Search

The Environmental Impact Classification for Alien Taxa (EICAT) is an important tool for biological invasion policy and management and has been adopted as an International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) standard to measure the severity of environmental impacts caused by organisms living outside their native ranges. EICAT has already been incorporated into some national and local decision‐making procedures, making it a particularly relevant resource for addressing the impact of non‐native species. Recently, some of the underlying conceptual principles of EICAT, particularly those related to the use of the precautionary approach, have been challenged. Although still relatively new, guidelines for the application and interpretation of EICAT will be periodically revisited by the IUCN community, based on scientific evidence, to improve the process. Some of the criticisms recently raised are based on subjectively selected assumptions that cannot be generalized and may harm global efforts to manage biological invasions. EICAT adopts a precautionary principle by considering a species' impact history elsewhere because some taxa have traits that can make them inherently more harmful. Furthermore, non‐native species are often important drivers of biodiversity loss even in the presence of other pressures. Ignoring the precautionary principle when tackling the impacts of non‐native species has led to devastating consequences for human well‐being, biodiversity, and ecosystems, as well as poor management outcomes, and thus to significant economic costs. EICAT is a relevant tool because it supports prioritization and management of non‐native species and meeting and monitoring progress toward the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) Target 6. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The precautionary principle aims to influence decision‐making in contexts where some activity poses uncertain but potentially grave threats. This perfectly describes the controversy surrounding germline gene editing. This article considers whether the precautionary principle should influence how we weigh the risks and benefits of human germline interventions, focusing especially on the possible threats to the health of future generations. We distinguish between several existing forms of the precautionary principle, assess their plausibility and consider their implications for the ethics of germline modification. We also offer a novel form of the precautionary principle: the sufficientarian precautionary principle. Some plausible versions of the precautionary principle recommend placing somewhat greater weight on avoiding threats to future generations than on achieving short‐term benefits. However, no plausible versions of the precautionary principle entail that we should outright reject the use germline gene editing in human reproduction and some, such as the sufficientarian version, might endorse its use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To identify the corporate political activity (CPA) of major food industry actors in France.Design: We followed an approach based on information available in the public domain. Different sources of information, freely accessible to the public, were monitored.Setting/SubjectsData were collected and analysed between March and August 2015. Five actors were selected: ANIA (Association Nationale des Industries Agroalimentaires/National Association of Agribusiness Industries); Coca-Cola; McDonald's; Nestlé; and Carrefour.Results: Our analysis shows that the main practices used by Coca-Cola and McDonald's were the framing of diet and public health issues in ways favourable to the company, and their involvement in the community. ANIA primarily used the 'information and messaging' strategy (e.g. by promoting deregulation and shaping the evidence base on diet- and public health-related issues), as well as the 'policy substitution' strategy. Nestlé framed diet and public health issues, and shaped the evidence base on diet- and public health-related issues. Carrefour particularly sought involvement in the community.Conclusions: We found that, in 2015, the food industry in France was using CPA practices that were also used by other industries in the past, such as the tobacco and alcohol industries. Because most, if not all, of these practices proved detrimental to public health when used by the tobacco industry, we propose that the precautionary principle should guide decisions when engaging or interacting with the food industry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a significant gap between the safety management in the Chinese colleges and many renowned colleges in other countries. The subject of this study is how to assess the performance of health, safety, and environment (HSE) in Chinese college laboratories. The assessment system is established by three parts. First of all, HSE performance assessment indicators for laboratories in Chinese colleges are identified based on the previous studies. Then set valued iteration is used to calculate the weights of the various indicators. Following that, multiple attribute group decision-making (MAGDM) method with Pythagorean 2-tuple linguistic operators is used to assess the laboratory HSE performance in colleges. Finally, taking a college in Sichuan Province as an example, the proposed method is used to assess the laboratory HSE performance. The assessment result shows that the proposed method used in this study is practical and feasible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Environmental variability and high motility are a challenge to get real absences. • We used 20 virtual species to study different kinds of absences effects on ENMs. • A very intense sampling would be needed to obtain a genuine unbiased absences. • For highly mobile species better to consider the non-observation as background info. Species distribution models are valuable tools for conservation management. However, there remain challenges in developing and interpreting these models in the marine environment, such as the nature of the species used for the modelling process. When working with mobile species in dynamic environments, lack of observation is usually interpreted as an observation of absence, which can result in the introduction of biases by methodological (false) absences. Here, we explore the role of absences when modelling marine megafauna distributions. To better understand how the use of absences (or equivalent) affects the niche modelling algorithms, we used a set of 20 virtual species with different relations to the habitat (generalist static, specialist static, generalist dynamic and specialist dynamic) with different encounter rates. We tested six different modelling techniques divided into three distinct groups: presence-only, presence-background and presence-absence. We compared the outputs of the models using traditional validation metrics and overlap metrics in the geographical and environmental spaces. Algorithms characterized the ecological niche for the simulated species differently. Approaches using background data generally outperformed the other methods, suggesting that the non-observation of a species in a given location and time should not be considered as an absence. A very intense (practically unrealistic) sampling schema would be required to obtain a genuine unbiased absence when working with these species and habitats. For highly mobile species, a precautionary approach would be to consider the non-observation of a species as part of the background (a sample of the conditions available in the study area) rather than an absence. A good starting point would be to use presence-background models, complemented with presence-absence and/or presence-only models, comparing outputs from the different algorithms tested in the geographic and environmental space. Improving model performance for highly mobile marine species should lead to better-informed decision making for conservation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A common strategy in bioethics is to posit a prima facie case in favour of one policy, and to then claim that the burden of proof (that this policy should be rejected) falls on those with opposing views. If the burden of proof is not met, it is claimed, then the policy in question should be accepted. This article illustrates, and critically evaluates, examples of this strategy in debates about the sale of organs by living donors, human enhancement, and the precautionary principle. We highlight general problems with this style of argument, and particular problems with its use in specific cases. We conclude that the burden ultimately falls on decision-makers (i.e. policy-makers) to choose the policy supported by the best reasons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]