Introduction: Aortic stiffness plays a critical role in the evolution of cardiovascular diseases, but the assessment requires specialized equipment. Photoplethysmography (PPG) and single-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) are readily available in healthcare and wearable devices. We studied whether a brief PPG registration, alone or in combination with single-lead ECG, could be used to reliably estimate aortic stiffness. Methods: A proof-of-concept study with simultaneous high-resolution index finger recordings of infrared PPG, single-lead ECG, and finger blood pressure (Finapres) was performed in 33 participants [median age 44 (range 21–66) years, 19 men] and repeated within 2 weeks. Carotid–femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV; two-site tonometry with SphygmoCor) was used as a reference. A brachial single-cuff oscillometric device assessed aortic pulse wave velocity (aoPWV; Arteriograph) for further comparisons. We extracted 136 established PPG waveform features and engineered 13 new with improved coupling to the finger blood pressure curve. Height-normalized pulse arrival time (NPAT) was derived using ECG. Machine learning methods were used to develop prediction models. Results: The best PPG-based models predicted cfPWV and aoPWV well (root-mean-square errors of 0.70 and 0.52 m/s, respectively), with minor improvements by adding NPAT. Repeatability and agreement were on par with the reference equipment. A new PPG feature, an amplitude ratio from the early phase of the waveform, was most important in modelling, showing strong correlations with cfPWV and aoPWV (r = −0.81 and −0.75, respectively, both P < 0.001). Conclusion: Using new features and machine learning methods, a brief finger PPG registration can estimate aortic stiffness without requiring additional information on age, anthropometry, or blood pressure. Repeatability and agreement were comparable to those obtained using non-invasive reference equipment. Provided further validation, this readily available simple method could improve cardiovascular risk evaluation, treatment, and prognosis.

Engineering applications involving multi-fan arrangements in close proximity face challenges including sound wave interference and inlet flow interactions. The former leading to beating effects and the latter to non-ideal inlet conditions, potentially affecting the aerodynamic and acoustic performance of the system. The herein study investigates the above within the application space of automotive cooling fans. Two identical low-pressure axial flow cooling fans, with rotating rings, were installed in parallel. Different inlet shroud lengths and spacing between the two fans' rotating centers were tested. Acoustic measurements were performed in a bespoke fan test rig, leading to sound power estimation along with acoustic beating investigation. Complementary velocity measurements upstream of the fan were performed using laser Doppler anemometry. This led to the identification of possible inlet flow interactions and upstream disturbances which match the acoustic spectra. Moreover, a single fan arrangement was documented as means of reference for the parallel fan system.

Studies from the United States (U.S.) show that opposition to climate policy is strong among some Christian groups, especially White evangelical Protestants. Much of this opposition is channelled through organisations such as the Cornwall Alliance, which argue against climate measures on religious, economic and what they claim to be science-based grounds. In the present study, we investigated to what extent these convictions were present among Swedish evangelical denominations. Representatives from the Evangelical Free Church, the Pentecostal Alliance, the Swedish Alliance Mission, and the Seventh-day Adventist Church were interviewed to identify the denominations' views on the scientific underpinnings of climate change and the moral implications of climate policy. Our data show that the denominations' views differ markedly from those expressed by climate-oppositional evangelical groups in the U.S. The denominations held homogenous views on the legitimacy of climate science, expressed a clear biblical mandate for climate policy based on the notion of human stewardship, and believed that climate change was inextricably linked to poverty and, thus, had to be addressed. Our results point to the need for further studies on the factors behind acceptance and denial of climate science within and between faith-based and other communities in different countries.

Biodiversity offsetting is an increasingly applied tool aiming to compensate for environmental damage caused by exploitation projects. Critics, however, raise concerns over the purported effectiveness of offsetting and question the ethical underpinnings and implications of offsetting. These ethical dimensions have largely been overlooked in research, which may lead to offsetting systems that fail to respect the values intended to be safeguarded. To address these dimensions, 5 ethical objections in the scientific literature were identified: offsetting violates nature's intrinsic value; losses of nature cannot be compensated for by human interventions; too little is known to make adequate trades; offsetting impedes virtuous dispositions toward nature; and offsetting has negative justice implications. We examined these objections and arguments against them based on the ethical concepts of intrinsic and instrumental values, anthropocentrism, nonanthropocentrism, and deontological, consequentialist, and virtue-ethical paradigms. Both nonanthropocentric and anthropocentric concerns were expressed in deontological, consequential, and virtue-ethical framings. Objections mostly had a deontological or virtue-ethical basis, whereas counterarguments were based on consequential reasoning, but common ground in practice is often conceivable. Based on our findings, we formulated 10 recommendations for policy makers and 5 questions for practitioners to consider. We propose, for example, that policy makers clarify aims, legislate on no-go areas, and govern the use of multipliers. We suggest that practitioners consider, for instance, how to improve case-specific knowledge and promote learning and stakeholder engagement. We hope these recommendations and questions will encourage further discussion of the ethics of biodiversity offsets and ultimately strengthen the respect for biodiversity and human-welfare values at stake in offsetting projects.

