Wyniki wyszukiwania - Biblioteka Nauki

1

Environmental protection in NATO policy

100%

Ślusarczyk J. M.

|

tom Vol. 55, No. 2(208)

91--103

EN

Environmental protection issues emerged in NATO’s political concepts in the last decades of the 20th century. Until the end of the 1980s, the Alliance was preoccupied with Cold War confrontation. In the 1990s, the geopolitical and geostrategic situation shifted. New countries joined the Alliance, and interest in environmental protection increased globally. The Pact member states began to realise the importance of environmental security. New concepts and trends emerged. Appreciating the importance of environmental protection, NATO quickly joined the mainstream of scientific research and practical projects. Their goal was, and is, to understand the causes of environmental degradation and its implications, especially in the context of safety, and to take appropriate remedial measures. NATO has been facing environmental security challenges for many years. This includes climate change, extreme weather conditions, sea level rise, risk of flooding, depletion of natural resources, land degradation, desertification and pollution. These are factors that can ultimately lead to humanitarian disasters, regional tension and violence. NATO’s latest 2030 Strategic Concept highlights the security impact of climate change resulting from a lack of proper environmental protection as the Alliance’s primary focus. At a time of progressive environmental threat, accompanied by rapid climate change, the activities of the Alliance in the field of ensuring environmental security cannot be overestimated.

PL

Kwestie ochrony środowiska pojawiły się w koncepcjach politycznych NATO w ostatnich dekadach ubiegłego wieku. Do końca lat 80. XX w. Sojusz zaabsorbowany był konfrontacją wynikającą ze scenariusza zimnej wojny. Lata dziewięćdziesiąte przyniosły zmienione sytuacje geopolityczną i geostrategiczną. Nowe państwa przystąpiły do Sojuszu, a w skali globalnej nastąpił znaczący wzrost zainteresowania problematyką ochrony środowiska. W krajach członkowskich Paktu zaczęto sobie uświadamiać znaczenie bezpieczeństwa środowiskowego. Pojawiły się nowe koncepcje i trendy. Doceniając znaczenie ochrony środowiska NATO szybko włączyło się w nurt badań naukowych i praktycznych przedsięwzięć. Ich celem było i jest poznanie przyczyn degradacji środowiska naturalnego, implikacji towarzyszących temu zjawisku, zwłaszcza w kontekście bezpieczeństwa oraz podejmowanie odpowiednich środków zaradczych. NATO od wielu lat zajmuje się wyzwaniami bezpieczeństwa związanymi ze środowiskiem. Obejmuje to zmiany klimatu, ekstremalne warunki pogodowe, podnoszenie się poziomu morza, ryzyko powodzi, wyczerpywanie się zasobów naturalnych, degradację gruntów, pustynnienie i zanieczyszczenia. Są to czynniki, które mogą ostatecznie prowadzić do katastrof humanitarnych, napięć regionalnych i przemocy. Najnowsza koncepcja strategiczna NATO 2030 podkreśla wpływ zmian klimatycznych na bezpieczeństwo, wynikających z braku należytej ochrony środowiska, jako główny punkt zainteresowania Sojuszu.

2

Warunki prowadzenia badań terenowych w Karpatach do roku 1914

100%

Ślusarczyk J. M.

|

2017

|

tom 62

|

nr 1

49–65

EN

In the second part of the 19th century, the Carpathians became a field of widely conducted research by the Polish scientists. On the basis of source materials we can reconstruct the conditions of those research. In the majority of cases the field works were carried on in difficult or even very difficult conditions. While getting to the foothill did not cause major problems, the state of transport and communication in mountainous terrain was very poor. Especially in the area of Eastern Carpathians there was practically no transport at all. Scientists had to cope with serious shortages in infrastructure – both in accommodation and available food; their diet was deficient and poor in nutrients. They were forced to spend the nights in spartan conditions, lack of guides evoked widespread criticism, the maps at their disposal were unsatisfactory, and the scientists were solely left to their own resources. Each time they decided to explore an area, they were aware of its difficult accessibility. The farther east they went, the worse accessibility of particular Carpathian range they encountered, and that situation extremely hampered their research. Thy had no specialist equipment to move in mountainous terrain and so were forced to settle for what they had – mostly things not suitable for field works. One has to remember that they had to use a lot of research equipment, which made it hard to move around. Their research work was also highly dependent on weather conditions and according to the sources, weather often hampered it or even prevented them from undertaking it at all. Despite all those adversities, the Polish scientists representing mainly the Kraków scientific institutions – the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences and its Physiography Committee, as well as the Jagiellonian University – conducted field research in all the ranges of Western and Eastern Carpathian Mountains for decades. Regardless of very difficult, often extreme, conditions of field work, the scientists carried out their responsibilities excellently, making their substantial contribution to the development of Polish and European science.

