Search results

This chapter places the discussion of trade and food security in a more general macroeconomic context.

This chapter uses historical analysis to briefly trace the debate on economy-wide policies, starting with the 1943 United Nations (UN) Conference on Food and Agriculture that led to the creation of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in 1945. A general economic framework is used to organize the different channels through which macroeconomic policies may affect food and nutrition security.

Examples of monetary, financial, fiscal, and exchange rate policies are presented, along with their implications for food and nutrition security.

The current debates about trade and food security must be placed in the context of the overall macroeconomic framework: a single trade policy may have different impacts depending on its interactions with other macroeconomic policies and structural factors.

The purpose of this chapter is to analyze the impact of public agricultural Research and Development (R&D) investments on agricultural productivity and long-term food security to derive policy recommendations. The methodological approach is based on the application of the state-of-the art Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) model to R&D. By endogenizing R&D in global CGE models, it is possible to assess the impact of different public R&D policies on the food availability and food access of food security. This study found that R&D investments bring positive effects on the food access dimension of food security, particularly in places such as Sub-Saharan Africa where prices are expected to grow significantly by 2050, as agricultural land becomes scarcer and more expensive. Doubling the R&D intensity would soften the land constraints and substantially decelerate food prices, thus preventing the deterioration of living standards of rural households and leading to a gain in daily caloric consumption. The impact of alternative agricultural R&D policies on the various dimensions of food security has not been analyzed using a CGE framework, which enables capturing both the benefits and costs from R&D investments. Modeling the dynamic accumulation of R&D stocks makes it possible to analyze the effects of R&D on food security over time.

Tourism, a critical economic sector for Small Island Developing States (SIDS), is extremely vulnerable to climate change. It has been becoming increasingly evident that strategic planning is essential for the sector to manage future impacts of climate change. This study examines the climate change considerations in the tourism sector of The Bahamas with a specific focus on adaptation policies by exploring the perspectives of key actors. Facing similar climate vulnerabilities as many other SIDS, The Bahamas was chosen because it is a mature tourism destination that provides an avenue for existing policy innovations. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight policy actors from the government, tourism associations, and nongovernmental organizations in the country. The findings revealed that these stakeholders have a good knowledge of climate change. However, planning for tourism and climate change is fragmented, with most climate policies formulated with the scope of mitigation, such as greenhouse gas reduction strategies. In addition, the policy implementation faces many gaps common to SIDS, such as funding and human capacity. At present, the strategic planning for future tourism targets sustainable eco-tourism markets. Based on our findings, we provide recommendations such as leveraging public officials' knowledge of climate change, steering locally relevant adaptation measures, and directing immediate attention toward projects in the pipeline to ensure timely, long-term, and effective planning. The study adds to the current knowledge of climate change in the tourism policy context for The Bahamas with implications for other SIDS.

Purpose – Patient safety and adverse events continue to present significant challenges to the US health care delivery system. Mandated reporting of adverse events can be a mechanism to “coerce” hospitals to identify, evaluate, and ultimately improve the quality and safety of patient care. The objective of this study is to determine if the coercion of mandated reporting impacts hospital patient safety scores.

Methods – We utilize the US News and World Report 2012–2013 Best Hospital Rankings which includes patient safety data from US teaching hospitals. The dependent variable is a composite measure of six indicators of patient safety during and after surgery. The independent variable is state mandated reporting of hospital adverse events. Three control variables are included: Magnet accreditation status, surgical volume, and the percentage of surgical admissions.

Findings – Using ordered logistic regression (n = 670 hospitals) we find a positive, but not significant, relationship between state mandated reporting and better patient safety scores.

Implications – This finding suggests that regulatory policy may not actually prompt performance improvement, and our data point to the need for further study of both formal and informal processes to manage patient safety within the hospital.

Originality – While increased reporting of adverse events has been linked to hospitals providing safer care, no research to date has examined whether or not state-level mandates actually lead to improvements in patient safety.

Many papers have been written about group reflexivity. Testimonials by practitioners often contain strong claims about its performance benefits. Research papers, by scientists, seem to support such claims at first glance, but a closer look reveals methodological problems and weak results, even in the studies that show performance benefits, and there are several studies that show no performance benefits. We have begun our own program of research on group reflexivity, and so far, we have found no performance benefits either. All of this suggests that enthusiasm for group reflexivity should be tempered, until more and better research has been done.

Why are some of the municipalities located on the most dynamic, populous and productive region of a nation, also the poorest of the nation? Why after decades of being at the center of national development policies, the municipalities of Greater Buenos Aires are still suffering some of the worst development indicators of the Argentina?