| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Björgvinsson, Erling, et al.
(author)
-
Prototyping Futures
- 2012
-
Reports (other academic/artistic)abstract
- Prototyping Futures gives you a glimpse of what collaborating with academia might look like. Medea and its co-partners share their stories about activities happening at the research centre – projects, methods, tools, and approaches – what challenges lie ahead, and how these can be tackled. Examples of highlighted topics include: What is a living lab and how does it work? What are the visions behind the Connectivity Lab at Medea? And, how can prototyping-methods be used when sketching scenarios for sustainable futures? Other topics are: What is the role of the body when designing technology? What is collaborative media and how can this concept help us understand contemporary media practices? Prototyping Futures also discusses the open-hardware platform Arduino, and the concepts of open data and the Internet of Things, raising questions on how digital media and connected devices can contribute to more sustainable lifestyles, and a better world.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Karlsson, Reine, et al.
(author)
-
Flervetenskaplig ljusforskning
- 2011
-
Reports (pop. science, debate, etc.)abstract
- Den här skriften handlar om ljus och ljusets betydelse för oss människor. Tolv forskare med vitt skilda bakgrunder samlas och diskuterar frågor som skrider över gränserna. Vad är ljus egentligen? Hur kan vi förstå ljus? Hur påverkar det oss? På vilket sätt kan vi använda oss av det? Vilka tekniska möjligheter har vi att skapa och styra olika sorters ljus? Vilka möjligheter ger det oss inför framtiden? I centrum för dialogen står samarbete och nytänkande. Här ges en inblick i perspektiv på ljus från områden som biologi, teknik, material, fysik, estetik, filosofi, medicin och psykologi, vilka sammantaget, på ett åskådligt och lättbegripligt sätt, presenterar den flervetenskapliga ljusrelaterade kompetensen i Lund. Gruppen av experter hoppas att de frågor som ställs och de svar som ges i den här skriften ska inspirera och leda vidare inom fältet ljusforskning. Tillsammans med Pufendorfinstitutet, genom vilket expertgruppens initiativ getts möjlighet att växa och utvecklas, vill de med andra ord att sätta ljuset på...just ”ljuset”!
|
|
| 5. |
- Moksnes, Per-Olav, 1965, et al.
(author)
-
Identifying new areas adding larval connectivity to existing networks of MPAs : The case of Kattegat and Skagerrak
- 2015
-
Reports (other academic/artistic)abstract
- Networks of marine protected areas (MPAs) are presently being developed in many countries with the aim to preserve biodiversity and restore overexploited stocks. However, one major challenge for the design and management of a functional MPA-network is the lack of information about how larval dispersal affects connectivity in the network and persistence of included species. Tools have been lacking that include larval connectivity into design and assessment of MPA-network, and in particular regarding finding the best new areas that will enhance larval connectivity in the existing networks. In the present study we build on earlier model studies on larval dispersal and assessment of MPA-networks in the Kattegat-Skagerrak area (Moksnes et al. 2014), and use novel theoretical tools to identify new areas for the existing MPA-network in the Skagerrak-Kattegat-Danish Strait area that would best enhance larval connectivity for benthic communities living shallower than 100 m. We also use new methods to identify areas with restricted larval dispersal and subpopulations within the study area, to assist in the selection of new MPAs. The assessment includes also benthic communities that are intolerant to low salinities and therefore have limited distribution in the Baltic Sea. The study demonstrates that the connectivity and protection of benthic communities in the existing MPA-network could be substantially improved by a relatively small addition of carefully selected new MPAs. Adding approximately 1000 km2 of model-selected areas to the existing network (representing an extension of the existing network area with 15–19 %) increased the simulated populations of benthic organism with on average 39–103 % in comparison with the existing network. In contrast, a random selection of new MPAs of the same size only increased the population sizes with 0–19 %. The study identified several areas with restricted larval dispersal and isolated subpopulations within the study area, which may have important implications for management of both genetic and species diversity. The results suggest that it may be important to manage the western Baltic Sea, Kattegat, coastal Skagerrak (including both the Swedish and Norwegian coasts) and the area northwest of Jutland as separate management units since restricted larval dispersal may create genetically distinct subpopulations in these regions. The study also identified restricted larval dispersal within Kattegat and Skagerrak that may create areas with benthic communities that are demographically isolated from neighboring communities. For management of populations and local species diversity, it is important to ensure that there are MPAs within each demographically isolated area. One such area was identified along the Swedish Kattegat coast, which presently has few large MPAs, in particular for shallow benthic communities (<20 m). The analysis identified shallow areas within the larger bays Skälderviken and the Laholmsbukten, and a deeper area located between the Laholmsbukten and Stora Middelgrund in southeastern Kattegatt as being key areas for larval connectivity and persistence of shallow and deep benthic communities, respectively, in Kattegat. The results suggest that these areas (covering approximately 700 km2 in total) constitute the best additions, in respect of larval connectivity, to the existing MPA-network found within Swedish waters. For management purposes, these results should only be viewed as guide for identifying general areas within the study region that are important for improving the connectivity of pelagic larvae within the existing MPA-network. Due to the limitation of the model they should not be viewed as a blue-print of the exact locations of an optimal extension, particularly not in the coastal zone. However, the study does represent the best available assessment to day of larval dispersal and connectivity in the study area, and the result could therefore provide manager with helpful information of one important aspect to include in the decision process when selecting new MPAs.
