Romanian Abstract: Articolul dezvoltă problema calității agroalimentare în contextul actual al diluării libertăților de conștiință. Dezvoltarea umană depinde din ce în ce mai mult de asigurarea necesarului de hrană, atât din punct de vedere cantitativ, cât și calitativ. Cantitativ, multe dintre aspectele siguranței și securității alimentare au fost rezolvate. Calitativ, mai sunt multe probleme de rezolvat, precum: nutriție sănătoasă, alimentație de calitate, educație alimentară, etc. Datorită stresului și provocărilor la care sunt supuși, din ce în ce mai mulți indivizi ai secolului XXI nu se mai hrănesc în mod calitativ, ci doar acoperă emoții sau un minim nutritiv insuficient sănătății umane. Cercetarea actuală sumarizează o serie de concepte asociate calității agroalimentare și nutriției sănătoase în contextul libertății de alegere. Cercetarea este preponderent exploratorie, sintetiză a literaturii de specialitate și date prelucrate de pe site-urile Băncii Mondiale și Eurostat. Sunt aduse în atenție date din montanologia mondială, europeană și românească, precum și indicatorul avantaj comparativ relevat al complexului de clase de produse alimentare astfel încât lucrarea să ofere o imagine fidelă a poziției României în conjunctura agroalimentară mondială și europeană.
English Abstract: The article develops the issue of agri-food quality in the current context of diluting freedoms of conscience. Human development increasingly depends on providing the necessary food, both in terms of quantity and quality. Quantitatively, many of the food safety and security issues have been addressed. Qualitatively, there are still many problems to be solved, such as: healthy nutrition, quality nutrition, food education, etc. Due to the stress and challenges they are subjected to, more and more individuals of the 21st century no longer feed themselves qualitatively, but only cover emotions or an insufficient nutritional minimum for human health. Current research summarizes a number of concepts associated with agri-food quality and healthy nutrition in the context of freedom of choice. The research is mainly exploratory, synthesized from the literature and data processed from World Bank and Eurostat. Data from the world, European and Romanian montanology are brought to attention, as well as the revealed comparative advantage indicator of the complex of food classes so that the paper offers a faithful image of Romania's position in the world agri-food conjuncture.
{"title":"Calitatea agroalimentară – dimensiune a libertății de conștiință. Evidențe din montanologia mondială, europeană și românească (Agri-Food Quality – A Dimension of Freedom of Conscience. Evidence from World, European and Romanian Montanology)","authors":"Brindusa Covaci","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3723684","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3723684","url":null,"abstract":"<b>Romanian Abstract:</b> Articolul dezvoltă problema calității agroalimentare în contextul actual al diluării libertăților de conștiință. Dezvoltarea umană depinde din ce în ce mai mult de asigurarea necesarului de hrană, atât din punct de vedere cantitativ, cât și calitativ. Cantitativ, multe dintre aspectele siguranței și securității alimentare au fost rezolvate. Calitativ, mai sunt multe probleme de rezolvat, precum: nutriție sănătoasă, alimentație de calitate, educație alimentară, etc. Datorită stresului și provocărilor la care sunt supuși, din ce în ce mai mulți indivizi ai secolului XXI nu se mai hrănesc în mod calitativ, ci doar acoperă emoții sau un minim nutritiv insuficient sănătății umane. Cercetarea actuală sumarizează o serie de concepte asociate calității agroalimentare și nutriției sănătoase în contextul libertății de alegere. Cercetarea este preponderent exploratorie, sintetiză a literaturii de specialitate și date prelucrate de pe site-urile Băncii Mondiale și Eurostat. Sunt aduse în atenție date din montanologia mondială, europeană și românească, precum și indicatorul avantaj comparativ relevat al complexului de clase de produse alimentare astfel încât lucrarea să ofere o imagine fidelă a poziției României în conjunctura agroalimentară mondială și europeană. <br><br><b>English Abstract:</b> The article develops the issue of agri-food quality in the current context of diluting freedoms of conscience. Human development increasingly depends on providing the necessary food, both in terms of quantity and quality. Quantitatively, many of the food safety and security issues have been addressed. Qualitatively, there are still many problems to be solved, such as: healthy nutrition, quality nutrition, food education, etc. Due to the stress and challenges they are subjected to, more and more individuals of the 21st century no longer feed themselves qualitatively, but only cover emotions or an insufficient nutritional minimum for human health. Current research summarizes a number of concepts associated with agri-food quality and healthy