Terrestrial and marine protected areas have long been championed as an approach to biodiversity conservation. For protected areas to be effective, equitable and inclusive, the involvement of local residents in their management and governance is considered important. Globally, there are many approaches to involving local residents in protected area law enforcement. However, opportunities for comparing different approaches have been limited by the lack of a clear common framework for analysis. To support a more holistic understanding, we present a framework for analysing the contributions of local residents to protected area law enforcement. Informed by a review of the literature and discussions with conservation practitioners, the framework comprises five key dimensions: (1) the different points in the enforcement system at which local residents are involved, (2) the nature of local participation in decision-making, (3) the type of external support provided to local residents, (4) the different motivating forces for participation, and (5) the extent to which local participation is formalized. We apply the framework to three real-world case studies to demonstrate its use in analysing and comparing the characteristics of different approaches. We suggest this framework could be used to examine variation in local participation within the enforcement system, inform evaluation and frame constructive discussions between relevant stakeholders. With the global coverage of protected areas likely to increase, the framework provides a foundation for better understanding the contributions of local residents to protected area law enforcement.

The new mineral naalasite (IMA2023–027), NaAl(AsO3OH)2⋅H2O, was found at the Torrecillas mine, Iquique Province, Chile, where it is a secondary alteration phase associated with anhydrite, juansilvaite, magnesiokoritnigite and a lavendulan-like phase. Naalasite occurs in tightly intergrown aggregates and druses of equant crystals. Crystals are light to medium pink and transparent, with vitreous lustre and white streak. The Mohs hardness is ~3½. The density is 3.19(2) g⋅cm–3. Optically, naalasite is uniaxial (+), with ω = 1.630(3) and ɛ = 1.660(3) (white light). The empirical formula (based on 9 O apfu) is Na0.92Al0.61Fe3+0.39As2O9H4.07. Naalasite is trigonal, space group R32, with cell parameters: a = 8.494(4), c = 26.430(13) Å, V = 1651.5(4) Å3 and Z = 9. The structure, refined to R1 = 3.78% for 641 I > 2σI reflections, is based on a loose 3D framework of alternating AsO3OH tetrahedra and AlO6 octahedra. The structure is topologically equivalent to that of nafeasite and can be regarded as its Al analogue, even though nafeasite is monoclinic with space group C2.

Evidence consistently shows that the benefits Nature-based Solutions generate are determined by several individual characteristics such as gender, age, sexuality, ethnicity and disability. As a result, Nature-based Solutions can perpetuate existing inequalities and even create new inequalities partly because diverse minority and marginalized people are underrepresented in the process of designing and implementing Nature-based Solutions. Therefore, some Nature-based Solutions scholars have highlighted the necessity to actively involve diverse minority and marginalized groups into the co-creation processes of Nature-based Solutions and to investigate who benefits from the Nature-based Solution and why. Within the GoGreenRoutes H2020 project a transdisciplinary gender, inclusion and diversity panel was established in order to map existing challenges within the consortium. Concordantly, relevant scientific resources and policy documents were identified. Both were blended during consensus meetings in order to develop a common understanding leading to a theoretical gender, inclusion and diversity framework. This framework consists of five domains: (1) gender equality; (2) LGBTQI + rights; (3) social, cultural and ethnic background; (4) people with disabilities; (5) integration of refugees and immigrants; and (6) intergenerational perspectives. Further, the framework was operationalized through the development of a checklist for researchers and practitioners.

