Download This Issue
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
LUSEM Thesis Template
Brand Hostage How NGOs achieve their Strategic Goals on a Reputational Battlefield by Allan Su & Stefanie Wolff May 2017 Master’s Programme in International Marketing & Brand Management Supervisor: Mats Urde Examiner: Veronika Tarnovskaya Abstract Title: Brand Hostage - How NGOs achieve their Strategic Goals on a Reputational Battlefield Authors: Allan Su and Stefanie Wolff Course: BUSN39 Degree project in Global Marketing Date of Seminar: 2017-05-31 Supervisor: Mats Urde Purpose: The purpose of the study is to explore the phenomenon of brand hostage, with the aim to develop a framework and a definition for a deeper understanding of its modus operandi. Relevance: Over the past two decades, disruptive and successful NGO campaigns have increasingly targeted corporations, which makes the topic a major concern for managers. Nevertheless, both from an academic and practitioner's perspective the phenomenon remains elusive and neither well understood nor described in theory or practice. Methodology: A qualitative multiple-case study with a constructionist and interpretivist stance has been chosen to follow the inductive approach. For the data collection and analysis of that data, a grounded theory approach was applied. The selected NGO cases encompass three Greenpeace campaigns as well as one campaign each from the Organic Consumer Association against Starbucks and Green America against General Mills. Findings: The research findings indicate that the phenomenon of brand hostage is significantly more complex than stated in current literature, as demonstrated in the developed NGO brand hostage framework resulting from the case analyses. Furthermore, there exists the possibility of a continuing partnership after the resolution. Contributions: The research contributes to NGO, reputation management and crisis communication theory by providing a framework and definition of the brand hostage phenomenon. -
Are Condorcet and Minimax Voting Systems the Best?1
1 Are Condorcet and Minimax Voting Systems the Best?1 Richard B. Darlington Cornell University Abstract For decades, the minimax voting system was well known to experts on voting systems, but was not widely considered to be one of the best systems. But in recent years, two important experts, Nicolaus Tideman and Andrew Myers, have both recognized minimax as one of the best systems. I agree with that. This paper presents my own reasons for preferring minimax. The paper explicitly discusses about 20 systems. Comments invited. [email protected] Copyright Richard B. Darlington May be distributed free for non-commercial purposes Keywords Voting system Condorcet Minimax 1. Many thanks to Nicolaus Tideman, Andrew Myers, Sharon Weinberg, Eduardo Marchena, my wife Betsy Darlington, and my daughter Lois Darlington, all of whom contributed many valuable suggestions. 2 Table of Contents 1. Introduction and summary 3 2. The variety of voting systems 4 3. Some electoral criteria violated by minimax’s competitors 6 Monotonicity 7 Strategic voting 7 Completeness 7 Simplicity 8 Ease of voting 8 Resistance to vote-splitting and spoiling 8 Straddling 8 Condorcet consistency (CC) 8 4. Dismissing eight criteria violated by minimax 9 4.1 The absolute loser, Condorcet loser, and preference inversion criteria 9 4.2 Three anti-manipulation criteria 10 4.3 SCC/IIA 11 4.4 Multiple districts 12 5. Simulation studies on voting systems 13 5.1. Why our computer simulations use spatial models of voter behavior 13 5.2 Four computer simulations 15 5.2.1 Features and purposes of the studies 15 5.2.2 Further description of the studies 16 5.2.3 Results and discussion 18 6. -
Forest Values Surrounding Ancient Cedar Stands in British Columbia's Inland Temperate Rainforest
FOREST VALUES SURROUNDING ANCIENT CEDAR STANDS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA’S INLAND TEMPERATE RAINFOREST by Jessica N. Shapiro B.A., McGill University, 2009 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN BRITISH COLUMBIA August 2012 © Jessica N. Shapiro, 2012 ABSTRACT The Inland Temperate Rainforest (ITR) of British Columbia is a globally unique ecosystem containing areas of high biodiversity, including ancient cedar stands in the upper Fraser River valley. The forest is located in a region historically focused on the economic values of timber. Increased research about and recreational use of the forest, however, has demonstrated a wider array of forest values that is yet to be fully documented. The purpose of this research is to document the breadth of forest values surrounding the ancient cedar stands to gain a better understanding of the significance of this globally unique forest. Through content analysis, as well as surveys conducted in two communities in the ITR, data were collected from trail users, the public, and local residents. Results reveal a broad set of forest values that inform the ongoing debate currently surrounding the best and highest use of the ancient cedar stands. Keywords: globally unique ecosystem, ancient cedar stands, forest values ii Table of Contents Abstract ii Table of Contents iii List of Tables, Charts, and Figures v Dedication & Acknowledgements vi CHAPTER ONE: Introduction 1 1.1 Research Question -
