Alien species can have major ecological and socioeconomic impacts in their novel ranges and so effective management actions are needed. However, management can be contentious and create conflicts, especially when stakeholders who benefit from alien species are different from those who incur costs. Such conflicts of interests mean that management strategies can often not be implemented. There is, therefore, increasing interest in engaging stakeholders affected by alien species or by their management. Through a facilitated workshop and consultation process including academics and managers working on a variety of organisms and in different areas (urban and rural) and ecosystems (terrestrial and aquatic), we developed a framework for engaging stakeholders in the management of alien species. The proposed framework for stakeholder engagement consists of 12 steps: (1) identify stakeholders; (2) select key stakeholders for engagement; (3) explore key stakeholders' perceptions and develop initial aims for management; (4) engage key stakeholders in the development of a draft management strategy; (5) re-explore key stakeholders' perceptions and revise the aims of the strategy; (6) co-design general aims, management objectives and time frames with key stakeholders; (7) co-design a management strategy; (8) facilitate stakeholders' ownership of the strategy and adapt as required; and (9) implement the strategy and monitor management actions to evaluate the need for additional or future actions. In case additional management is needed after these actions take place, some extra steps should be taken: (10) identify any new stakeholders, benefits, and costs; (11) monitor engagement; and (12) revise management strategy. Overall, we believe that our framework provides an effective approach to minimize the impact of conflicts created by alien species management.

Food waste is a multi-faceted and complex problem for urban circular economies with far-reaching environmental impacts. Effectively addressing this problem requires a comprehensive understanding of the food waste impacts on food, energy, water, and climate (FEWC) systems. Despite complex dynamics in the FEWC nexus, the most popular guidance for food waste management is the food waste hierarchy framework - which fails to account for ensuing impacts on all nexus elements. Aiming to optimise the framework, we adopt a participatory approach to develop the first comprehensive and replicable system dynamics model of the FEWC footprints of urban food waste throughout the agri-food supply chain. The quantitative model compares different food waste management options, and relevant policies in Bristol, UK (2018-2030). Unlike the guidance of the traditional waste hierarchy framework, our findings show that the preferability of each option can vary for each sector within the supply chain and for each FEWC element. Our results show that increasing food surplus redistribution in the supply sectors and reducing food waste in consumer sectors are the most preferable approaches to reduce the environmental impacts of food. Feeding food leftover to pets at household level also has a promising impact. Other options involve trade-offs between energy and carbon footprints, while having minimal impact on water footprint. We conclude that the traditional food waste hierarchy is too simplified to provide reliable guidance for environmentally sustainable food waste management and policy. Instead, we present an improved food waste hierarchy framework that accounts for the scale of preferability of each option for different sectors and different FEWC nexus elements. This novel framework thus provides more nuanced and more robust understanding of food waste impacts on the FEWC nexus in urban circular economies, thereby enabling the development of policy and management options that are optimised for environmental sustainability.

In South Africa, HIV/AIDS remains a major public health problem. In a context of chronic unemployment and deepening poverty, social assistance through a Disability Grant (DG) is extended to adults with HIV/AIDS who are unable to work because of a mental or physical disability. Using a mixed methods approach, we consider 1) inequalities in access to the DG for patients on ART and 2) implications of DG access for on-going access to healthcare. Data were collected in exit interviews with 1200 ART patients in two rural and two urban health sub-districts in four different South African provinces. Additionally, 17 and 18 in-depth interviews were completed with patients on ART treatment and ART providers, respectively, in three of the four sites included in the quantitative phase. Grant recipients were comparatively worse off than non-recipients in terms of employment (9.1 % vs. 29.9 %) and wealth (58.3 % in the poorest half vs. 45.8 %). After controlling for socioeconomic and demographic factors, site, treatment duration, adherence and concomitant TB treatment, the regression analyses showed that the employed were significantly less likely to receive the DG than the unemployed (p < 0.001). Also, patients who were longer on treatment and receiving concomitant treatment (i.e., ART and tuberculosis care) were more likely to receive the DG (significant at the 5 % level). The qualitative analyses indicated that the DG alleviated the burden of healthcare related costs for ART patients. Both patients and healthcare providers spoke of the complexity of the grants process and eligibility criteria as a barrier to accessing the grant. This impacted adversely on patient-provider relationships. These findings highlight the appropriateness of the DG for people living with HIV/AIDS. However, improved collaboration between the Departments of Social Development and Health is essential for preparing healthcare providers who are at the interface between social security and potential recipients.