The sources and distribution of anthropogenic nitrogen (N), including N fertilization and N fixed during fossil-fuel combustion, are rapidly becoming globally distributed. Responses of terrestrial ecosystems to anthropogenic N inputs are likely to vary geographically. In the temperate zone, long-term N inputs can lead to increases in plant growth and also can result in over-enrichment with N, eventually leading to increased losses of N via solution leaching and trace-gas emissions, and in some cases, to changes in species composition and to ecosystem decline. However, not all ecosystems respond to N deposition similarly; their response depends on factors such as successional state, ecosystem type, N demand or retention capacity, land-use history, soils, topography, climate, and the rate, timing, and type of N deposition. We point to some of the conditions under which anthropogenic impacts can be significant, some of the factors that control variations in response, and some areas where uncertainty is large due to limited information.

Despite the impact of El Nino-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) events on climate in the Indo-Pacific region, models linking ENSO-based climate variability to Indonesian cereal production are not well developed. This study measures connections among sea-surface temperature anomalies (SSTAs), rainfall, and Indonesian rice and corn production from 1971 to 1998. Year-to-year August SSTA fluctuations explain about half the interannual variance in paddy production during the main (wet) season. These effects are cumulative for rice: during strong El Nino years, wet season production shortfalls are not made up subsequently. For corn, the cumulative area sown is actually higher in El Nino years than La Nina years. Indonesia's paddy production varies on average by 1.4 million tons for every 1 C change in August SSTAs. The paper illustrates how an SSTA model might assist policy makers with budgetary processes, and private sector cereal traders with framing production expectations.

During three decades spent studying the highly charged issue of climate change, I've not been bashful about offering my scientific conclusions - or even my opinions about appropriate public policy. Acting both as a research scientist and as a policy advocate poses some special challenges, and prominent among them is the matter of dealing with the press.

To my mind, the popular media haven't done the best job of covering the science behind this contentious topic. The roots of their difficulties are easy to understand. The first problem is their need for brevity: They have little time on the air, or space on the page, to delve into details. In addition, in covering controversy, especially when there are polarized political positions, journalists generally strive to report "both sides." Got the Democrat? Better get the Republican, too. Doing so ostensibly provides journalistic balance. But achieving the same evenhandedness in describing complex questions typical of science can be considerably more difficult, because there are rarely two mainstream views on any given subject. There may be a complete spectrum of reasoned opinion - or there may be considerable consensus among knowledgeable experts, with the only dissenting voices coming from a few extremists or special interests.

Still, many reporters have been trained to "get both sides." So by agreeing to an interview, a scientist risks getting his or her views stuffed into one of two boxed storylines. In the case of my specialty, climate change, it's either "you're worried" or "it will all be okay." In talking to reporters, I routinely discuss a wide range of possibilities.

The ethical case for the social insurance model will be strengthened as people realize that most health problems have at least in part a genetic basis. The efficiency case will benefit from recognition that employment-based insurance has high administrative costs but provides no advantages to society as a whole. The desire to exert more direct control over rising expenditures will provide an additional reason to introduce some form of national health insurance.

The timing of such a change, however, will depend largely on factors external to health care. Major changes in health policy are political acts undertaken for political purposes. This was true when Bismarck introduced national health insurance to the new German state in the 19th century. It was true when England adopted national health insurance after World War II; and it will be true in the United States as well. National health insurance will probably come to the United States after a major change in the political climate, the kind of change that often accompanies a war, a depression, or large scale civil unrest. Until then, the major effect of the new plans will be to make young and healthy workers better off at the expense of their older, sicker colleagues.

Despite the strong signal of El Nino/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) events on climate in the Indo-Pacific region, models linking ENSO-based climate variability to seasonal rice production and food security in the region have not been well developed or widely used in a policy context. This study successfully measures the connections among sea surface temperature anamolies (SSTAs), rainfall, and rice production in Indonesia during the past three decades. Regression results show particularly strong connections on Java, where 55% of the country's rice is grown. Two-thirds of the interannual variance in rice plantings and 40% of the interannual variance in rice production during the main (wet) season on Java are explained by year-to-year fluctuations in SSTAs measured 4 and 8 months in advance, respectively. These effects are cumulative; during strong El Nino years, production shortfalls in the wet season are not made up later in the crop year. The analysis demonstrates that quantitative predictions of ENSO's effects on rice harvests can provide an additional tool for managing food security in one of the world's most populous and important rice-producing countries.

The Evolving Sphere of Food Security seeks to answer two important questions: How do the priorities and challenges of achieving food security change over time as countries develop economically? And how do the policies used to promote food security in one country affect nutrition, food access, natural resources, and national security in other countries? The volume presents the many faces and facets of food security—their symptoms, their roots, and their possible remedies—through the lens of a multidisciplinary group of scholars. The authors share personal stories of research and policy advising from their field experiences to provide readers with a real-world sense of the opportunities and challenges involved in promoting food security at local to global scales. Their observations from countries around the world demonstrate how food security is tied to security of many other kinds: energy, water, health, climate, the environment, and national security. The book’s main goal is to connect these areas in a way that tells an integrated story about human lives, resource use, and the policy process—a story about global food security.

Prior to the 2000 election The Aspen Institute convened a distinguished group of science, business, and environment leaders as a hypothetical committee to advise the new President on global environmental policy. Experts prepared this set of policy memos to tell the President, concisely and in understandable language, "what he should know" and "what he should do" about climate change, biodiversity, population, oceans, water, food and agriculture, and other problems. A thematic summary of the groups conclusions, written by Co-chairs Donald Kennedy of Stanford University and Roger Sant of the AES Corporation, communicates the urgency of the challenges, the complexity of the interrelated issues, and the optimism necessary to tackle them.