Demand-Side Interventions to Reduce Deforestation and Forest Degradation
Demand-side interventions to reduce deforestation and forest degradation Nathalie Walker, Sabrina Patel, Frances Davies, Simon Milledge and James Hulse DEMAnd-sidE inTERVENTIOns TO REDUCE DEFORESTATION And FOREST DEGRADATION Acknowledgements Increasing recognition of the role that commodity demand-side measures can play to address deforestation has resulted in a recent surge in efforts to assess progress and chart ways forward. As an initial step towards taking a holistic look at the range of available commodity demand-side measures, this paper was the result of a collaboration between the International Institute of Environment and Development (IIED), Global Canopy Programme (GCP), CDP Forests (formerly Forest Footprint Disclosure Project) and The Prince’s Rainforests Project (PRP). In this regard special thanks are due to Andrew Mitchell (GCP), James Hulse (CDP Forests), Frances Davis (GCP), Nathalie Walker (FFD), Edward Davey (PRP), Irene Klepinine (PRP), Georgia Edwards (PRP), Duncan Macqueen (IIED), Simon Milledge (IIED), Leianne Rolington (IIED) and Lucile Robinson (IIED). The paper builds on an international workshop held in February 2013, also co-convened by the International Institute of Environment and Development, Global Canopy Programme, CDP Forests and The Prince’s Rainforests Project. The active inputs from presenters and participants representing private sector, civil society and government are sincerely appreciated, and The Royal Society is acknowledged for providing an atmospheric venue setting within the City of London rooms. Barbara Bramble (National Wildlife Federation and also Chair of the Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels) deserves special mention for having chaired the event to ensure a day of informative and provocative discussions. Lastly, Duncan Brack and Alison Hoare (Chatham House) are acknowledged for their efforts to enable coordinated preparations and follow-up to this work. -
Legitimacy and Exclusion in the Canadian Boreal Forest Agreement
Neoliberal conservation: Legitimacy and exclusion in the Canadian Boreal Forest Agreement by Stephanie Kittmer A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Affairs in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Political Economy Carleton University Ottawa, Ontario ©2013, Stephanie Kittmer Library and Archives Bibliotheque et Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du 1+1 Branch Patrimoine de I'edition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-94605-3 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-94605-3 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans le loan, distrbute and sell theses monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non support microforme, papier, electronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la these ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation. -
April 7, 2021 To: Representative Mark Meek, Chair House Special
The League of Women Voters of Oregon is a 101-year-old grassroots nonpartisan political organization that encourages informed and active participation in government. We envision informed Oregonians participating in a fully accessible, responsive, and transparent government to achieve the common good. LWVOR Legislative Action is based on advocacy positions formed through studies and member consensus. The League never supports or opposes any candidate or political party. April 7, 2021 To: Representative Mark Meek, Chair House Special Committee On Modernizing the People’s Legislature Re: Hearing on Ranked Choice Voting Chair Meek, Vice-Chair Wallan and committee members, The League of Women Voters (LWV) at the national and state levels has long been interested in electoral system reforms as a way to achieve the greatest level of representation. In Oregon, we most recently conducted an in-depth two-year study (2016) to update our Election Methods Position. That position was (in part) the basis for a similar update to the LWV United States position in 2020. In League studies around the nation, our current system (called either ‘plurality’ or ‘First Past the Post’) where ‘whoever gets the most votes wins’ has been found the least-desirable of all electoral systems. The Oregon position is no different. It further lays out criteria for best systems; and states our support of Ranked Choice Voting (RCV). Several of the related criteria are: • Encouraging voter participation and voter engagement. • Encouraging those with minority opinions to participate. • Promote sincere voting over strategic voting. • Discourage negative campaigning. For multi-seat elections (a.k.a. at-large or multi-winner elections), the LWV Oregon position currently supports several systems. -
Ethical Shopping Guide to Disposable and Reusable Nappies
