Agricultural soils provide multiple ecosystem services (ES) that can replace chemical inputs to support agricultural production. However, most arable cropping systems are managed with little concern for preserving ecological functions, which could reduce their ability to provide these ES. An increasing number of studies assess ES from agroecosystems, but analysis of multiple ES distinguishing relationships that may exist between them and between these ES and their drivers is lacking. Thus, we performed a systematic literature review of soil-based ES relationships, with a focus on temperate annual field crops. Forty relevant studies out of 870 were selected for the analysis. We created an original ontology of soil-based ES, based on the indicators used to assess them, to which we added soil-based negative impacts and biomass production (defined as a good) to combine the ES approach and the impact approach. We summarized each positive (synergy), negative (trade-off) or non-significant relationship in these studies, which were either quantitative or qualitative. We highlighted key relationships that have never been investigated in the corpus selected, such as relationships between C sequestration and physical soil quality regulation, soil erosion regulation or soil biodiversity. Relationships between biomass production and soil-based ES or impacts were investigated the most and were mainly non-significant. This suggests there are agroecological practices for which maximizing bundles of ES does not always decrease agricultural production. Relationships between soil biodiversity and soil-based ES were exclusively synergistic or non-significant. Summarizing effects of drivers of these relationships revealed that the three pillars of conservation agriculture - rotation diversification (with ley or legumes), soil coverage with cover crops and reduced tillage - and organic fertilization seem promising practices to help provide balanced bundles of ES and potentially reduce negative agronomic impacts. We highlighted potential trade-offs that should be consciously considered when adapting management strategies.

Achieving global sustainability is a coupled human-environment system issue that requires resource planning and management that goes beyond siloed thinking. As such, there has been a growing interest in nexus thinking as a way to address global sustainability challenges in an integrated manner. In general, the nexus approach serves as a tool for systems integration, a platform for stakeholder engagement, and a method for exploring development pathways. This review traces the historical origin and progress of the nexus approach and examines the changes in the complexity and diversity of nexuses over time. Since its emergence in the early 1980s, the nexus approach has undergone several phases of development, resulting in more complex and diverse nexuses, whose components can be resource sectors/systems and/or specific social-ecological issues. This progress is favorable for the sustainable development agenda because the more components involved in a nexus, the greater the reality that can be potentially captured. Currently, however, there is still no consensus with regards to the key nexus components that could potentially cover all of the sustainable development goals. The development of frameworks for implementing the nexus approach and the identification of relevant indicators and target values to be used for assessing trade-offs and synergies are among the current issues with regards to the use of the nexus approach in the sustainability context.

For physicians, it is important to know which treatment outcomes are prioritized overall by older patients with cancer, since this will help them to tailor the amount of information and treatment recommendations. Older patients might prioritize other outcomes than younger patients. Our objective is to summarize which outcomes matter most to older patients with cancer. A systematic review was conducted, in which we searched Embase and Medline on 22 December 2020. Studies were eligible if they reported some form of prioritization of outcome categories relative to each other in patients with all types of cancer and if they included at least three outcome categories. Subsequently, for each study, the highest or second-highest outcome category was identified and presented in relation to the number of studies that included that outcome category. An adapted Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the risk of bias. In total, 4374 patients were asked for their priorities in 28 studies that were included. Only six of these studies had a population with a median age above 70. Of all the studies, 79% identified quality of life as the highest or second-highest priority, followed by overall survival (67%), progression- and disease-free survival (56%), absence of severe or persistent treatment side effects (54%), and treatment response (50%). Absence of transient short-term side effects was prioritized in 16%. The studies were heterogeneous considering age, cancer type, and treatment settings. Overall, quality of life, overall survival, progression- and disease-free survival, and severe and persistent side effects of treatment are the outcomes that receive the highest priority on a group level when patients with cancer need to make trade-offs in oncologic treatment decisions.

Patients with cancer face difficult decisions regarding treatment and the possibility of trading quality of life (QoL) for length of life (LoL). Little information is available regarding patients\' preferences and attitudes toward their cancer treatment and the personal costs they are prepared to exchange to extend their life. The aim of this review is to determine the complex trade-offs and underpinning factors that make patients with cancer choose quality over quantity of life.
A systematic review of the literature was conducted using MeSH terms: cancer, longevity or LoL, QoL, decision making, trade-off, and health utility. Articles retrieved were published between 1942 and October 2018.
Out of 4393 articles, 30 were included in this review. Older age, which may be linked to declining physical status, was associated with a preference for QoL over LoL. Younger patients were more likely to undergo aggressive treatment to increase survival years. Preference for QoL and LoL was not influenced by gender, education, religion, having children, marital status, or type of cancer. Patients with better health valued LoL and inversely those with poorer physical status preferred QoL.
Baseline QoL and future expectations of life seem to be key determinants of preference for QoL versus LoL in cancer patients. In-depth studies are required to understand these trade-offs and the compromises patients are willing to make regarding QoL or LoL, especially in older patients with naturally limited life expectancy.

