Search results

The observed increase in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases since the industrial period, due to human activities, is very likely causing the warming of the climate system. Anthropogenic warming and rising sea levels will continue for centuries due to the time scales associated with climate processes and feedbacks. Even if greenhouse gas concentrations were to be stabilized, different types of adaptation measures are needed to cope with the inevitable change. At the same time mitigation measures aiming at decreasing greenhouse gas emissions and enhancing carbon sinks must be taken in order to reduce the potential extent of global warming. This chapter covers the main aspects of the current understanding of the physical basis of climate change, including the directly measured observations and estimated projections for the 21st century. Causes and effects of climate change are also addressed. Finally, the main uncertainties of climate projections and a few general considerations on the different ways to respond to the climate change issue are discussed.

This chapter reviews factors responsible for climate change, impacts of the change on animal health, zoonotic diseases, and their linkage with One-Health program.

This chapter is based on the available literature related to climate change and its effect on animal health and production from different points. The causes and change forcers of climate change, direct and indirect effects of the change on animal health management, host–pathogen–vector interaction, and zoonotic diseases are included. Inter-linkage between climate change and One-Health program are also assessed.

Beside natural causes of climatic change, greenhouse gases are increasing due to human activities, causing global climate changes which have direct and indirect animal health and production performance impacts. The direct impacts are increased ambient temperature, floods, and droughts, while the indirect are reduced availability of water and food. The change and effect also promote diseases spread, increase survival and availability of the pathogen and its intermediate vector host, responsible for distribution and prevalence of tremendous zoonotic, infectious, and vector-borne diseases. The adverse effect on the biodiversity, distribution of animals and micro flora, genetic makeup of microbials which may lead to emerging and re-emerging disease and their outbreaks make the strong linkage between climate change and One-Health.

Global climate change is receiving increasing international attention where international organizations are increasing their focus on tackling the health impacts. Thus, there is a need for parallel mitigation of climate change and animal diseases in a global form.

Most research on climate change is limited to environmental protection, however this chapter provides a nexus between climate change, animal health, livestock production, and the One-Health program for better livelihood.

Global climate can be defined as the average of all the regional trends of weather over a long time period (National Science Foundation [NSF], 2009). The researchers all over the world have concluded that the Earth's climate is changing as a whole. There are basically two factors that have impacts on the climate, the natural (climatic and environmental variability) and the anthropogenic (infrastructure development and land use land cover change). The causes of past changes are believed to be related to changes in ocean currents, solar activity, volcanic eruptions, and other natural factors (ISDR, 2008). But in recent times, human activities have accelerated this rate of climate change (IPCC, 2007; Sperling & Szekely, 2005; ISDR, 2008). As the developmental activities increase, the amount of emission of greenhouse gasses and aerosols increases, which, in turn, leads to global warming and snow melting, thus increasing the sea level and the frequency and intensity of cyclones, floods, droughts, and many other disasters (IPCC, 2001).

The complexity of atmospheric corrosion, further compounded by the effects of climate change, makes existing models inappropriate for corrosion prediction. The commonly used kinetic model and dose-response functions are restricted in their capacity to represent the non-linear behaviour of corrosion phenomena. The application of artificial intelligence (AI)-driven machine learning algorithms to corrosion data can better represent the corrosion mechanism by considering the dynamic behaviour due to changing climatic conditions. Effective use of materials, coating systems and maintenance strategies can then be made with such a corrosivity model. Accurate corrosion prediction will help to improve climate change resilience of the social, economic and energy infrastructure in line with the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure) and 13 (Climate Action). This chapter discusses atmospheric corrosion prediction in relation to the SDGs and the influence of AI in overcoming the challenges.

Expertise in designing organizations is an important construct for scholars interested in studying the micro-foundations of organizational performance. We investigate the existence and nature of this expertise in this chapter. Conceptualizing the designing of organizations as a problem-solving process, we describe the underlying structure of this problem space. Further, we propose that this process of problem solving should look different for “greenfield” design problems and for “brownfield” redesign problems. We test our arguments through a comparison of the think-aloud verbal protocols of 16 subjects with greater experience with organization design problems (experts) and 16 subjects with significantly lower experience with organization design problems (novices). The results suggest that the parts of the problem that experts focus on are different from those that novices focus on, and expertise matters differently for design and redesign problems.

