birth. We also evaluated the rate empiric antibiotics were commenced >24 hours to 7 days after birth, for a duration of ≥5 days, with negative blood or CSF cultures.ResultsOf 99 683 live births, 42 952 (43%) were born in SRC hospitals and 56 731 (57%) in NICE hospitals. The overall incidence of EOS (<72 hours) was 0.64/1000 live births. The incidence of EOS identified >24 hours was 2.3/100 000 (n=1) for SRC vs 7.1/100 000 (n=4) for NICE (OR 0.5, 95% CI (0.1 to 2.7)). This corresponded to (1/20) 5% (SRC) vs (4/45) 8.9% (NICE) of EOS cases (χ=0.3, p=0.59). Empiric antibiotics were commenced >24 hours to 7 days after birth in 4.4/1000 (n=187) for SRC vs 2.9/1000 (n=158) for NICE (OR 1.5, 95% CI (1.2 to 1.9)). 3111 (7%) infants received antibiotics in the first 24 hours in SRC hospitals vs 8428 (15%) in NICE hospitals.ConclusionThere was no significant difference in the incidence of EOS identified >24 hours after birth between SRC and NICE hospitals. SRC use was associated with 50% fewer infants receiving antibiotics in the first 24 hours of life.