The influence of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) produces pronounced regional variability in drought over the Caribbean, Central America and equatorial South America area. Through spatial statistical analyses, we identified a marked dichotomy between drought values of the Standardized Precipitation Evapotranspiration Index (SPEI) in northern Mexico and equatorial South America as a function of the AMO. The relationship is such that significant negative correlations between the drought index and phase of the AMO are identified for northern Mexico and on the Atlantic side of Central America. This indicates that drought (negative values of the SPEI) episodes are linked to the positive phase of the AMO. Alternately, there are high positive correlations between the AMO and on the Pacific side of Central America, the Caribbean and mainly in the northern South American area closest to the equator. Although many potential causes have been proposed in explanation of precipitation variability over the region, this geographic dichotomy suggests that movement of the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ) may play a significance role. The heightened vulnerability of the developing nations in this region to drought episodes makes forecasting droughts of great importance. These nations are greatly dependent on water intensive industries to maintain economic development. Thus, the findings of this research can assist in informing drought preparedness strategies to mitigate significant losses due to drought.

The majority of trust research has focused on the benefits trust can have for individual actors, institutions, and organizations. This “optimistic bias” is particularly evident in work focused on institutional trust, where concepts such as procedural justice, shared values, and moral responsibility have gained prominence. But trust in institutions may not be exclusively good. We reveal implications for the “dark side” of institutional trust by reviewing relevant theories and empirical research that can contribute to a more holistic understanding. We frame our discussion by suggesting there may be a “Goldilocks principle” of institutional trust, where trust that is too low (typically the focus) or too high (not usually considered by trust researchers) may be problematic. The chapter focuses on the issue of too-high trust and processes through which such too-high trust might emerge. Specifically, excessive trust might result from external, internal, and intersecting external-internal processes. External processes refer to the actions institutions take that affect public trust, while internal processes refer to intrapersonal factors affecting a trustor’s level of trust. We describe how the beneficial psychological and behavioral outcomes of trust can be mitigated or circumvented through these processes and highlight the implications of a “darkest” side of trust when they intersect. We draw upon research on organizations and legal, governmental, and political systems to demonstrate the dark side of trust in different contexts. The conclusion outlines directions for future research and encourages researchers to consider the ethical nuances of studying how to increase institutional trust.

Since the 1980’s, there has been a growing interest in the concept of sustainability. The prime directive of sustainability is to balance the needs of economics, environmental health, and human society. The change in the global climate, loss of biodiversity, increased levels of pollution, and general trend toward resource scarcity have all increased the momentum of the contemporary sustainability movement. Simultaneously, poverty and nutrition scarcity have attracted many to sustainability’s principles of resource equity. What one can gather from the diversity of sustainability’s intended functions is that it’s meant to solve several problems at once. In another sense, the most impactful sustainability solutions are multipurpose. This is not to say that any given solution is a panacea. On the contrary, sustainability advocates often dispute the existence of so-called “silver bullets” for these global issues. While this tends to reign true, it does not stop policy makers, communities, or researchers from attempting to employ multifaceted solutions. One such example is the myriad of sustainability issues associated with industrial agriculture. With the compounding issues of high water consumption, habitat destruction via land use change, biodiversity loss and climate change, industrial agriculture appears to be a damaging system. Areas like Arizona are projected to be affected by many of these issues. It thus stands to reason that if Arizona is to aggressively address its long-term drought, as well as global sustainability issues, a systematic change in farming practices needs to be made. Firstly, an analysis of the agricultural and water histories of Arizona will highlight the events most relevant to the region’s contemporary issues. Following this, the analysis will frame the greater problem through specific pieces of evidence associated with water scarcity in Arizona. Then, a summary of findings will illustrate the fundamental theories surrounding regenerative agriculture and three of its alternative forms: permaculture, dryland farming, and carbon farming. These theories will be instrumental in recommending a useful conception of regenerative agriculture for Arizona; it will be known as a Regenerative Dryland Farming System (RDFS). The extent and utility of current solutions will then be explored. The remainder of the section will illustrate the principles of the RDFSs, explore their potential weaknesses, and recommend policy for their successful deployment. Overall, it will be argued that RDFSs should fully replace industrial agriculture in Arizona. This will be vital in addressing the nine planetary boundaries and freshwater reality of the region.