As the world contends with the far-ranging impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, ongoing environmental crises have, to some extent, been neglected during the pandemic. One reason behind this shift in priorities is the scarcity mindset triggered by the pandemic. Scarcity is the feeling of having less than what is necessary, and it causes people to prioritize immediate short-term needs over long-term ones. Scarcity experienced in the pandemic can reduce the willingness to engage in pro-environmental behavior, leading to environmental degradation that increases the chance of future pandemics. To protect pro-environmental behavior, we argue that it should not be viewed as value-laden and effortful, but rather reconceptualized as actions that address a multitude of human needs including pragmatic actions that conserve resources especially during scarcity. To bolster environmental protection, systematic changes are needed to make pro-environmental behavior better integrated into people's lives, communities, and cities, such that it is more accessible, less costly, and more resilient to future disturbances.
Polarization is pervasive in the current sociopolitical discourse. Polarization tends to increase cognitive inflexibility where people become less capable of updating their beliefs upon new information or switching between different ways of thinking. Cognitive inflexibility can in turn increase polarization. We propose that this positive feedback loop between polarization and cognitive inflexibility is a form of threat response that has benefited humans throughout their evolutionary history. This feedback loop, which can be driven by conflict mindset, group conformity, and simplification of information, facilitates the formation of strong bonds within a group that are able to eliminate threats and increase individual fitness. Although cognitive inflexibility is conventionally seen as maladaptive, here we argue that cognitive inflexibility may be an adaptation under polarization. That is, in a highly polarized society most people only interact with members of their own social group, without having to confront perspectives from another group or interacting with out-group members. In this context, cognitive inflexibility creates rigid cognitive specialization, a set of cognitive traits that allow people to operate efficiently within their social circles but not outside of it. Although rigid cognitive specialization benefits individuals in the short term, it may lead to more polarization over the long run, and thus produce more conflict between groups. We call on future research to examine the link between cognitive inflexibility and rigid cognitive specialization.
Solutions to environmental and social problems are often framed in dichotomous ways, which can be counterproductive. Instead, multiple solutions are often needed to fully address these problems. Here we examine how framing influences people’s preference for multiple solutions. In a pre-registered experiment, participants (N = 1,432) were randomly assigned to one of four framing conditions. In the first three conditions, participants were presented with a series of eight problems, each framed with multiple causes, multiple impacts, or multiple solutions to the problem. The control condition did not present any framing information. Participants indicated their preferred solution, perceived severity and urgency of the problem, and their dichotomous thinking tendency. Pre-registered analyses showed that none of the three frames had a significant impact on preference for multiple solutions, perceived severity, perceived urgency, or dichotomous thinking. However, exploratory analyses showed that perceived severity and urgency of the problem were positively correlated with people’s preference for multiple solutions, while dichotomous thinking was negatively correlated. These findings showed no demonstrable impact of framing on multi-solution preference. Future interventions should focus on addressing perceived severity and urgency, or decreasing dichotomous thinking to encourage people to adopt multiple solutions to address complex environmental and social problems.
In this work, we systematically study a rotational nanofluidic device for reverse osmosis (RO) desalination by using large scale molecular dynamics modeling and simulation. Moreover, we have compared Molecular Dynamics simulation with fluid mechanics modeling. We have found that the pressure generated by the centrifugal motion of nanofluids can counterbalance the osmosis pressure developed from the concentration gradient, and hence provide a driving force to filtrate fresh water from salt water. Molecular Dynamics modeling of two different types of designs are performed and compared. Results indicate that this novel nanofluidic device is not only able to alleviate the fouling problem significantly, but it is also capable of maintaining high membrane permeability and energy efficiency. The angular velocity of the nanofluids within the device is investigated, and the critical angular velocity needed for the fluids to overcome the osmotic pressure is derived. Meanwhile, a maximal angular velocity value is also identified to avoid Taylor-Couette instability. The MD simulation results agree well with continuum modeling results obtained from fluid hydrodynamics theory, which provides a theoretical foundation for scaling up the proposed rotational osmosis device. Successful fabrication of such rotational RO membrane centrifuge may potentially revolutionize the membrane desalination technology by providing a fundamental solution to the water resource problem.
Intensive agriculture with high reliance on pesticides and fertilizers constitutes a major strategy for ‘feeding the world’. However, such conventional intensification is linked to diminishing returns and can result in ‘intensification traps’ – production declines triggered by the negative feedback of biodiversity loss at high input levels. We developed a novel framework that integrates biodiversity in crop-yield assessments to evaluate risk and magnitude of intensification traps. Simulations grounded in literature reviews demonstrated that intensification traps emerge in most agricultural landscapes (73%), but rarely in major calorie production systems. Small reductions in maximal production by just 5–10% could be frequently transmitted into substantial biodiversity gains, resulting in small-loss large-gain trade-offs prevailing in landscapes with and without intensification traps. However, systematic sensitivity analyses revealed a strong context-dependence complicating the identification of optimal management practices at the field level. Hence, management safety margins need to be considered to prevent the double loss of biodiversity and food security linked to intensification traps.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.