3

Badania faunistyczne wód polskiej części tatr w latach 1919-1939

63%

Kownacki A. , Ślusarczyk J. M.

|

tom 60

|

nr 3

67–77

EN

This work constitutes a continued presentation of the history of Polish research in the fauna of the Tatra waters and covers the inter-war period. During the years 1919-1939 these studies were still conducted but on a smaller scale than before the 1st World War. Many publications were based on earlier research done before 1914, which were broader works concerning the territory of the whole country, including also the Tatra waters, such as a monograph on the leeches of Poland by Michał Giedroyć, lacewing insects by Józef Dzięgielewicz, or uxtaposition of Heteroptera (true bugs) of “Galicia” by Adam Krasucki. Alfred Lityński summed up his many years’ research on the fauna of Cladocera (water fleas) conducted in 120 ponds, both on the Polish and Slovak sides of the Tatra Mountains. Unpublished materials of deceased scientists were used as well. Professor Kazimierz Simm, the disciple of professor Antoni Wierzejewski who died in 1916, published his monograph on Spongaria, in which he mentioned Spongaria from the Toporowy Pond and included notes about the winter fauna in the outflow of Morskie Oko. Museum collections were also used. Edward Schechtel worked out feed for trouts caught in Morskie Oko in 1900. New research on the fauna of the Tatra Mountains were conducted both as part of broader studies in the Polish fauna but also presented results of studies pursued only in the Tatras. Numerous researchers continued earlier studies of zooplankton crustacea in the waters of the Tatra Mountains during the inter-war period. Monographic study on Phyllopoda and Copepoda complexes of the Toporowy Pond was presented by Kazimierz Gajl. Several works of Zygmunt Koźmiński were devoted to population and taxonomic studies on plankton crustacean Cyclops strennus. Tadeusz Wolski found in the bog-spring on Kalatówki a new Tatra species of water flea (Cladocera) – Moina rectirostris. Meaningful from the scientific point of view and, at the same time, controversial, was the work of Gajl on Branchinecta paludosa. Using an enormous amount of materials coming from the Dwoisty Pond, as well as comparative material from Scandinavia, arctic European and Asian parts of Russia, Greenland, Alasca, and on the basis of differences in anatomical features, he came to a conclusion that the population of the Polish Tatras was a separate species Branchinecta polonica. This distinction was questioned later by scientists. It remained unsolved, however, because the population of this species in the Dwoisty Pond died out. At that time, for much broader scale studies were performed on flatworms (Dendrocoelum lacteum). They were started by Władysław Poliński with his monograph on the distribution of two species of Acoela – Crenobia alpina i Dugesia gonocephala – in Poland, and continued by W. Tomaszewski. Yet much greater achievements in learning about this group were made by Marian Gieysztor, who not only named several new species from the Tatras but on the basis of the materials coming from there also described species quite new to science: Macrostomum catarractae and Dalyellia tatrica. His research were on the global scale and later scientists named one species Gieysztor. From the world-science point of view, equally important were studies conducted by Witold Stefański on nematodes living freely in pond mosses and the lakes of the Tatra Mountains. In addition to the register of species, majority of which were found for the first time in the Tatra waters, he described three species new to science: Tripyla tatrica, Steratocephalus demani and Bunonema steineri. One of the greatest achievements of inter-war hydrobiology were studies concerning biology of the inshore sands, the so-called psammon, conducted by Jerzy Wiśniewski all over Poland, including the territory of the Tatra Mountains. In the Tatras Wiśniewski studied the fauna of rotifers occurring in the psammon on the shores of lakes and streams and the fauna of underwater sand. Briofile rotifers in Poland were studied by Leszek Kazimierz Pawłowski and in his research materials from the Tatra Mountains were also included. Similarly, Władysław Rydzewski in his review of Polish water mites from the Tatras named 9 species. On a smaller scale studies were conducted on the insects living in the Tatra waters. In his key to mayflies, based on the archive materials, Józef Stanisław Mikulski listed 7 species from the Tatra Mountains. A note on morphologic differences of mayflies from Baetis alpinus group was published by Anna Steinberg. Publishing his findings of many-years’ studies on lacewings in Poland from the area of the Tatra Mountains, Jan Zaćwilichowski named only one species Sialis flavilateratafrom Stawy Gąsiennicowe. In a thorough monograph by Tadeusz Jaczewski on water boatmen (Heteroptera) in Poland, there is only one mention of aquatic bug Glaenocorisa cavifrons occurring in the Toporowy Staw. In his subsequent work (Jaczewski), another species from Toporowy Staw was mentioned – Notonecta lutea. Of fundamental importance were only the studies on Tatra dragonflies conducted by Józef Fudakowski. He found 39 species of dragonflies in the area of the Tatra Mountains, occurring in lower water bodies: Toporowy Staw Niżny, Toporowy Staw Wyżny, Smreczyński Staw, at Capki bog-spring, on Siwa Polana, in Dolina Kondratowa, Dolina Pyszna, and the high-situated bog-spring near Morskie Oko. A popular-science review of studies on the Tatra lakes, which included also fauna research, were presented by Jerzy Młodziejowski i J. Rzóska.