Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis work examines the effects of different kinds of subsidies on risk prevention from a theoretical standpoint. We show that both a subsidy on the cost of prevention activities and a subsidy on wealth have ambiguous effects on the level of present contemporaneous prevention. Similar kinds of subsidies have however increasing effects on the level of advance prevention and, under plausible assumptions, on future levels of contemporaneous prevention. We also show that social security subsidies may have decreasing effects on prevention activities while a kind of reverse social security has an increasing effects on them. This indicates that there is a trade-off between the social security aim of mitigating the negative consequences of bad events and the prevention aim of incentivizing choices which reduce the probability that these bad events occur.

The huge amount of work accidents in Peru has not produced the implementation of policies aimed at reducing occupational accidents rates. Not only that, there is a certain passivity with informal business and persons who break the law, even when it creates risks to workers' lives. Criminal Law is the best example, because criminal rules do not apply in fact. We have a symbolic norm; that means a situation that counteracts the preventive effect of Criminal Law. In other words, the legislator has weakened non-criminal instances excluding punishment even for the most serious behaviors in which workers' lives are endangered. In this context, compliance programs play a big role in labor risk prevention and, therefore, in the reduction of criminal rates.

Intro -- Contents -- Preface -- Chapter 1 -- Conditionality and Decision-Making on the Road: The Management of Risks -- Abstract -- The Theory of Conditionality and the Decision Theory -- Materials and Methods -- Tools -- The Conditional Scripts Questionnaire -- The Lottery -- Population and Procurement -- Analysis Strategies -- Results -- Conditionality -- The Lottery -- Conditionality and Lottery -- Discussion -- References -- Chapter 2 -- School Education for Preventing Sexism in Adolescence -- Abstract -- The School as a Social and Socializing Institution -- Androcentrism in the Educational Institution -- The Reproduction of Sexist Stereotypes in Schools -- Child and Adolescent Development and Gender Stereotypes -- Thinking about Education as a Tool for Preventing Sexism: What is Urgent, What Can and Should be Done? -- References -- Chapter 3 -- Identity Dynamics and Risk: The Vulnerability of Students -- Abstract -- The Development of Higher Education -- Identity Dynamics, Capacity, and Vulnerability -- For the Improvement of the Student Condition -- References -- Chapter 4 -- The Individual Faced with Risk: Outlines and Limits of a Preventive Approach -- Abstract -- Risk in Everyday Life -- Risk Characterization -- From Resignation to Responsibility -- Risk Prevention, Confrontation with Risk: What Meaning? -- The Risk: A Complex Dimensionality -- References -- Chapter 5 -- Group Membership and Vaccination -- Abstract -- Vaccination and Psychosocial Concepts -- Materials and Methods -- Tools -- The Questionnaire -- Sample -- Results and Discussion -- The Complexity of the Group Membership -- References -- Chapter 6 -- Preventing Systemic Discrimination and Microaggressions in the Workplace: An Overview of Some Practices in Quebec -- Abstract -- Integration in the Workplace.

AbstractExistential risks are those that threaten the entire future of humanity. Many theories of value imply that even relatively small reductions in net existential risk have enormous expected value. Despite their importance, issues surrounding human‐extinction risks and related hazards remain poorly understood. In this article, I clarify the concept of existential risk and develop an improved classification scheme. I discuss the relation between existential risks and basic issues in axiology, and show how existential risk reduction (via the maxipok rule) can serve as a strongly action‐guiding principle for utilitarian concerns. I also show how the notion of existential risk suggests a new way of thinking about the ideal of sustainability.Policy Implications Existential risk is a concept that can focus long‐term global efforts and sustainability concerns. The biggest existential risks are anthropogenic and related to potential future technologies. A moral case can be made that existential risk reduction is strictly more important than any other global public good. Sustainability should be reconceptualised in dynamic terms, as aiming for a sustainable trajectory rather than a sustainable state. Some small existential risks can be mitigated today directly (e.g. asteroids) or indirectly (by building resilience and reserves to increase survivability in a range of extreme scenarios) but it is more important to build capacity to improve humanity's ability to deal with the larger existential risks that will arise later in this century. This will require collective wisdom, technology foresight, and the ability when necessary to mobilise a strong global coordinated response to anticipated existential risks. Perhaps the most cost‐effective way to reduce existential risks today is to fund analysis of a wide range of existential risks and potential mitigation strategies, with a long‐term perspective.

Parent-based HIV prevention programming may play an important role in reaching youths early to help establish lifelong patterns of safe and healthy sexual behaviors. Families Matter! is a 5-session, evidence-based behavioral intervention designed for primary caregivers of children aged 9 to 12 years to promote positive parenting and effective parent–child communication about sexuality and sexual risk reduction. The program's 5-step capacity-building model was implemented with local government, community, and faith-based partners in 8 sub-Saharan African countries with good intervention fidelity and high levels of participant retention. Families Matter! may be useful in other resource-constrained settings.

