Honeybee loss can induce global threats for food production as it is estimated that one third of the entire world’s food supply comes from pollination. Pesticides are a key suspect for honeybee loss and there is something that we can all do to counteract their use. 

Colony collapse disorder (CCD) is a global phenomenon in which worker bees from  European and North American hineybee colonies abruptly disappear. Colony collapse disorder is significant economically because many agricultural crops worldwide are being pollinated honey bees (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colony_collapse_disorder).

The negative effects of the honeybee shortage were predicted years ago and there are several theorized causes of colony collapse disorder, from disease, to mites, to pesticides. However, in recent studies, e.g. U.C. Davis, where large sample of hives was examined, as much as 150 different chemical residues were found on the bees.

http://www.realfarmacy.com/effects-of-colony-collapse-disorder-now-manifesting-in-california/

Water means everything from health, nature, urbanization, industry, energy, food and equality. It is part of our daily life everywhere and at anytime. It is the heart of sustainability and essence of life. Today the 22nd of March, World Water Day, is an occasion for us to celebrate water as ancient Egyptians did (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flooding_of_the_Nile). To promote water and sanitation in Africa there is a dedicated Facebook page for communication and information, visit it at: (https://m.facebook.com/commonwealthafricabuja/posts/1610941099118189).

http://www.unwater.org/worldwaterday/

Egypt is in on its feet again after years of turmoil. On the top of Egypt’s long-term renaissance strategy is providing energy, housing, education and work for its growing population, in particular young people.

The MENA region as whole is investing heavily in renewable energy, unlike Iran with much investment in nuclear solutions. It is the particular geographical situation of the MENA region by being rich with solar resources and the long-term needs for desalination, water treatment and wastewater treatment, all of which are much power dependent. The region as whole still needs appropriate policies and sustainable long-term solutions for affordable and accessible water resources because of the arid and semi-arid nature of the region. Also, the negative impacts of climate change, in particular Egyptian Nile-delta, accelerating pressures not only of groundwater resources but also surface waters of the Jordan River, the Tigris-Euphrates River Basin, and the Nile River and their catchments with huge populations. Sound and sustainable large-scale and long-term policies for protection and conservation of the natural resources in the MENA region against waste and pollution are, also, important emerging necessities.

http://www.utilities-me.com/article-3326-mena-renewable-energy-zeal-spreads-to-egypt/#.VQv6kYp86nN

Throughout human history, in the evolution of many ancient civilizations and during the formation of many cultures, POVERTY has been of tremendous threats for stability, the breakdown of socio-economic structures and development of large-scale and long-term risk for wars. For several reasons these threats developed and piled up to global realities in many urban and rural regions around the world. The problem now is not only fighting POVERTY but to deal with its consequences everywhere and on all levels.

For many centuries, in particular in modern times, there have been continuous debates about how to bring about welfare socio-economic systems. Though economic models were/are primarily concerned with promotion of production and consumption, there have been no room for understanding POVERTY. It was left to expand and establish itself in a world struggling for affordable peace, security and safety under new realities of shrinking natural resources, environment and climate degradation. Above all, majority of the world growing population will still be facing less resources for food, education and health. The very question that is facing us is: how would POVERTY be solved if its roots are allowed to expand even deeper and deeper. POVERTY is not lack of food, it is rather lack of accessibility and affordability to all the modern features of civilization otherwise we are, without hesitation, heading to stone ages. Erasing POVERTY is about “serve and get served with focus on quality”.

http://video.nationalgeographic.com/video/ng-live/gwin-bleasdale-war-africa-nglive?utm_source=NatGeocom&utm_medium=Email&utm_content=inside_20150219&utm_campaign=Content

Morocco has been chosen as the first location for a project to build a vast network of solar and wind farms in North Africa and the Middle East. This is planned to provide 15% of Europe’s electricity supply by 2050.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/nov/02/morocco-solar-farm-renewables

It is not new that science and politics don’t mix, and there are increasing gaps in many societies between facts and values because of the different paths of historical evolution, limited exchanges in micro-cultures and also between major civilizations. Steven Pinker, professor of psychology at Harvard University, recently wrote an essay for the New Republic in defense of science. As is the case everywhere around the world, science is under attack for its arrogance, vulgarity and narrowness of vision. But is this true? If not why? What are the limits of science and politics? Who has the right to decide this? Above all what are the consequences if science and politics run in conflict? When, how and where this takes place? These are important, if not essential, questions but the answers are not simple or straightforward and the debate will go on for generations.

Why is this happening? Pinker asks. Because, he says, science is intruding on the humanities, disciplines lacking in vitality or any real purpose of their own, and the intrusion is resented. Far from deriding science as a campaign to diminish and oversimplify — to reduce beauty to brain chemistry, say, or ethics to natural selection — the humanities should welcome science as a source of new inspiration: “Surely our conceptions of politics, culture, and morality have much to learn from our best understanding of the physical universe and of our makeup as a species.”

Science is judged by quality and has its own limits. However, it is always expecting respect, as is the case for values. Quality has “scientific” instruments for assessment but the limits of science are described by the distinction between facts and values. Values have other “cultural” frames to be judged upon and assessed, even economic and environmental issues are finding their way into values. Here, comes a continuous dilemma and paradox, science is practiced and done by “minorities” though its content “facts” is still shaped by the needs of the society, at least in societies that recognize the importance of science. It is, also, true that politics seek help from science whenever is necessary. This isn’t to deny that science “facts” can shed light on “values”, make moral values intelligible in physical terms, it can explain how certain moral instincts might confer an evolutionary advantage, or why they might persist. It can show that the supposed empirical basis for some moral values is simply false. Values, on the other hand, are practiced by majorities in societies, if not by everyone, and they have their own “codes of conduct” which get support by political parties and have more legitimate status through elections and political systems. Values have, therefore, enormous momentum in many societies especially where science is week with has little support.

“Though the scientific facts do not by themselves dictate values,” Pinker goes on, “they certainly hem in the possibilities.” He’s right about this — but the second point, though interesting, is much less important than the first. Science can’t dictate values. That’s what matters. And because it can’t dictate values, it can’t dictate courses of action.

Science is always seeking respect especially when it acts beyond the limits set by politics. Climate science for example, as viewed by non-experts is a far-flung family of loosely related disciplines, which resulted in a set of costly and controversial policy proposals. This is not strange because of the extent and dimensions of the threats and as many climate scientists require urgent measures to cut greenhouse-gas emissions. Still there is criticism that The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which will release its fifth assessment report on global warming next year, is an advocacy organization rather than a neutral compiler of scientific evidence. But who would invent appropriate solutions without having the knowledge and how-how to decide how, why, where and when? What to do about climate change is indeed not only a political question and if so where were the politicians? What do they want? What are their arguments? Who would take the responsibility when things go wrong? “Business as usual” still is requiring science to be cautious and do not mix with politics.

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2013-08-20/why-science-and-politics-don-t-mix