The understanding that some pesticides are more hazardous than others is well established. Recognition of this is reflected by the World Health Organization (WHO) Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard, which was first published in 1975. The document classifies pesticides in one of five hazard classes according to their acute toxicity. In 2002, the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) was introduced, which in addition to acute toxicity also provides classification of chemicals according to their chronic health hazards and environmental hazards.

This Child-Friendly Schools (CFS) Manual was developed during three-and-a-half years of continuous work, involving the United Nations Children's Fund education staff and specialists from partner agencies working on quality education. It benefits from fieldwork in 155 countries and territories, evaluations carried out by the Regional Offices and desk reviews conducted by headquarters in New York. The manual is a part of a total resource package that includes an e-learning package for capacity-building in the use of CFS models and a collection of field case studies to illustrate the state of the art in child-friendly schools in a variety of settings.

Since its inception, anthropology's authority has been based on the assumption that it is a unified discipline emanating from the West. In an age of heightened globalization, anthropologists have failed to discuss consistently the current status of their practice and its mutations across the globe. World Anthropologies is the first book to provoke this conversation from various regions of the world in order to assess the diversity of relations between regional or national anthropologies and a contested, power-laden Western discourse. Can a planetary anthropology cope with both the 'provincial cosmopolitanism' of alternative anthropologies and the 'metropolitan provincialism' of hegemonic schools? How might the resulting 'world anthropologies' challenge the current panorama in which certain allegedly national anthropological traditions have more paradigmatic weight - and hence more power - than others? Critically examining the international dissemination of anthropology within and across national power fields, contributors address these questions and provide the outline for a veritable world anthropologies project.

This enlightening book brings together the work of gender and forestry specialists from various backgrounds and fields of research and action to analyse global gender conditions as related to forests. Using a variety of methods and approaches, they build on a spectrum of theoretical perspectives to bring depth and breadth to the relevant issues and address timely and under-studied themes. Focusing particularly on tropical forests, the book presents both local case studies and global comparative studies from Africa, Asia, and Latin America, as well as the US and Europe. The studies range from personal histories of elderly American women’s attitudes toward conservation, to a combined qualitative / quantitative international comparative study on REDD+, to a longitudinal examination of oil palm and gender roles over time in Kalimantan. Issues are examined across scales, from the household to the nation state and the global arena; and reach back to the past to inform present and future considerations. The collection will be of relevance to academics, researchers, policy makers and advocates with different levels of familiarity with gender issues in the field of forestry.

On a mountainside in sunny Tuscany, in October 1989, 96 people from 23 countries on five continents gathered to learn and teach about the problems of managing contemporary science. The diversity of economic and political systems represented in the group was matched by our occupations, which stretched from science policy practitioners, through research scientists and engineers, through academic observers of science and science policy. It was this diversity, along with the opportunities for infonnal discussion provided by long meals and remote location, that made the conference a special learning experience. Except at lecture time, it was impossible to distinguish the "students" at this event from the "teachers," and even the most senior members of the teaching staff went away with a sense that they had learned more from this group than from many a standard conference on science policy they had attended. The flavor of the conference experience cannot be captured adequately in a proceedings volume, and so we have not tried to create a historical record in this book. Instead, we have attempted to illustrate the core problems the panicipants at the conference shared, discussed, and debated, using both lectures delivered by the fonnal teaching staff and summaries of panel discussions, which extended to other panicipants and therefore increased the range of experiences reponed.