Concern over mitigation costs impedes the adoption of the climate policies needed to achieve agreed global warming targets. While costs are important to consider, so are benefits. However, the evidence for climate policy co-benefits, that is, the benefits in addition to avoided climate change costs, is commonly overlooked in policy-making. In many areas, the research is limited and not comprehensively synthesised. This article counters that problem and reviews 239 peer-reviewed articles, selected from 1,749 hits from a literature search covering 'co-benefits' and related terms. Aiming to aid policy-makers and to identify research gaps, we structure, describe, analyse and synthesize the rapidly expanding knowledge on climate policy co-benefits. Improved air quality is the co-benefit category dominating the literature, but studies covering a broad geographic range also focus on diet, physical activity, soil and water quality, biodiversity, economic performance, and energy security. In these areas, co-benefits are shown to be of substantial economic value, regarding air quality often of the same order of magnitude as mitigation costs, in some instances even larger. However, the share of studies quantifying or monetizing co-benefits is limited, and the empirical evidence is small, in particular for areas besides air quality and health. Furthermore, the knowledge is seldom used in policy-making, meaning that decision-making is often biased and overly concerned with costs, leading to suboptimal climate policies and goal failures. Evidently, more research is needed, as well as improved decision-making. Understanding and acting on climate policy co-benefits can promote policies that better mitigate climate change and improve overall welfare. Key policy insights Climate policy co-benefits in well-researched fields such as air quality and health are large, often equalling or exceeding mitigation costs. Despite their significance, co-benefits are seldom considered in decision-making, leading to biased policies and goal failures. In several areas, such as diet and energy security, co-benefits are sparsely researched, but emerging evidence points to high values. More research is needed, including on how to describe the total value of different co-benefits. Improved processes, documentation requirements and criteria in decision-making are needed, in order to ensure that political decision-makers consider co-benefits.

Much research shows that science denial regarding climate change is widespread and problematic for science and scientists, as well as for policy-makers. Climate denial delays goal achievement. As shown in this article, science denial commonly occurs also in the field of chemicals assessment and policy, but the research on the topic is scarce. The peer-reviewed studies that exist mostly concern a limited number of specific cases, such as DDT, CFCs and endocrine disrupting chemicals. The characteristics of 'chemicals denial' show similarity with those of climate denial, including reliance on fake experts, cherry-picked facts and attacks on scientists, with a key aspect being the questioning of causal relationships. Considering the gaps between chemicals policy goals and the state of the environment, further scientific exploration in the field is needed. Developing a better coordinated research agenda and a common terminology are therefore warranted strategies. A key concept in such endeavors could be 'chemicals denial'.

The expectations on marine spatial planning to improve environmental governance of the Baltic Sea are high, not least for helping to close the huge gaps between environmental objectives and the state of the marine environment. This article focuses on the on-going implementation of marine spatial planning in Sweden, well-known to be a forerunner in environmental policy. Aiming to identify governance recommendations, the study analyses how the first consultation document for the Baltic Sea may complement existing governance systems and promote gap closure. A particular focus is placed on the potential impact of the plan on the implementation of an ecosystem approach to management (EAM) and how these issues are regarded by involved stakeholders. It is shown that the planning process promotes participation, but that the studied plan as such most likely does not significantly help to close any larger environmental goal-state gaps. A number of recommendations on how to develop the plan are discussed, but significant improvements require broader governance reforms, in particular concerning coordination and integration in relation to legislation on other marine and water strategies, as well as policies and laws for fisheries, agriculture and industrial chemicals. Major policy development is thus needed in order to allow marine spatial planning in Sweden, and most likely in several other geographical areas as well, to significantly help closing goal-state gaps in the future.

Gaps between public policy goals and the state of the environment are often significant. However, while goal failures in environmental governance are studied in a number of disciplines, the knowledge on the various causes behind delayed goal achievement is still incomplete. In this article we propose a new framework for analysis of delay mechanisms in science and policy, with the intention to provide a complementary lens for describing, analysing and counteracting delay in environmental governance. The framework is based on case-study findings from recent research focusing on goal-failures in policies for climate change, hazardous chemicals, biodiversity loss and eutrophication. It is also related to previous research on science and policy processes and their interactions. We exemplify the framework with two delay mechanisms that we consider particularly important to highlight—denial of science and decision thresholds. We call for further research in the field, for development of the framework, and not least for increased attention to delay mechanisms in environmental policy review and development on national as well as international levels.

While modern society is highly dependent on chemicals, numerous substances also turn out to be hazardous and many give rise to severe risks and problems in the marine environment. In response, national, regional and global chemical policies, often focusing on the land-based sources to marine pollution, have been developed, as outlined in the article. As a result, the levels of some pollutants have decreased, but the vast majority of substances are not controlled in line with the internationally stated objectives of sound management of chemicals. An environment-oriented development of present policies, implementing the precautionary principle, is considered needed in order to improve the situation, and the question is raised in the article whether the present main international chemicals agreements would not also gain from being merged into a global framework convention.

Denial of scientific findings is neither a new nor an unexplored phenomenon. In the area of environmental science and policy though, the research on denial has not been systematically summarized and analyzed. This article reviews 161 scientific articles on environmental and climate science denial published in peer reviewed international journals in the last 25 years and aims to both identify research gaps and enable learning on the phenomenon. Such knowledge is needed for the increasingly important task to provide effective response to science denial, in order to put an end to its influence on environmental policy making. The review, which is based on articles found in the databases Web of Science, Scopus and Philosopher's Index, shows that denial by far is most studied in relation to climate change, with a focus on Anglo-American countries, where this form of denial is most common. Other environmental issues and other geographical areas have received much less scientific attention. While the actors behind climate science denial, their various motives and the characteristics of their operations have been thoroughly described, more comparative research between issues and countries is needed in order to draw reliable conclusions about the factors explaining the peculiarities of denial. This may in turn lay the ground for developing and actually testing the effectiveness and efficiency of strategies to counter environmental science denial. Irrespective of the ambitions of environmental goals, science-based policies are always preferable. The scientific community therefore needs to increase its efforts to dismantle false claims and to disclose the schemes of denialists.