Front Matter -- Copyright Page -- Acknowledgments -- Acronyms -- Tables -- Introduction -- Methodology -- The Treaty Basis and Criteria for ipa Application in Theory and Practice -- Revisiting the Treaty Basis for ipa Practice -- The Baseline Requirements for ipa Application -- Beyond Non-refoulement: Other Factors Relevant to ipa Application -- Procedural and Evidentiary Issues in the ipa Analysis -- The ipa in Complementary Protection Regimes -- ipa Application: Insights from Norway -- Conclusion -- Back Matter -- Bibliography -- Index.
Verfügbarkeit an Ihrem Standort wird überprüft
Dieses Buch ist auch in Ihrer Bibliothek verfügbar:
English language learners with visual impairments (ELLVIs) are a low incidence population with unique learning needs. The purpose of this review was to identify the existing literature specifically examining ELLVIs. As no literature review examining ELLVIs could be located, this review synthesizes what we know about the population and provides a starting point for future research. The authors reviewed all titles found across four databases ( n = 658 articles) and included only articles addressing English language learners with visual impairments in educational contexts. A total of 24 articles were included in the review. The following four themes emerged: assessment, family perceptions, teacher perceptions, and instructional strategies. Findings are discussed generally and by theme. Assessment reports revealed common accommodations for English language proficiency tests, but decision-making criteria for whether ELLVIs participated in assessments were unclear. Parent/guardian perceptions largely revealed dissatisfaction with school communication. Teacher perception studies revealed a need for more training and support. Common instructional strategies were identified by researchers and teachers in the field, but only one article examined instructional strategies experimentally. Therefore, there is limited evidence of the efficacy of any particular instructional strategy. Analyzing the research, the results show the majority has been conducted by the same research teams. More research needs to be conducted across all themes. Commonly accepted/validated assessment accommodations are discussed, allowing practitioners to identify which accommodations they might be able to implement. In addition, this review alerts practitioners to common parental concerns. This review also uncovers commonly used instructional strategies although these are not necessarily research based within the population. Commonly used instructional strategies are discussed, which, although not evidence-based, identifies potential areas for future research.
This research report has been published as part of the EU Horizon 2020 VULNER research project (www.vulner.eu). The VULNER research project is an international research initiative, the objective of which is to reach a more profound understanding of the experiences of vulnerabilities of migrants applying for asylum and other humanitarian protection statuses, and how they could best be addressed. It therefore makes use of a twofold analysis, which confronts the study of existing protection mechanisms towards vulnerable migrants (such as minors and victims of human trafficking), with the one of their own experiences on the ground. This research report presents some of the intermediate research results of the VULNER project, based on the first phase of the project, which consisted of mapping out the vulnerability assessment mechanisms developed by state authorities in Norway, including how they are implemented on the ground through the practices of the public servants in charge. The following research questions are addressed: What do the relevant domestic legislation, case-law, policy documents, and administrative guidelines reveal about how "vulnerabilities" are being assessed and addressed in the countries under study? Do the relevant state and/or aid agencies have a legal duty to assess migrants' vulnerabilities, and if yes, using which procedures, when and how? Following which legal and bureaucratic criteria? How do decision-makers (street-level bureaucrats) understand and perceive the 'vulnerabilities' of the migrants they meet on a daily basis? How do they address these 'vulnerabilities' through their everyday practices? What is their stance on existing legal requirements towards 'vulnerable' migrants? Which loopholes do they identify? To that end, the objective of the legal enquiry was to analyse and reflect upon how 'vulnerability' is being developed as a legal and bureaucratic concept in the Norwegian regulations. Legal sources include national laws and regulations related to immigration and welfare ...