nutrition in the context of freedom of choice. The research is mainly exploratory, synthesized from the literature and data processed from World Bank and Eurostat. Data from the world, European and Romanian montanology are brought to attention, as well as the revealed comparative advantage indicator of the complex of food classes so that the paper offers a faithful image of Romania's position in the world agri-food conjuncture.","PeriodicalId":326277,"journal":{"name":"PRN: Environmental Ethics","volume":"68 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115363699","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper gives a broad overview of existing approaches and other considerations concerning the definition and operation of concepts and approaches for “limits of acceptable change” (LAC) which may be applicable to the Ramsar context of defining and detecting change in the ecological character of wetlands, as required by Article 3.2.The paper identifies different purposes for LAC in the context of existing Ramsar information management and decision-making frameworks. It highlights conceptual distinctions between interpretations of “trivial” change, benchmarks for establishing the range of normal variability, recreational management compromise protocols, precautionary envelopes for ecosystem status reporting, early warning indicators, adaptive management triggers, expressions of risk appetite and degrees of approximation/tolerance bandwidths for the achievement of conservation objectives.Examples of existing approaches are given from Australia, the European Union, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States, as well as from the Convention’s own guidance. Some of these approaches operate with substantial volumes of data and well-resourced agencies, but any global Ramsar standards or guidance which may be developed on this issue will need to cater for more capacity-constrained parts of the world, perhaps through a “framework” or “tiered” approach. Elements of the scope of desirable future work by the Ramsar Scientific & Technical Review Panel towards this are identified.The term “Limits of Acceptable Change” has been used in significantly different ways in different contexts, giving rise to some confusion and mistaken conceptual extrapolations. It is suggested that different terminology should be used for defining “how much change constitutes relevant change” for the purposes of Article 3.2. For Article 3.2 purposes it is therefore recommended that the term “Limits for Defining Change in Ecological Character” (LDCEC) should be used instead.
{"title":"Limits of Acceptable Change","authors":"D. Pritchard","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2592423","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2592423","url":null,"abstract":"This paper gives a broad overview of existing approaches and other considerations concerning the definition and operation of concepts and approaches for “limits of acceptable change” (LAC) which may be applicable to the Ramsar context of defining and detecting change in the ecological character of wetlands, as required by Article 3.2.The paper identifies different purposes for LAC in the context of existing Ramsar information management and decision-making frameworks. It highlights conceptual distinctions between interpretations of “trivial” change, benchmarks for establishing the range of normal variability, recreational management compromise protocols, precautionary envelopes for ecosystem status reporting, early warning indicators, adaptive management triggers, expressions of risk appetite and degrees of approximation/tolerance bandwidths for the achievement of conservation objectives.Examples of existing approaches are given from Australia, the European Union, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States, as well as from the Convention’s own guidance. Some of these approaches operate with substantial volumes of data and well-resourced agencies, but any global Ramsar standards or guidance which may be developed on this issue will need to cater for more capacity-constrained parts of the world, perhaps through a “framework” or “tiered” approach. Elements of the scope of desirable future work by the Ramsar Scientific & Technical Review Panel towards this are identified.The term “Limits of Acceptable Change” has been used in significantly different ways in different contexts, giving rise to some confusion and mistaken conceptual extrapolations. It is suggested that different terminology should be used for defining “how much change constitutes relevant change” for the purposes of Article 3.2. For Article 3.2 purposes it is therefore recommended that the term “Limits for Defining Change in Ecological Character” (LDCEC) should be used instead.","PeriodicalId":326277,"journal":{"name":"PRN: Environmental Ethics","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114957269","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号