Search results

The global biofuels sector has expanded rapidly in the past decade, with feedstock expansion penetrating many tropical areas. While the emerging demand for biofuels represents an opportunity for developing countries, it also poses a host of social and environmental risks. Large investments are needed to finance expansion of biofuel and feedstock production, suggesting that the financial sector may have a crucial role to play in mitigating these risks. This paper seeks to explore the role of financiers in expanding biofuel feedstock production and refining in tropical forest‐rich countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America to better understand the role and future potential of responsible finance in the biofuel sector.

The analysis draws on published data and reports from academia, industry, governments, civil society and the press, to quantify the magnitude and source of investments made from 2000‐2010 in 16 countries sampled from “ecoregions” subject to high rates of forest conversion, weak land tenure institutions, and vulnerable communities.

It is found that the case study countries received USD 5.3‐7.3 billion for feedstock production and USD 5.7‐6.7 billion for biofuel refining between 2000 and 2009. This was financed by a mix of entrepreneurs, private banks, investors, governments and multilateral banks. While no clear patterns emerge, foreign banks and institutional investors rank as “important” for most feedstocks and regions. Multilateral banks and domestic institutional investors seem to be the least important. Few financiers have criteria in place in order to ensure sustainable investing practices, and those who do tend to have policies of limited quality.

While much has been written on biofuel sustainability and governance, there is little research that delineates the nature of investment and finance in the sector.

Social engineering is a prominent aspect of online crime. Various interventions have been developed to reduce the success of this type of attacks. This paper aims to investigate if interventions can help to decrease the vulnerability to social engineering attacks. If they help, the authors investigate which forms of interventions and specific elements constitute success.

The authors selected studies which had an experimental design and rigorously tested at least one intervention that aimed to reduce the vulnerability to social engineering. The studies were primarily identified from querying the Scopus database. The authors identified 19 studies which lead to the identification of 37 effect sizes, based on a total sample of N = 23,146 subjects. The available training, intervention materials and effect sizes were analysed. The authors collected information on the context of the intervention, the characteristics of the intervention and the characteristics of the research methodology. All analyses were performed using random-effects models, and heterogeneity was quantified.

The authors find substantial differences in effect size for the different interventions. Some interventions are highly effective; others have no effect at all. Highly intensive interventions are more effective than those that are low on intensity. Furthermore, interventions with a narrow focus are more effective than those with a broad focus.

The results of this study show differences in effect for different elements of interventions. This allows practitioners to review their awareness campaigns and tailor them to increase their success.

The authors believe that this is the first study that compares the impact of social engineering interventions systematically.