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This research report has been established as part of the EU Horizon 2020 VULNER project, which aims to contribute to a better understanding of the experiences of 'vulnerability' as lived by migrants applying for a protection status (such as the refugee status and other complementary forms of humanitarian protection, including the one awarded to victims of human trafficking), and to critically assess the potentials and pitfalls of using 'vulnerability' as a legal and policy standard to guide the development and implementation of migration policies at EU and global level. The VULNER project starts from the common observation, widely documented in the scientific literature, that the requirement to address the specific needs of 'vulnerable' migrants, including asylum seekers, victims of human trafficking and unaccompanied minors, is flooding the legal and policy discourse on asylum and migration at EU and global level (as illustrated by the UN Global Compact for Migration and its objective to 'reduce vulnerabilities' in migration, or the current focus at EU level on resettlement programmes for vulnerable refugees namely). Yet, if not based on scientific data and analyses that provide a clear and non-stereotyped understanding of the vulnerabilities that are lived and experienced by migrants, such policy objectives risk failing to address vulnerabilities, exacerbating existing vulnerabilities, or even producing new ones. The overall objective of the VULNER project is to produce knowledge that will assist States in identifying suitable strategies to assess the 'vulnerabilities' of migrants and to address them. This research report presents some of the intermediary research results of the VULNER project, based on the first phase of the project which consisted in mapping the vulnerability assessment mechanisms as developed by state authorities in Norway, including how they are concretely implemented on the ground through the practices of the public servants in charge. The objective was to address the ...
The global lockdown to mitigate COVID-19 pandemic health risks has altered human interactions with nature. Here, we report immediate impacts of changes in human activities on wildlife and environmental threats during the early lockdown months of 2020, based on 877 qualitative reports and 332 quantitative assessments from 89 different studies. Hundreds of reports of unusual species observations from around the world suggest that animals quickly responded to the reductions in human presence. However, negative effects of lockdown on conservation also emerged, as confinement resulted in some park officials being unable to perform conservation, restoration and enforcement tasks, resulting in local increases in illegal activities such as hunting. Overall, there is a complex mixture of positive and negative effects of the pandemic lockdown on nature, all of which have the potential to lead to cascading responses which in turn impact wildlife and nature conservation. While the net effect of the lockdown will need to be assessed over years as data becomes available and persistent effects emerge, immediate responses were detected across the world. Thus, initial qualitative and quantitative data arising from this serendipitous global quasi-experimental perturbation highlights the dual role that humans play in threatening and protecting species and ecosystems. Pathways to favorably tilt this delicate balance include reducing impacts and increasing conservation effectiveness. ; The Canada Research Chairs program provided funding for the core writing team. Field research funding was provided by A.G. Leventis Foundation; Agence Nationale de la Recherche, [grant number ANR-18-32–0010CE-01 (JCJC PEPPER)]; Agencia Estatal de Investigaci; Agência Regional para o Desenvolvimento da Investigação Tecnologia e Inovação (ARDITI), [grant number M1420-09-5369-FSE-000002]; Alan Peterson; ArcticNet; Arkadaşlar; Army Corp of Engineers; Artificial Reef Program; Australia's Integrated Marine Observing System (IMOS), National Collaborative; Research Infrastructure Strategy (NCRIS), University of Tasmania; Australian Institute of Marine Science; Australian Research Council, [grant number LP140100222]; Bai Xian Asia Institute; Batubay Özkan; BC Hydro Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program; Ben-Gurion University of the Negev; Bertarelli Foundation; Bertarelli Programme in Marine Science; Bilge Bahar; Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; Biology Society of South Australia; Boston University; Burak Över; California State Assembly member Patrick O'Donnell; California State University Council on Ocean Affairs, Science & Technology; California State University Long Beach; Canada Foundation for Innovation (Major Science Initiative Fund and funding to Oceans Network Canada), [grant number MSI 30199 for ONC]; Cape Eleuthera Foundation; Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales; Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique; Charles