Farm forests, seasonal hunger, and biomass poverty: Evidence of induced intensification from panel data in the Ethiopian Highlands.

Seasonal hunger is the most common food insecurity experience for millions of small dryland farmers. This study tests the relationships between food insecurity, farm forests, and biomass poverty using a longitudinal dataset from the Amhara region of Ethiopia. These data form part of the Ethiopia Socioeconomic Survey, which collected panel data over three survey rounds from 530 households between 2011 and 2016. This dataset represents a collection of unique socioeconomic, wellbeing, and micro-land use measures, including farm forests. Hierarchical mixed effect regression models assessed the relationship between food insecurity and farm forests as well as the conditional effects of biomass poverty among the poorest farmers and women-headed households. Over a six-year study period, farmers reported increased stress from smaller land holdings, higher prices, and climate-related shocks. A clear trend towards spontaneous dispersed afforestation is observed by both researchers and satellite remote sensing. Model results indicate, dedicating approximately 10% of farm area to forest reduces months of food insecurity by half. The greatest reductions in food insecurity from farm forests are reported by ultra-poor and crop residue-burning households, suggesting that biomass poverty may be a major constraint to resilient food security on these farms. This research provides novel quantitative evidence of induced intensification and food security impacts of farm management preserving and building stores of biomass value as green assets. The results reported here have important implications for nature-based solutions as a major strategy to achieve sustainable development in some contexts.

Neurological Risks During Implant Placement in the Anterior Maxilla and Mandible: A Literature Review.

The placement of implants in the anterior maxillary and mandibular region requires esthetic proficiency and surgical finesse. It is important to consider the esthetic outcome while avoiding any type of nerve injury for the patient. In this literature review, anatomical structures of the anterior jaw were reviewed from a gross anatomical and radiographic interpretation. A discussion on the frequency of neurosensory complications for patients as a result of nerve damage in this region was evaluated. The purpose of this literature review was to educate the dental surgeon to consider the anterior jaw's neurological structures when performing procedures like implant surgery. The mandibular incisive canal (MIC) presents as an extension of the inferior alveolar canal that runs between the mental foramina. The MIC is a structure that is easily depicted in cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging and is present in most subjects in gross anatomical studies. The anterior loop of the mental nerve is another structure that is discussed in this paper. Although its structure is accurately depicted in CBCT images, its anatomical variations in patients can make implant treatment planning difficult. The maxilla contains 2 neurovascular structures that were discussed. First, the nasopalatine canal and its relation and impact on implant placement is evaluated. Case reports are reviewed that outline a prophylactic enucleation and bone grafting of the canal prior to implant placement. Second, the canalis sinuosus, which houses the anterior superior alveolar nerve, is of concern during implant placement in the lateral incisor region. Case reports involving nerve damage with follow-up are discussed.

Conclusion: Agency in the face of complexity and the future of assumption-aware evaluation practice.

This final chapter in the volume pulls together common themes from the diverse set of articles by a group of eight authors in this issue, and presents some reflections on the next steps for improving the ways in which evaluators work with assumptions. Collectively, the authors provide a broad overview of existing and emerging approaches to the articulation and use of assumptions in evaluation theory and practice. The authors reiterate the rationale and key terminology as a common basis for working with assumption in program design and evaluation. They highlight some useful concepts and categorizations to promote more rigorous treatment of assumptions in evaluation. A three-tier framework for fostering agency for assumption-aware evaluation practice is proposed-agency for themselves (evaluators); agency for others (stakeholders); and agency for standards and principles.

Clarifying concepts and categories of assumptions for use in evaluation.

In order to advance systematic examination of how evaluators work with assumptions, there is need for; first of all, a coherent synthesis and categorization of assumptions, as well as a discussion of their varied relevance in program design and evaluation. An emergent typology of assumptions as they are used in the literature will be proposed based on categories of assumptions as used in literature. The critical role and potential contribution of the articulation of paradigmatic, normative, diagnostic, prescriptive, causal, external and other assumptions in program design and evaluation are discussed and then evaluated for utility to current evaluative practice.

Volume overview: Working with assumptions. Existing and emerging approaches for improved program design, monitoring and evaluation.

This volume attempts to systematically capture the state of practice, highlight commonalities linking existing and emerging approaches to assumption-making and evaluation. It tries to organize existing and emerging knowledge, tools and terminology into an emergent but useful typology for working with assumptions and complexity in program designs, monitoring and evaluation.

Assumption-aware tools and agency; an interrogation of the primary artifacts of the program evaluation and design profession in working with complex evaluands and complex contexts.

Like artisans in a professional guild, we evaluators create tools to suit our ever evolving practice. The tools we use as evaluators are the primary artifacts of our profession, reflect our practice and embody an amalgamation of paradigms and assumptions. With the increasing shifts in evaluation purposes from judging program worth to understanding how programs work, the evaluator's role is changing to that of facilitating stakeholders in a learning process. This involves clarifying purposes and choices, as well as unearthing critical assumptions. In such a role, evaluators become major tool-users and begin to innovate with small refinements or produce completely new tools to fit a specific challenge or context. We interrogate the form and function of 12 tools used by evaluators when working with complex evaluands and complex contexts. The form is described in terms of traditional qualitative techniques and particular characteristics of the elements, use and presentation of each tool. Then the function of each tool is analyzed with respect to articulating assumptions and affecting the agency of evaluators and stakeholders in complex contexts.