Accidents with automatic production systems are reported to be on the order of one in a hundred or thousand robot‐years, while fatal accidents are found to occur one or two orders of magnitude less frequently. Traditions in occupational safety tend to seek for safety targets in terms of zero severe accidents for automatic systems. Decision‐making requires a risk assessment balancing potential risk reduction measures and costs within the cultural environment of a production company. This paper presents a simplified procedure which acts as a decision tool. The procedure is based on a risk concept approaching prevention both in a deterministic and in a probabilistic manner. Eight accident scenarios are shown to represent the potential accident processes involving robot interactions with people. Seven prevention policies are shown to cover the accident scenarios in principle. An additional probabilistic approach may indicate which extra safety measures can be taken against what risk reduction and additional costs. The risk evaluation process aims at achieving a quantitative acceptable risk level. For that purpose, three risk evaluation methods are discussed with respect to reaching broad consensus on the safety targets.

Cities located in regions prone to natural hazards such as flooding are not uniformly exposed to risks because of sub-city local characteristics (e.g. topography). Spatial heterogeneity thus raises the issue of how these cities have spread and should continue to develop. The current paper investigates these questions by using an urban model in which each location is characterized by a transport cost to the city center and a risk exposure. Riskier areas are developed nearer to the city center than further away. Investment in building resilience leads to more compact cities. At a given distance to the city center, riskier areas have lower land prices and get lower household density and higher building resilience. Actuarially fair insurance generates optimal density and resilience. An increase of insurance subsidization leads to an increase of density in the riskiest areas and a general decrease of resilience. In this case density restrictions and building codes have to be enforced to limit risk over-exposure.

Cities located in regions prone to natural hazards such as flooding are not uniformly exposed to risks because of sub-city local characteristics (e.g. topography). Spatial heterogeneity thus raises the issue of how these cities have spread and should continue to develop. The current paper investigates these questions by using an urban model in which each location is characterized by a transport cost to the city center and a risk exposure. Riskier areas are developed nearer to the city center than further away. Investment in building resilience leads to more compact cities. At a given distance to the city center, riskier areas have lower land prices and get lower household density and higher building resilience. Actuarially fair insurance generates optimal density and resilience. An increase of insurance subsidization leads to an increase of density in the riskiest areas and a general decrease of resilience. In this case density restrictions and building codes have to be enforced to limit risk over-exposure.

Cities located in regions prone to natural hazards such as flooding are not uniformly exposed to risks because of sub-city local characteristics (e.g. topography). Spatial heterogeneity thus raises the issue of how these cities have spread and should continue to develop. The current paper investigates these questions by using an urban model in which each location is characterized by a transport cost to the city center and a risk exposure. Riskier areas are developed nearer to the city center than further away. Investment in building resilience leads to more compact cities. At a given distance to the city center, riskier areas have lower land prices and get lower household density and higher building resilience. Actuarially fair insurance generates optimal density and resilience. An increase of insurance subsidization leads to an increase of density in the riskiest areas and a general decrease of resilience. In this case density restrictions and building codes have to be enforced to limit risk over-exposure.

1. Introduction -- 2. Toxic chemical composition reporting -- 3. Toxic chemical release reporting -- 4. TRI programs in other countries -- 5. TRI program impacts on reducing toxic chemical releases -- 6. Quantifying toxicity -- 7. Quantifying mobility -- 8. Quantifying persistence -- 9. Quantifying bioconcentration -- 10. Developing effective toxicity factors -- 11. Focusing on impact chemicals -- 12. Use versus release reporting -- 13. Pollution prevention planning -- 14. Technical assistance -- 15. Market-based approaches to environmental protection -- 16. A program to reduce toxic chemical use -- 17. Costs and benefits.

1. Introduction -- 2. Toxic chemical composition reporting -- 3. Toxic chemical release reporting -- 4. TRI programs in other countries -- 5. TRI program impacts on reducing toxic chemical releases -- 6. Quantifying toxicity -- 7. Quantifying mobility -- 8. Quantifying persistence -- 9. Quantifying bioconcentration -- 10. Developing effective toxicity factors -- 11. Focusing on impact chemicals -- 12. Use versus release reporting -- 13. Pollution prevention planning -- 14. Technical assistance -- 15. Market-based approaches to environmental protection -- 16. A program to reduce toxic chemical use -- 17. Costs and benefits.

We evaluate several concerns related to measuring the demand for public risk prevention policies, using an innovative national survey and new modeling strategies. We find that the omission of avoided morbidity leads to an upward bias in estimates of the marginal utility of avoided deaths. Individuals experience diminishing marginal utility in the scope of mortalityand morbidity-reducing policies. Individual attitudes towards government involvement and, particularly, perceptions of the personal benefits of different policies, appear to be important determinants of demand. Finally, we uncover little evidence of heterogeneity in demand for public health policies according to the proximate health threat (e.g. cancer, stroke, respiratory disease, injury) or the underlying cause (e.g. exposure to contaminants in air, water, food; highway hazards).