|
|
| 6. |
- Moksnes, Per-Olav, 1965, et al.
(author)
-
Larval connectivity and ecological coherence of marine protected areas (MPAs) in the Kattegat-Skagerrak region
- 2014
-
Reports (other academic/artistic)abstract
- Marine protected areas (MPAs) are considered effective instrument to mitigate the loss of biodiversity in the sea. However, the management of MPA-networks is challenged by a lack of information of habitat distribution, and of how populations are connected between habitats and MPAs through dispersal of pelagic larval stages. In this study, the effect of larval connectivity on the ecological coherence of the MPA-networks in the Kattegat-Skagerrak area of the North Sea is investigated with special focus on the OSPAR-MPAs. By using biophysical models, the larval dispersal and connectivity of benthic organisms in the Kattegat-Skagerrak area is assessed. The report also aims to assess if a series of new model tools can be applied to identify optimal MPA-networks for benthic communities, and evaluate the existing MPA-networks with regards to larval connectivity. This report was prepared on request by the Swedish Agency for Water and Marine Management.
|
|
| 7. |
- Nilsson, Johan, et al.
(author)
-
Hjälmarens fågelskär 2019 : Miljöövervakning av kolonihäckande sjöfågel
- 2020
-
Reports (other academic/artistic)abstract
- På uppdrag av länsstyrelserna i Södermanlands, Västmanlands och Örebro län samt Hjälmarens vattenvårdsförbund har sex ornitologer genomfört den tredje heltäckande inventeringen av kolonihäckande sjöfågel i Hjälmaren under våren och sommaren 2019. Tidigare heltäckande inventeringar gjordes 2015 och 2017. Resultaten visar att gråtrut och skrattmås fortsätter att öka jämfört med 2015 medan fisktärna gått tillbaka något efter ökningen 2017. Fiskmås har minskat något men inte lika mycket som mellan 2015 och 2017. Beståndet av havstrut har varit relativt oförändrat sedan 2015. En slutsats efter den tredje inventeringsomgången är att vattenståndet i Hjälmaren har stor betydelse för fåglarnas förutsättningar att häcka på skären. En annan viktig förutsättning är trädfria skär för att undvika bopredatorer. Som exempel har Länsstyrelsens röjning av Stallgårn i naturreservatet Grundholmarna (Örebro län) lett till att skäret återkoloniserats med 150 häckande individer av fisktärna 2019 jämfört med nio häckande fisktärnor 2015. Någon ökning av häckande skarv har inte noterats. Skarvkolonierna tenderar att öka i storlek men minska i antal, troligen ett resultat av störning från bopredatorer (havsörn).
|
|
| 8. |
- Nyström Sandman, Antonia, et al.