THANK YOU FOR DOWNLOADING THIS ETHICAL CONSUMER RESEARCH REPORT. It contains a buyers’ guide complete with: • a detailed article • rankings table • Best Buy advice • all the stories behind the marks on the table • company ownership and contact details • full list of references £4.25 EC121 November/December 2009 www.ethicalconsumer.org Subscribe to Ethical Consumer and get instant access to over 80 similar reports (worth over £240) as part of your subscription. Subscribers also get: Revealing the dark heart Ethical Consumer magazine of the chocolate industry – play fair, not dirty Toys & games consoles – cutting the environmental costs - keeping you up to date with all the latest ethical news and analysis Razors & shavers Rating • Unique buyers’ guides with detailed ratings tables, Best Buys advice, (out of 20) Brand 17 company profiles, news, boycotts, comment and more Equal Exchange tea 17 [F,O] 17 Online back issues archive HampsteadCo tea Tea [F,O] & Coffee • 17 Purely Organic tea [F,O] Steenbergs English • Available in print through the post or as a digital download breakfast tea [F,O] Unlimited, 24 hour access to our premium website ethiscore.org been a contributor to carbon emissions which had a damaging effect on the environment. (ref: 3) or dolphin No palm oil policy Sustainable(July 2009) forestry policy (2008) contacted, 123 had a dmitted to selling whale and/ A search was madeWal-Mart of the Walmart did not website respond (www.walmartstores. to a request by ECRA in Ocober 2008 meat. It said Sea Shepherd had been urging its members and the com) on 8th July 2009.for the No company’s policy on popalmlicy oil on could the sustainable be found. -
Vote Splitting
Vote Splitting: Who benefits from better The Root of Electoral Evils voting methods? Our current choose-one Plurality Voting method allows voters to express an opinion about only one candidate. This works fine—when there are only two candidates. Add a third, and you get vote splitting: the most similar candidates split their common supporters’ votes, and can lose to another less preferred Major-party supporters candidate—possibly even the least preferred! • Better primaries, without vote The Vote-Splitting Cycle What Makes a Good Voting Method splitting and spoilers A good voting method has several essential Fear of being a “spoiler” deters many candidates • Less negative campaigning, qualities, starting with the fundamental two: from entering the race, denying voters a real choice. more post-primary unity Often enough more candidates run anyway, forcing Accuracy and Simplicity. Over the expected voters to play a game: guessing how other voters range of election scenarios, the voting method • No minor-party spoilers will vote. For this they consider candidates’ “viabilty” must produce results that accurately reflect the — not only their qualifications, but their popularity, will of the electorate, at an acceptable logistical Minor-party supporters funding, and media support. Campaign money cost. To produce such results, we need three more becomes necessary not just to make candidates qualities: Expressiveness, Sincerity, and Equality. • Other parties see minor-party candidates as allies, not spoilers known, but to signal that they are serious. Facing Voters must be able and willing to express a the “wasted-vote dilemma,” many voters abandon reasonably full and sincere opinion, and the • Results reflect a party’s true their favorite candidates for the few who seem to presence of similar candidates should not hurt or support have the best chances — the bandwagon effect. -
Voting Rights Plan
Making Virginia Number One in the Nation for Voting Rights Summary Protecting the fundamental voting rights of Virginians is personal for Jenn McClellan. In 1901, when her great-grandfather Henry Davidson went to register to vote in Bibb County, Alabama, he was sub- jected to a challenging literacy test and ordered to find three white men to vouch for his character. Her great-grandmother was not even allowed to register to vote. Recently, Jenn found her father James McClellan’s poll tax receipt. That moment – coupled with the recent attempts by Republican state legis- latures across the country to restrict voting rights affirmed the on-going struggle for fair access and the urgent need to protect voting rights. A copy of the 1947 poll tax that Jenn McClellan’s father paid in Davidson County, TN. In Jenn’s 16 sessions in the legislature, she has driven and fought for generational progress in voter protections and rights. She helped reverse the GOP leader’s restrictive voter ID requirements in 2010 and seven restrictive Republican voter ID laws from 2013, expanded the list of accepted voter ID options, helped create no excuse absentee voting, extended the timeline for mailed absentee ballots, enabled permanent absentee voting by mail, created automatic voter registration and same day registration, and ended prison gerrymandering in the redistricting process. Jenn’s leadership in the Virginia General Assembly laid the foundation for generational progress in protecting Virginians’ right to vote. In 2021, Jenn passed the Voting Rights Act of Virginia. The Voting Rights Act of Virginia is modeled after the feder- al Voting Rights Act of 1965 and will protect all voters in the Commonwealth from suppression, discrim- ination and intimidation, and expand language access to voters for whom English is a second language. -
Kimberly-Clark Sets the Bar Higher for Tissue Products with Stronger Global Forest Policy