In 2001, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Third Assessment Report revealed an important increase in the level of consensus concerning the reality of human-caused climate warming. The scientific basis for global warming has thus been sufficiently established to enable meaningful planning of appropriate policy responses to address global warming. As a result, the world's policy makers, governments, industries, energy producers/planners, and individuals from many other walks of life have increased their attention toward finding acceptable solutions to the challenge of global warming. This laudable increase in worldwide attention to this global-scale challenge has not, however, led to a heightened optimism that the required substantial reductions in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions deemed necessary to stabilize the global climate can be achieved anytime soon. This fact is due in large part to several fundamental aspects of the climate system that interact to ensure that climate change is a phenomenon that will emerge over extensive timescales.

Although most of the warming observed during the 20th century is attributed to increased greenhouse gas concentrations, because of the high heat capacity of the world's oceans, further warming will lag added greenhouse gas concentrations by decades to centuries. Thus, today's enhanced atmospheric CO2 concentrations have already “wired in” a certain amount of future warming in the climate system, independent of human actions. Furthermore, as atmospheric CO2 concentrations increase, the world's natural CO2 “sinks” will begin to saturate, diminishing their ability to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. Future warming will also eventually cause melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, which will contribute substantially to sea level rise, but only over hundreds to thousands of years. As a result, current generations have, in effect, decided to make future generations pay most of the direct and indirect costs of this major global problem. The longer the delay in reducing CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions, the greater the burden of climate change will be for future life on earth.

Collectively, these phenomena comprise a “global warming dilemma.” On the one hand, the current level of global warming to date appears to be comparatively benign, about 0.6°C. This seemingly small warming to date has thus hardly been sufficient to spur the world to pursue aggressive CO2 emissions reduction policies. On the other hand, the decision to delay global emissions reductions in the absence of a current crisis is essentially a commitment to accept large levels of climate warming and sea level rise for many centuries. This dilemma is a difficult obstacle for policy makers to overcome, although better education of policy makers regarding the long-term consequences of climate change may assist in policy development.

The policy challenge is further exacerbated by factors that lie outside the realm of science. There are a host of values conflicts that conspire to prevent meaningful preventative actions on the global scale. These values conflicts are deeply rooted in our very globally diverse lifestyles and our national, cultural, religious, political, economic, environmental, and personal belief systems. This vast diversity of values and priorities inevitably leads to equally diverse opinions on who or what should pay for preventing or experiencing climate change, how much they should pay, when, and in what form. Ultimately, the challenge to all is to determine the extent to which we will be able to contribute to limiting the magnitude of this problem so as to preserve the quality of life for many future generations of life on earth.

This study examined public knowledge and compliance with infectious disease preventive measures using COVID-19 as a case study. Exploratory research design was employed to collect primary qualitative data from 23 market-involved individuals through the use of in-depth interviews. Responses from the interviewees were audio-recorded, transcribed and categorised into themes before content analysis was used to decrypt fundamental cognitive processes and patterns. Results showed good public knowledge of the infectious disease signs and symptoms, mode of transmission as well as prevention. However, knowledge of how and why some of these preventive measures should be engaged was inadequate or lacking. Findings further showed knowledge-praxis gaps as expressed in the non-observance of face mask directives, disregarding social distancing requirements, and non-compliance to handwashing obligations. Lastly, results showed that observed preventive inactions were reportedly rooted in scarcity of proximate infectious disease cases, public distrust in government, leadership exemplar deficit, individual's poor responsibility mentality, and difficulties in adapting to preventive and control guidelines. Knowledge of this study is most beneficial to market-involved individuals affected by infectious disease policies. This empirical study has helped to unveil the need to bridge knowledge-praxis gap in order to curtail the spread of any infectious disease especially in market areas. The study concluded that unless health communication of infectious disease is adequately and properly disseminated, knowledge-praxis gaps remains inevitable. The need for detailed dissemination of health information, cum intervention strategies that bridge the observed knowledge-compliance gaps is highly imperative in a progressive and dynamic society.