Livestock farming is criticized for negatively impacting the environment, concerns about animal welfare and the impact of excessive meat consumption on human health. However, livestock farming provides other underappreciated and poorly communicated benefits to society in terms of employment, product quality, cultural landscapes and carbon storage by grasslands. Few attempts have been made so far to simultaneously consider the services and impacts provided by livestock production. Here, we propose an integrated graphical tool, called the \'barn\' to explicitly summarize the synergies and trade-offs between services and impacts provided by livestock farming. It illustrates livestock farming interacting with its physical, economic and social environment along five interfaces: (i) Markets, (ii) Work and employment, (iii) Inputs, (iv) Environment and climate, (v) Social and cultural factors. This graphical tool was then applied by comparing two contrasting livestock production areas (high livestock density v. grassland-based), and the dominant v. a niche system within a crop-livestock area. We showed the barn could be used for cross-comparisons of services and impacts across livestock production areas, and for multi-level analysis of services and impacts of livestock farming within a given area. The barn graphically summarizes the ecological and socio-economic aspects of livestock farming by explicitly representing multiple services and impacts of different systems in a simple yet informative way. Information for the five interfaces relies on available quantitative assessments from the literature or data sets, and on expert-knowledge for more qualitative factors, such as social and cultural ones. The \'barn\' can also inform local stakeholders or policy-makers about potential opportunities and threats to the future of livestock farming in specific production areas. It has already been used as a pedagogical tool for teaching the diversity of services and impacts of livestock systems across Europe and is currently developed as a serious game for encouraging knowledge exchange and sharing different viewpoints between stakeholders.

The role of herbivorous livestock in supporting the sustainability of the farming systems in which they are found is complex and sometimes conflicting. In Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), the integration of livestock into farming systems is important for sustainable agriculture as the recycling of nutrients for crop production through returns of animal manure is a central element of the dominant mixed crop-livestock systems. Sustainable agriculture has been widely advocated as the main practical pathway to address the challenge of meeting the food needs of the rapidly growing population in SSA while safeguarding the needs of future generations. The objective of this paper is to review the state of knowledge of the role of herbivores in sustainable intensification of key farming systems in SSA. The pathways to sustainable agriculture in SSA include intensification of production and livelihood diversification. Sustainable agricultural practices in SSA have focused on intensification practices which aim to increase the output : input ratio through increasing use of inputs, introduction of new inputs or use of existing inputs in a new way. Intensification of livestock production can occur through increased and improved fodder availability, genetic production gains, improved crop residue use and better nutrient recycling of manure. Livestock deliver many \'goods\' in smallholder farming systems in SSA including improving food and nutrition security, increased recycling of organic matter and nutrients and the associated soil fertility amendments, adding value to crop residues by turning them into nutrient-rich foods, income generation and animal traction. Narratives on livestock \'bads\' or negative environmental consequences have been largely shaped by the production conditions in the Global North but livestock production in SSA is a different story. In SSA, livestock are an integral component of mixed farming systems and they play key roles in supporting the livelihoods of much of the rural population. None-the-less, the environmental consequences of livestock production on the continent cannot be ignored. To enhance agricultural sustainability in SSA, the challenge is to optimize livestock\'s role in the farming systems by maximizing livestock \'goods\' while minimizing the \'bads\'. This can be through better integration of livestock into the farming systems, efficient nutrient management systems, and provision of necessary policy and institutional support.

The loss of genetic diversity, due to exposure to chemical contamination (genetic erosion), is a major threat to population viability. Genetic erosion is the loss of genetic variation: the loss of alleles determining the value of a specific trait or set of traits. Almost a third of the known amphibian species is considered to be endangered and a decrease of genetic variability can push them to the verge of extinction. This review indicates that loss of genetic variation due to chemical contamination has effects on: 1) fitness, 2) environmental plasticity, 3) co-tolerance mechanisms, 4) trade-off mechanisms, and 5) tolerance to pathogens in amphibian populations.