The new mineral nafeasite (IMA2021-103), NaFe3+(AsO3OH)2⋅H2O, was found at the Torrecillas mine, Iquique Province, Chile, where it is a secondary alteration phase associated with anhydrite, gypsum, halite, lavendulan, magnesiokoritnigite and natrojarosite. Nafeasite occurs in tightly intergrown aggregates of equant crystals. Crystals are light to medium pink and transparent, with vitreous lustre and white streak. The Mohs hardness is ~2½. The density is 3.23(2) g⋅cm–3. Optically, nafeasite is biaxial (+), with α = 1.679(3), β = 1.682(3), γ = 1.730(5) (white light); 2V = 27(2)°; and slight r < v dispersion. The empirical formulae of the holotype and cotype (based on 9 O atoms per formula unit) are Na0.98K0.02Fe0.92Al0.07As2.00O9H4.01 and Na0.97Fe0.68Al0.33As2.00O9H4.01, respectively. Nafeasite is monoclinic, space group C2, with cell parameters: a = 18.6876(16), b = 8.6769(7), c = 14.8100(10) Å, β = 105.238 (5)°, V = 2317.0(3) Å3 and Z = 12. The structure, refined to R1 = 5.03% for 5979 Io > 2σI reflections, is based on a loose 3D framework of alternating AsO3OH tetrahedra and Fe3+O6 octahedra.

Capacity development is increasingly recognized as central to conservation goals. Efforts to develop individual, organizational and societal capacity underpin direct investments in biodiversity conservation and natural resource management, and sustain their impact over time. In the face of urgent needs and increasingly complex contexts for conservation the sector not only needs more capacity development, it needs new approaches to capacity development. The sector is embracing the dynamic relationships between the ecological, political, social and economic dimensions of conservation. Capacity development practitioners should ensure that individuals, organizations and communities are prepared to work effectively in these complex environments of constant change to transform the systems that drive biodiversity loss and unsustainable, unequitable resource use. Here we advocate for a systems view of capacity development. We propose a conceptual framework that aligns capacity development components with all stages of conservation efforts, fosters attention to context, and coordinates with parallel efforts to engage across practitioners and sectors for more systemic impact. Furthermore, we highlight a need for practitioners to target, measure and support vital elements of capacity that have traditionally received less attention, such as values and motivation, leadership and organizational culture, and governance and participation by using approaches from psychology, the social sciences and systems thinking. Drawing from conservation and other sectors, we highlight examples of approaches that can support reflective practice, so capacity development practitioners can better understand the factors that favour or hinder effectiveness of interventions and influence system-wide change.

The concept of User Experience (UX) dates back to the 1990s, but a shared definition of UX is not available. As design integrates UX, different interpretations thereof can complicate the possibility to build upon previous literature and develop the field autonomously. Indeed, by analysing the literature, UX emerges as a cauldron of related and closely linked concepts. However, it is possible to find recurring attributes that emerge from those definitions, which are ascribable to two foci: the fundamental elements of the interaction (user, system, context) and typologies of experience (ergonomic, cognitive, and emotional). Those are used to build a framework. We have preliminarily investigated how UX is dealt with in design by mapping a sample of UX-related experimental articles published in design journals. We classified UX case studies based on the framework to individuate the UXs that emerge most frequently and the most studied ones in the design field. The two-focus framework allows the mapping of experiments involving UX in design, without highlighting specific favorable combinations. However, comprehensive studies dealing with all elements and UX typologies have not been found.

Achieving the clinical, public health, economic, and policy benefits of translational science requires the integration and application of findings across biomedical, clinical, and behavioral science and health policy, and thus, collaboration across experts in these areas. To do so, translational teams need the skills, knowledge, and attitudes to mitigate challenges and build on strengths of cross-disciplinary collaboration. Though these competencies are not innate to teams, they can be built through the implementation of effective strategies and interventions. The Science of Team Science (SciTS) has contributed robust theories and evidence of empirically-informed strategies and best practices to enhance collaboration. Yet the field lacks methodological approaches to rigorously translate those strategies into evidence-based interventions to improve collaborative translational research. Here, we apply lessons from Implementation Science and Human-Centered Design & Engineering to describe the Wisconsin Interventions in Team Science (WITS) framework, a process for translating established team science strategies into evidence-based interventions to bolster translational team effectiveness. To illustrate our use of WITS, we describe how University of Wisconsin’s Institute for Clinical and Translational Research translated the existing Collaboration Planning framework into a robust, scalable, replicable intervention. We conclude with recommendations for future SciTS research to refine and test the framework.