Search results for: maasai mara ecosystem

Authors: Adriana De Serio, Donato Forenza

Abstract:

Aims. In this experimental research the Authors present the methodological plan “Musictherapy and Gardentherapy” that they created interconnected with the garden landscape ecosystems and aimed at PsychoPhysical Disability (MusGarPPhyD). In the context of the environmental education aimed at spreading the landscape culture and its values, it’s necessary to develop a solid perception of the environment sustainability to implement a multidimensional approach that pays attention to the conservation and enhancement of gardens and natural environments. The result is an improvement in the life quality also in compliance with the objectives of the European Agenda 2030. The MusGarPPhyD can help professionals such as musictherapists and environmental and landscape researchers strengthen subjects' motivation to learn to deal with the psychophysical discomfort associated with disability and to cope with the distress and the psychological fragility and the loneliness and the social seclusion and to promote productive social relationships. Materials and Methods. The MusGarPPhyD was implemented in multiple spaces. The musictherapy treatments took place first inside residential therapeutic centres and then in the garden landscape ecosystem. Patients: twenty, set in two groups. Weekly-sessions (50’) for three months. Methodological phases: - Phase P1. MusicTherapy treatments for each group in the indoor spaces. - Phase P2. MusicTherapy sessions inside the gardens. After each Phase, P1 and P2: - a Questionnaire for each patient (ten items / liking-indices) was administrated at t0 time, during the treatment and at tn time at the end of the treatment. - Monitoring of patients' behavioral responses through assessment scales, matrix, table and graph system. MusicTherapy methodology: pazient Sonorous-Musical Anamnesis, Musictherapy Assessment Document, Observation Protocols, Bodily-Environmental-Rhythmical-Sonorous-Vocal-Energy production first indoors and then outside, sonorous-musical instruments and edible instruments made by the Author/musictherapist with some foods; Administration of Patient-Environment-Music Index at time to and tn, to estimate the patient’s behavior evolution, Musictherapeutic Advancement Index. Results. The MusGarPPhyD can strengthen the individual sense of identity and improve the psychophysical skills and the resilience to face and to overcome the difficulties caused by the congenital /acquired disability. The multi-sensory perceptions deriving from contact with the plants in the gardens improve the psychological well-being and regulate the physiological parameters such as blood pressure, cardiac and respiratory rhythm, reducing the cholesterol levels. The secretions of the peptide hormones endorphins and the endogenous opioids enkephalins increase and bring a state of patient’s tranquillity and a better mood. The subjects showed a preference for musictherapy treatments within a setting made up of gardens and peculiar landscape systems. This resulted in greater health benefits. Conclusions. The MusGarPPhyD contributes to reduce psychophysical tensions, anxiety, depression and stress, facilitating the connections between the cerebral hemispheres, thus also improving intellectual performances, self-confidence, motor skills and social interactions. Therefore it is necessary to design hospitals, rehabilitation centers, nursing homes, surrounded by gardens. Ecosystems of natural and urban parks and gardens create fascinating skyline and mosaics of landscapes rich in beauty and biodiversity. The MusGarPPhyD is useful for the health management promoting patient’s psychophysical activation, better mood/affective-tone and relastionships and contributing significantly to improving the life quality.

Keywords: musictherapy, gardentherapy, disability, life quality

Procedia PDF Downloads 41

Authors: Isabelle Barrett

Abstract:

Natural watercourses provide a range of vital ecosystem services, notably freshwater provision. They also offer highly heterogeneous habitat which supports an extreme diversity of aquatic life. Exploitation of rivers, changing land use and flood prevention measures have led to habitat degradation and subsequent biodiversity loss; indeed, freshwater species currently face a disproportionate rate of extinction compared to their terrestrial and marine counterparts. Large woody debris (LWD) encompasses the trees, large branches and logs which fall into watercourses, and is responsible for important habitat characteristics. Historically, natural LWD has been removed from streams under the assumption that it is not aesthetically pleasing and is thus ecologically unfavourable, despite extensive evidence contradicting this. Restoration efforts aim to replace lost LWD in order to reinstate habitat heterogeneity. This paper aims to assess the current state of such restoration schemes for improving fluvial ecological health in the UK. A detailed review of the scientific literature was conducted alongside a meta-analysis of 25 UK-based projects involving LWD restoration. Projects were chosen for which sufficient information was attainable for analysis, covering a broad range of budgets and scales. The most effective strategies for river restoration encompass ecological success, stakeholder engagement and scientific advancement, however few projects surveyed showed sensitivity to all three; for example, only 32% of projects stated biological aims. Focus tended to be on stakeholder engagement and public approval, since this is often a key funding driver. Consequently, there is a tendency to focus on the aesthetic outcomes of a project, however physical habitat restoration does not necessarily lead to direct biodiversity increases. This highlights the significance of rivers as highly heterogeneous environments with multiple interlinked processes, and emphasises a need for a stronger scientific presence in project planning. Poor scientific rigour means monitoring is often lacking, with varying, if any, definitions of success which are rarely pre-determined. A tendency to overlook negative or neutral results was apparent, with unjustified focus often put on qualitative results. The temporal scale of monitoring is typically inadequate to facilitate scientific conclusions, with only 20% of projects surveyed reporting any pre-restoration monitoring. Furthermore, monitoring is often limited to a few variables, with biotic monitoring often fish-focussed. Due to their longer life cycles and dispersal capability, fish are usually poor indicators of environmental change, making it difficult to attribute any changes in ecological health to restoration efforts. Although the potential impact of LWD restoration may be positive, this method of restoration could simply be making short-term, small-scale improvements; without addressing the underlying symptoms of degradation, for example water quality, the issue cannot be fully resolved. Promotion of standardised monitoring for LWD projects could help establish a deeper understanding of the ecology surrounding the practice, supporting movement towards adaptive management in which scientific evidence feeds back to practitioners, enabling the design of more efficient projects with greater ecological success. By highlighting LWD, this study hopes to address the difficulties faced within river management, and emphasise the need for a more holistic international and inter-institutional approach to tackling problems associated with degradation.

Keywords: biological monitoring, ecological health, large woody debris, river management, river restoration

Procedia PDF Downloads 179