Darwin Foundation, [grant number 2398]; Colombian Institute for the Development of Science and Technology (COLCIENCIAS), [grant number 811–2018]; Colombian Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, [grant number 0041–2020]; Columbia Basin Trust; Commission for Environmental Cooperation; Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Cultural practices and environmental certification of beaches, Universidad de la Costa, Colombia, [grant number INV.1106–01–002-15, 2020–21]; Department of Conservation New Zealand; Direction de l'Environnement de Polynésie Française; Disney Conservation Fund; DSI-NRF Centre of; Excellence at the FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology; Ecology Project International; Emin Özgür; Environment and Climate Change Canada; European Community: RTD programme - Species Support to Policies; European Community's Seventh Framework Programme; European Union; European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, Marie Skłodowska-Curie, [grant number 798091, 794938]; Faruk Eczacıbaşı; Faruk Yalçın Zoo; Field research funding was provided by King Abdullah University of Science and Technology; Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program; Fisheries and Oceans Canada; Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, [grant numbers FWC-12164, FWC-14026, FWC-19050]; Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional; Fonds québécois de la recherche nature et technologies; Foundation Segré; Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT Portugal); Galapagos National Park Directorate research, [grant number PC-41-20]; Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, [grant number GBMF9881 and GBMF 8072]; Government of Tristan da Cunha; Habitat; Conservation Trust Foundation; Holsworth Wildlife Research Endowment; Institute of Biology of the Southern Seas, Sevastopol, Russia; Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt; Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais (INPE), Brazil; Israeli Academy of Science's Adams Fellowship; King Family Trust; Labex, CORAIL, France; Liber Ero Fellowship; LIFE (European Union), [grant number LIFE16 NAT/BG/000874]; Mar'a de Maeztu Program for Units of Excellence in R&D; Ministry of Science and Innovation, FEDER, SPASIMM,; Spain, [grant number FIS2016–80067-P (AEI/FEDER, UE)]; MOE-Korea, [grant number 2020002990006]; Mohamed bin Zayed Species Conservation Fund; Montreal Space for Life; National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Earth and Space Science Fellowship Program; National Geographic Society, [grant numbers NGS-82515R-20]; National Natural Science Fund of China; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; National Parks Board, Singapore; National Science and Technology Major Project of China; National Science Foundation, [grant number DEB-1832016]; Natural Environment Research Council of the UK; Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), Alliance COVID-19 grant program, [grant numbers ALLRP 550721–20, RGPIN-2014-06229 (year: 2014), RGPIN-2016-05772 (year: 2016)]; Neiser Foundation; Nekton Foundation; Network of Centre of Excellence of Canada: ArcticNet; North Family Foundation; Ocean Tracking Network; Ömer Külahçıoğlu; Oregon State University; Parks Canada Agency (Lake Louise, Yoho, and Kootenay Field Unit); Pew Charitable Trusts; Porsim Kanaf partnership; President's International Fellowship Initiative for postdoctoral researchers Chinese Academy of Sciences, [grant number 2019 PB0143]; Red Sea Research Center; Regional Government of the Azores, [grant number M3.1a/F/025/2015]; Regione Toscana; Rotary Club of Rhinebeck; Save our Seas Foundation; Science & Technology (CSU COAST); Science City Davos, Naturforschende Gesellschaft Davos; Seha İşmen; Sentinelle Nord program from the Canada First Research Excellence Fund; Servizio Foreste e Fauna (Provincia Autonoma di Trento); Sigrid Rausing Trust; Simon Fraser University; Sitka Foundation; Sivil Toplum Geliştirme Merkezi Derneği; South African National Parks (SANParks); South Australian Department for Environment and Water; Southern California Tuna Club (SCTC); Spanish Ministry for the Ecological Transition and the Demographic Challenge; Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness; Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation; State of California; Sternlicht Family Foundation; Suna Reyent; Sunshine Coast Regional Council; Tarea Vida, CEMZOC, Universidad de Oriente, Cuba, [grant number 10523, 2020]; Teck Coal; The Hamilton Waterfront Trust; The Ian Potter Foundation, Coastwest, Western Australian State NRM; The Red Sea Development Company; The Wanderlust Fund; The Whitley Fund; Trans-Anatolian Natural Gas Pipeline; Tula Foundation (Hakai Institute); University of Arizona; University of Pisa; US Fish and Wildlife Service; US Geological Survey; Valencian Regional Government; Vermont Center for Ecostudies; Victorian Fisheries Authority; VMRC Fishing License Fund; and Wildlife Warriors Worldwide.