(author)
-
Grön infrastruktur i havet : landskapsperspektiv i förvaltningen av Sveriges marina områden
- 2020
-
Reports (other academic/artistic)abstract
- En kartläggning av havets naturkvaliteter har påbörjats genom arbetet med grön infrastruktur. Rapporten undersöker olika scenarier för hur den marina gröna infrastrukturen påverkas av mänskliga aktiviteter i förhållande till olika strategier för förvaltning. Projektet har genomfört tre fallstudier med olika fokus: strandexploatering, trålfiske och klimatförändring. Genom scenariobaserade analyser visar forskarna vilken effekt olika beslut och åtgärder kan få på naturskydds- och miljömål.Det tvärvetenskapliga projektet är ett samarbete mellan experter inom ekologi och juridik. Forskarna beskriver hur lagstiftning, planering och förvaltningsstrategier bör utformas och fungera ihop, och presenterar förslag för att stärka skyddet av den gröna infrastrukturen i Sveriges havsområden.Forskningen har finansierats av Naturvårdsverkets miljöforskningsanslag till stöd för Naturvårdsverket och Havs- och vattenmyndighetens verksamhet.
|
|
| 9. |
-
Scientific considerations of how Arctic Marine Protected Area (MPA) networks may reduce negative effects of climate change and ocean acidification : Report from the Third Expert Workshop on Marine Protected Area networks in the Arctic, organised by Sweden and Finland under the auspices of the PAME working group of the Arctic Council in Helsinki, Finland, 21-22 September 2017
- 2017
-
Reports (other academic/artistic)abstract
- Rapid environmental changes in the ArcticDuring the last two decades, the Arctic region has become an area of international strategic importance for states, businesses, NGOs and other stakeholders. The rapid environmental changes in the Arctic create new opportunities for different actors that may impact negatively on ecological and social values. Global climate change and ocean acidification change the habitats of the cold-adapted organisms living in the Arctic, with the risk of exterminating unique biodiversity. Human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases (primarily carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide) affect the balance between energy entering and leaving the Earth’s system resulting in global warming, melting of sea-ice (which increases heat absorption by the Arctic Ocean), and associated climate change. Approximately 27 % of the carbon dioxide released to the atmosphere every year is absorbed by the oceans. This keeps the atmosphere from warming as much as it otherwise would, but creates ocean acidification. In the Arctic region climate change and ocean acidification take place 10-100 times faster than at any time in the last 65 million years.Intention of the workshopThis third expert workshop on Marine Protected Area (MPA) networks in the Arctic, organised by Sweden and Finland, was held in Helsinki (Finland) and its outcome is a contribution to the ‘‘PAME MPA-network toolbox’’ project. An MPA, as defined by PAME, is ‘‘a clearly defined geographical space recognized, dedicated, and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values’. An MPA network is a collection of individual MPAs or reserves operating cooperatively and synergistically, at various spatial scales, and with a range of protection levels that are designed to meet objectives that a single reserve cannot achieve. During this third expert workshop the scientific basis of how MPA networks may reduce negative effects of climate change and ocean acidification in the Arctic region was discussed. Workshop participants were mainly scientists with expertise on Arctic marine ecosystems, climate change, ocean acidification and/or MPAs. The intention of the workshop was not to reach consensus and provide a fixed list of recommendations, but rather to summarize: (1) the best available knowledge that can already be applied to the planning of a pan-Arctic MPA network, and (2) the primary uncertainties and, hence, what necessary scientific knowledge is still lacking. As such, the six main outcomes from the workshop below contribute to the scientific basis for the potential of MPAs as a tool to meet the threats posed by climate change and ocean acidification to Arctic ecosystems and livelihoods.A paradigm shift for establishing MPAs is necessaryGiven the rapid environmental changes and unprecedented rate of loss of Arctic sea ice there is an urgency to protect habitats that are essential for ecosystem functioning and to link MPAs in an international network. Humanity has now the opportunity of a pro-active and precautionary approach vis-à-vis the largely intact, highly sensitive and unique cold-adapted Arctic marine ecosystems. The current paradigm for the creation of MPAs seems to be that a direct regional or local threat needs to be proven before an MPA can be designated. However, climate change and ocean acidification are global processes that operate across the whole Arctic, and therefore this paradigm should be shifted towards one that establishes MPA networks to protect what is valued and cherished before it is harmed. This calls for applying the precautionary principle and creating Arctic MPA networks that will support resilience of biodiversity and ecosystem services to climate change and ocean acidification. Scientists are aware that not all desired knowledge for planning such networks is available at this time. This includes uncertainty associated with projecting the consequences of climate change across the physical (e.g. climate models), ecological (e.g. species diversity, ecosystem processes) to the human domain (e.g. ecosystem services, human well-being). Uncertainty about the effects of climate change and ocean