Zoekresultaten

Validity and compatibility of the SAM and KLD screening instruments

In this paper validity and compatibility of the SAM and KLD screening instruments are the central themes. A screening instrument can be called valid if it identifies performance that is important to society. A screening instrument is called compatible if these instruments can be used interchangeably. Validity The outcome of the content-analysis approach suggest that there is clearly not a perfect match between the SAM and KLD instruments and the CSAF, indicating that the SAM and KLD screening instruments taken the CSAF as the standard, cannot be called valid measures of corporate sustainability performance. However, as discussed earlier, assessing validity is not a binary phenomenon. A simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ will not do. To make things more complicated, the validity of a measure also depends on the aggregation level under observation. It makes a big difference if validity is assessed at a high (i.e. Dimension) or low aggregation (i.e. Sustainability Item) level . At the highest level there is a perfect match with the CSAF, indicating that both screening instruments are valid measures of corporate sustainability performance. At the lowest level the situation is quite different. Here we see that overlap is relatively poor. Besides, the weight distributions of the SAM and KLD instruments and the CSAF are also largely dissimilar. When we break the validity discussion down to the Dimension level, we can see that overlap between the SAM and KLD instruments is also relatively poor, although the SAM instrument is slightly more attuned to the CSAF than the KLD instrument. This most notably applies to the Governance Dimension. The SAM instrument scores relatively poor on environmental issues. This is due to the fact that we analyzed the generic (i.e. non-industry specific) screening instrument. SAM typically addresses environmental issues in industry specific supplements. CompatibilityThe second question in this study concerns the compatibility of the SAM and KLD screening instruments. Or more accurately phrased: the extent to which these rating schemes are compatible. If we would consider compatibility assessment of screening instruments as a binary phenomenon, then we should conclude that the SAM and KLD instruments are not compatible.However, just like validity, assessing the compatibility of screening instruments is not a binary phenomenon. The extent to which the rating schemes of the two SRAs are compatible relates to the aggregation level. At the highest aggregation ( or Dimension) level the screening instruments are perfectly compatible. Both instruments cover governance, social, environmental and economic issues. At the lowest (or Sustainability Item) level the situation is quite different. At this level compatibility of both instruments is poor. Overlap is poor and the weight distributions are hardly correlated. Obviously both instruments are reflect different interpretations of corporate sustainability performance. Compatibility is highest for the Social Dimension. For the Governance, Environment and Economic Dimension compatibility is very poor. The overall conclusion should therefore be that that compatibility of the SAM and KLD screening instruments is (very) poor and that for this reason these instruments cannot

Netherlands : Review of sustainable tourism policies, strategies and instruments.

Developing a new national MDMA policy: Results of a multi-decision multi-criterion decision analysis

Background:Ecstasy (3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA)) has a relatively low harm and low dependence liability but is scheduled on List I of the Dutch Opium Act (‘hard drugs’). Concerns surrounding increasing MDMA-related criminality coupled with the possibly inappropriate scheduling of MDMA initiated a debate to revise the current Dutch ecstasy policy.Methods:An interdisciplinary group of 18 experts on health, social harms and drug criminality and law enforcement reformulated the science-based Dutch MDMA policy using multi-decision multi-criterion decision analysis (MD-MCDA). The experts collectively formulated policy instruments and rated their effects on 25 outcome criteria, including health, criminality, law enforcement and financial issues, thematically grouped in six clusters.Results:The experts scored the effect of 22 policy instruments, each with between two and seven different mutually exclusive options, on 25 outcome criteria. The optimal policy model was defined by the set of 22 policy instrument options which gave the highest overall score on the 25 outcome criteria. Implementation of the optimal policy model, including regulated MDMA sales, decreases health harms, MDMA-related organised crime and environmental damage, as well as increases state revenues and quality of MDMA products and user information. This model was slightly modified to increase its political feasibility. Sensitivity analyses showed that the outcomes of the current MD-MCDA are robust and independent of variability in weight values.Conclusion:The present results provide a feasible and realistic set of policy instrument options to revise the legislation towards a rational MDMA policy that is likely to reduce both adverse (public) health risks and MDMA-related criminal burden.

Policy evaluation report

In this policy evaluation report, the results of the first 2 years of the Interreg funded ABCitiEs project are presented. In total 16 entrepreneurship collectives have been studied in 5 partner regions, i.e. Athens, Vilnius, Varazdin-Cakovec, Manchester and Amsterdam. The report contains an analysis of the cases and gives an overview of the most important opportunities and challenges faced by these cases. On the basis of these result, 4 policy directions have been selected in which improvement are considered most successful, i.e. access to funding, intermediaries, monitoring and experimental learning environments. Also, the report presents the action plans that have been formulated on the basis of these policy directions for the cities involved in this project. In the last 2 years of the project, project partners will implement these action plans in their respective cities.

Decarbonizing the international shipping industry

Ship-source greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions could increase by up to 250% from 2012 levels by 2050 owing to increasing global freight volumes. Binding international legal agreements to regulate GHGs, however, are lacking as technical solutions remain expensive and crucial industrial support is absent. In 2003, IMO adopted Resolution A.963 (23) to regulate shipping CO2 emissions via technical, operational, and market-based routes. However, progress has been slow and uncertain; there is no concrete emission reduction target or definitive action plan. Yet, a full-fledged roadmap may not even emerge until 2023. In this policy analysis, we revisit the progress of technical, operational, and market-based routes and the associated controversies. We argue that 1) a performance-based index, though good-intentioned, has loopholes affecting meaningful CO2 emission reductions driven by technical advancements; 2) using slow steaming to cut energy consumption stands out among operational solutions thanks to its immediate and obvious results, but with the already slow speed in practice, this single source has limited emission reduction potential; 3) without a technology-savvy shipping industry, a market-based approach is essentially needed to address the environmental impact. To give shipping a 50:50 chance for contributing fairly and proportionately to keep global warming below 2°C, deep emission reductions should occur soon.

Dementia in People with Severe/Profound Intellectual (and Multiple) Disabilities:

Introduction: Diagnosing dementia in people with severe/profound intellectual (and multiple) disabilities (SPI(M)D) is complex. Whereas existing dementia screening instruments as a whole are unsuitable for this population, a number of individual items may apply. Therefore, this study aimed to identify applicable items in existing dementia screening instruments. Methods: Informant interviews about 40 people with SPI(M)D were conducted to identify applicable items in the Dementia Scale for Down Syndrome, Behavioral and Psychological Symptoms of Dementia in Down Syndrome II scale, Dementia Questionnaire for persons with Mental Retardation and Social competence Rating scale for people with Intellectual Disabilities. Results: Among 193 items, 101 items were found applicable, categorized in 5 domains: behavioral and psychological functioning (60 items), cognitive functioning (25), motor functioning (6), activities of daily living (5) and medical comorbidities (5). Conclusion: Identifying applicable items for people with SPI(M)D is an essential step in developing a dedicated dementia screening instrument for this population.