Kimberly-Clark Sets the Bar Higher for Tissue Products with Stronger Global Forest Policy Greenpeace Ends Its "Kleercut" Campaign and Applauds the Company's Sustainability Efforts Washington -- Aug. 5, 2009 -- Kimberly-Clark Corporation, the maker of Kleenex, Scott and Cottonelle brands, today announced stronger fiber sourcing standards that will increase conservation of forests globally and will make the company a leader for sustainably produced tissue products. Greenpeace, which worked with Kimberly-Clark on its revised standards, announced that it will end its "Kleercut" campaign, which focused on the company and its brands. "We are committed to using environmentally responsible wood fiber and today's announcement enhances our industry-leading practices in this area," said Suhas Apte, Kimberly-Clark Vice President of Environment, Energy, Safety, Quality and Sustainability. "It is our belief that certified primary wood fiber and recycled fiber can both be used in an environmentally responsible way and can provide the product performance that customers and consumers expect from our well-known tissue brands. We commend Greenpeace for helping us develop more sustainable standards." Kimberly-Clark has set a goal of obtaining 100 percent of the company's wood fiber for tissue products, including the Kleenex brand, from environmentally responsible sources. The revised standards will enhance the protection of Endangered Forests and increase the use of both Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certified fiber and recycled fiber. By the end of 2011, Kimberly-Clark will ensure that 40 percent of its North American tissue fiber - representing an estimated 600,000 tonnes - is either recycled or FSC certified, an increase of more than 70 percent over 2007 levels. -
Improving Elections with Instant Runoff Voting
FAIRVOTE: THE CENTER FOR VOTING & DEMOCRACY | WWW.FAIRVOTE.ORG | (301) 270-4616 Improving Elections with Instant Runoff Voting Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) - Used for both government and private elections around the United States and the world, instant runoff voting is a simple election process used to avoid the expense, difficulties and shortcomings of runoff elections. Compared to the traditional “delayed” runoff, IRV saves taxpayers money, cuts the costs of running campaigns, elects public officials with higher voter turnout and encourages candidates to run less negative campaigns. How instant runoff voting works: • First round of counting: The voters rank their preferred candidate first and may also rank additional choices (second, third, etc.). In the first round of counting, the voters’ #1 choices are tallied. A candidate who receives enough first choices to win outright (typically a majority) is declared the winner. However, other candidates may have enough support to require a runoff – just as in traditional runoff systems. • Second round: If no one achieves a clear victory, the runoff occurs instantly. The candidate with the fewest votes is removed and the votes made for that candidate are redistributed using voters’ second choices. Other voters’ top choices remain the same. The redistributed votes are added to the counts of the candidates still in competition. The process is repeated until one candidate has majority support. The benefits: Instant runoff voting (IRV) would do everything the current runoff system does to ensure that the winner has popular support – but it does it in one election rather than two. • Saves localities, taxpayers and candidates money by holding only one election. -
2007–2008 Annual Report
Page 2007–2008 1 Annual Report Blomstrandbreen glacier in Svalbard, Norway in 1928. In 2002, the glacier showed a loss of over one mile. OUR MISSION STATEMENT Contents 2–3 From the Executive Director Greenpeace is an independent campaigning 4–7 Climate Campaign 8–11 Oceans Campaigns organization that uses peaceful protest and 12–15 Forests Campaigns 16–17 Toxic Campaigns creative communication to expose global 18–21 Global Perspective 22–23 Direct Action and Hope environmental problems and promote solutions 24–25 Financial Highlights 26–32 Donor lists for the future. With 42 offices located throughout Greenpeace, Inc. 2007-08 the world, Greenpeace works to protect our Board of Directors Donald K. Ross, Chair oceans and ancient forests, and to end toxic Elizabeth Gilchrist (Treasurer) Kenny Bruno pollution, global warming, nuclear threats, and Valerie Denney Jeffrey Hollender genetic engineering. Since 1971, Greenpeace David Hunter Jigar Shah has been the leading voice of the environmental David Pellow Bryony Schwan movement by taking a stand against powerful ADDITIONAL OFFICERS John Passacantando (Executive Director) political and corporate interests whose policies Tom Wetterer (Secretary) put the planet at risk. Greenpeace Fund, Inc. 2007 Board of Directors David Chatfield (Chair) Peggy Burks (Treasurer) Elizabeth Gilchrist Karen Topakian John Willis ADDITIONAL OFFICERS John Passacantando (Executive Director) Daniel McGregor (Secretary) On the Cover Planet Earth taken by Apollo 17 astronauts in December 1972, as they left Earth’s orbit en route to the moon. ©NASA On the Back Cover Greenpeace and the Iowa Farmers Union make an image of a windmill into a crop formation in Des Moines on October 1, 2007.