A development project introduces various changes into a community. Some of these changes are positive while others are negative or warrant better planning. Evaluation reports designed strictly for quantitative, targetoriented physical and fiscal achievements often overlook many of these changes. Our personal field observations and experiences with an agricultural development project showed us several examples of impacts brought about in the local farming system in some hill districts of Nepal. These impacts cannot be neglected and project evaluation and progress reports (...) should accommodate such changes. (shrink)

Provision of additional food supplements for the purpose of biological conservation has been widely researched both theoretically and experimentally. The study of these biosystems is usually done using predator–prey models. In this paper, we consider an additional food provided predator–prey system in the presence of the inhibitory effect of the prey. This model is analyzed in the control parameter space using the control parameters, quality and quantity of additional food. The findings suggest that with appropriate choice of additional food to (...) predators, the biosystem can be controlled and steered to a desirable state. It is also possible to eliminate either of the interacting species. The vital role of the quality and quantity of the additional food in the system dynamics cautions the eco manager on the choice of the additional food for realizing the goal in the biological conservation programme. (shrink)

Arguments for a just transition are integral to debates about climate change and the drive to create a carbon-neutral economy. There are currently two broad approaches rooted in ethics and justice for framing just energy transitions. The first can be described as internal to the transition and emphasizes the anticipation, assessment, and redressing of harms created by the transition itself and the inclusion in transition governance of groups or communities potentially harmed by its disruptions. In this article, we propose a (...) second approach to ethics and justice in an energy transition, which we describe as systemic or societal in scope. This approach complements attention to the proximate dynamics and impacts of the transition process with a focus on the distant societal and economic outcomes the transition brings into being and how they compare to conditions prior to the transition. It poses the question: do the transformative social, economic, and technological changes wrought by energy systems create more just societies and economies, or do they instead reinforce or recreate long-standing injustices and inequalities? We illustrate this approach with an assessment of one of the most significant existing forms of energy injustice: the energy-poverty nexus. We argue that the energy-poverty nexus reflects configurations of socio-energy systems that create complex, extractive feedbacks between energy insecurity and economic insecurity and, over time, reinforce or exacerbate poverty. We further argue that just energy transitions should work to disentangle these configurations and re-design them so as to create generative rather than extractive feedbacks, thus ending the energy-poverty nexus and creating long-term outcomes that are more just, equitable, and fair. (shrink)

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in more than 524 million cases and 6 million deaths worldwide. Various drug interventions targeting multiple stages of COVID-19 pathogenesis can significantly reduce infection-related mortality. The current within-host mathematical modeling study addresses the optimal drug regimen and efficacy of combination therapies in the treatment of COVID-19. The drugs/interventions considered include Arbidol, Remdesivir, Interferon and Lopinavir/ritonavir. It is concluded that these drugs, when administered singly or in combination, reduce the number of infected cells and viral load. (...) Four scenarios dealing with the administration of a single drug, two drugs, three drugs and all four are discussed. In all these scenarios, the optimal drug regimen is proposed based on two methods. In the first method, these medical interventions are modeled as control interventions and a corresponding objective function and optimal control problem are formulated. In this framework, the optimal drug regimen is derived. Later, using the comparative effectiveness method, the optimal drug regimen is derived based on the basic reproduction number and viral load. The average number of infected cells and viral load decreased the most when all four drugs were used together. On the other hand, the average number of susceptible cells decreased the most when Arbidol was administered alone. The basic reproduction number and viral load decreased the most when all four interventions were used together, confirming the previously obtained finding of the optimal control problem. The results of this study can help physicians make decisions about the treatment of the life-threatening COVID-19 infection. (shrink)