Search

Deforestation is an environmental stressor that dramatically threatens biodiversity while having adverse, deep-rooted, socioeconomic impacts. Interventions to address deforestation require considerable long-term investments; therefore, assessing their impact is crucial. The UN Convention on Biological Diversity encourages establishing protected areas (PAs) as a strategy to conserve biodiversity, secure ecosystem services, support local livelihoods, and reduce climate change impacts. The Global Environment Facility (GEF) has supported the conservation and management of PAs, yet site accessibility and data availability present challenges in assessing PAs using traditional evaluation methods. We present a novel application of satellite Earth observations for evaluating the effectiveness and impact of PAs as a deforestation mitigation strategy. Geospatial analysis and ecological forecasting methodologies provide an efficient way to quantify land cover change, estimate above ground carbon stock, and evaluate ecosystem services provided by the PAs ex ante. We demonstrate the value of a geospatial approach through the evaluation of GEF-supported PAs in Kenya.

The British Railway Mania of the mid-1840s led to a massive expansion of the railway network, a socially beneficial legacy that however produced a collapse of profitability and dividends. Paradoxically, the majority of this expansion was carried out by established (and hitherto successful) railways, rather than Mania promotions. Campbell and Turner (2015) see this expansion as a rational, indeed optimal, response to the Mania: they would have been worse placed with alternative strategies. This paper contends that it was established railways which began the expansion in 1843–1844, and that the high returns they generated for their shareholders depended crucially on the rights issues that financed their projected lines. This helps to explain both shareholder support for expansion, and investor enthusiasm for Mania projections. But the new lines were unprofitable: the established railways' expansionary strategy was a major managerial failure with, in the longer term, disastrous consequences for shareholders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

All too often discussion of Capability proceeds as if it is clear what "Capability" is and that all that is required is the ascertaining of means for developing it. This paper seeks to explore the meanings of Capability. It provides two broad meanings, and discusses the paradoxes inherent in the application of these to the real world of management and business. On the one hand, Capability is defined as Potential, what the individual could achieve. Potential is an endowment, which is realised by the acquisition of skills and knowledge, i.e. the acquisition of Content. On the other hand, Capability is defined as Content what the individual can or has learned to do. This Content has been acquired by, or input into, the individual, who then has the Potential to develop further. So there are different routes to Capability, depending on the definition of Capability one chooses. All of this impinges on the development of Capability. This leads us on to a consideration of whether the "Development of Capability" is a meaningful concept.

Defines two competitive ideas--competence and capability--and argues that neither deals adequately with the central issue of the present. Provides a model, to place these ideas in conceptual space--the vertical axis of which is bounded by the extremes of narrow and broad focus, and the horizontal axis by the past and the future. Suggests that competence is on an outer edge, being narrowly focused on the performance of pre-defined tasks, and based on the past in that it can be demonstrated in the present only if it has already been developed. Capability is on the opposite outer edge, being broadly focused on the performance of non-defined tasks, and cannot be demonstrated in the present, because it exists as potential/future possibility or capacity. To illuminate the centre, suggests a tentative solution called "capatence"--the necessary symbiosis between competence and capability that will allow for flexibility of focus and a grounding in the present. (Contains 1 table and 1 figure.)

Examines the debate over competence ("I will do things satisfactorily in future because I have done in the past") versus capability ("I could do things in future because of certain qualities I have"). Describes the middle ground of capacity, defined as contextual intelligence, a spiral that links competence and capability. (SK)

Several Jewish women were entrepreneurs in medieval England. They participated in financial businesses.