acidification grows when moving from physical processes to ecology and finally to human well-being. Nonetheless, general ecological principles and additional experience from other regions (e.g. Antarctica, Baltic Sea) provide sufficient basic understanding to start designing a robust pan-Arctic MPA network already now and to develop and implement the necessary connected management measures.Existing MPA criteria need to be adapted to Arctic conditionsCreating an MPA network for the Arctic will require adaptation of established criteria to the unique, and rapidly changing, character of the region. For example, optimal MPA locations for some MPAs in the Arctic Ocean may not be stationary in space and time; e.g. high-biodiversity marginal ice zone (MIZ) ecosystems will become more dynamic in time and space, contracting in winter and expanding in summer, with climate change. In order to account for the migration of species with moving physico-chemical conditions (so-called ‘climate tracking’) creating dynamic MPAs along oceanographic and climatic gradients may be a feasible and effective approach. Such focus on ocean features, the integration of other effective area-based measures next to MPAs, as well as the systematic integration of traditional and local knowledge (TLK), will be essential in the process of designating MPA networks. In so doing, the vulnerability and status of Arctic ecosystems to cumulative drivers and pressures from not only regional and local scales (fishing, tourism, pollution, etc.) but also global scales (climate change and ocean acidification) should be monitored and reviewed on a regular basis.Arctic MPAs should be located in areas that are expected to become refugiaClimate change and ocean acidificationdo not operate in isolation but combine with regional and local environmental stressors to affect Arctic species, habitats, and ecosystems. It is possible to lessen the total stress burden and increase the resilience of biodiversity to the impacts of climate change and ocean acidification by mitigating stresses from direct anthropogenic pressures, such as habitat destruction, fishing, shipping, discharges of hazardous substances, etc., through establishing MPA networks. This will not ‘solve’ the underlying problems of climate change and ocean acidification, which can only be done by reducing atmospheric greenhouse gas emissions, but it will ‘buy time’ during which the underlying problems are addressed globally.Additional stresses should be targetedA key aspect is how to identify the location of prospective MPAs within a network. Since the effects of climate change and ocean acidification are unevenly distributed across the Arctic Ocean, it would be recommended to protect habitats that will act as refugia for Arctic biodiversity. For example, protecting the areas north of Greenland, where summer sea ice is projected to be most long-lasting, or parts of the Arctic Ocean where the supply of organic matter through permafrost melt, glacier melt, higher precipitation and higher river runoff (with increasing coastal CO2 concentrations through microbial activity) will be lowest. The 18 Arctic large marine ecosystems (LMEs) reflect the marine ecosystem variability in the region, and should be used to draft plans for MPA networks to more effectively consider representativeness.The scientific knowledge basis must be improvedThe workshop highlighted the need for a dedicated group to compile relevant geophysical and biological data for the purpose of MPA network planning. These data should include the changing environment, ‘spatial adaptation planning’, biochemical gradients, and identification of areas of high and low impact of climate change and ocean acidification. There is a wealth of information available (both reviews and analyses of knowledge gaps from CAFF, AMAP and others), that can be used for MPA planning but this information is highly scattered and needs to be collated and made spatially explicit, when possible. While the planning for MPA networks can start already now, there remains a large need for monitoring and relevant scientific research. This would require not only improved scientific cooperation between countries but also truly integrated international monitoring and research to decrease fragmentation and duplication of research.Identification of research prioritiesGaps in knowledge identified by the workshop participants mainly concern the winter season, the vulnerability and resilience of the Arctic marine ecosystems and the need to support sustainable development. With respect to climate change much more is known about species higher up in the food web (seabirds, marine mammals, some fish) than about species lower in food web. For ocean acidification, most of the experimental work has been done on lower trophic levels. Much uncertainty surrounds the fate of Arctic ecosystems in a future world and how to deal with uncertainties is an issue that should be addressed in scientific studies. For example, the disappearance of strongly ice-associated species in many places will likely lead to a state-change in the associated ecosystem, yet the timing and nature of that change is currently unpredictable. While the basic drivers of the Arctic shelf-sea ecosystems are quite well understood, there is a massive lack of information at all trophic levels for the Central Arctic Ocean LME, i.e. the deep central basin, and key species are difficult to identify. Presently, this high-latitude ecosystem is ice-bound, but climate projections indicate that it will become ice-free during summer within decades; the projected spatial and temporal variability is however very large and i
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
