A hybrid proposal for cross-sectoral analysis of knowledge management

At present time, although many theoretical formulations have been successfully proposed, there is a lack of ICT-based tools to support practical deployment of knowledge management (KM) in real settings. To bridge this gap, a hybrid artificial intelligence system is proposed in present study, aimed at gaining deeper knowledge about KM practices in four different economic sectors. By means of soft computing, companies are diagnosed according to their status regarding KM and subsequent explanations about crucial KM practices and perspectives are generated. Interesting conclusions are then derived from these explanations, allowing KM managers to optimise their decisions and obtain better results. Experimental results of real-life data from Spanish companies associated with different economic sectors validate the proposed combination of techniques

Capital adequacy regulation of financial conglomerates in the European Union

Over the past few decades, changes in market conditions such as globalisation and deregulation of financial markets as well as product innovation and technical advancements have induced financial institutions to expand their business activities beyond their traditional boundaries and to engage in cross-sectoral operations. As combining different sectoral businesses offers opportunities for operational synergies and diversification benefits, financial groups comprising banks, insurance undertakings and/or investment firms, usually referred to as financial conglomerates, have rapidly emerged, providing a wide range of services and products in distinct financial sectors and oftentimes in different geographic locations. In the European Union (EU), financial conglomerates have become part of the biggest and most active financial market participants in recent years. Financial conglomerates generally pose new problems for financial authorities as they can raise new risks and exacerbate existing ones. In particular, their cross-sectoral business activities can involve prudentially substantial risks such as the risk of regulatory arbitrage and contagion risk arising from intra-group transactions. Moreover, the generally large size of financial conglomerates as well as the high complexity and interconnectedness of their corporate structures and risk exposures can entail substantial systemic risk and can therefore threaten the stability of the financial system as a whole. Until a few years ago, there was no supervisory framework in place which addressed a financial conglomerate in its entirety as a group. Instead, each group entity within a financial conglomerate was subject to the supervisory rules of its pertinent sector only. Such silo supervisory approach had the drawback of not taking account of risks which arise or aggravate at the group level. It also failed to consider how the risks from different business lines within the group interrelate with each other and affect the group as a whole. In order to address this lack of group-wide prudential supervision of financial conglomerates, the European legislator adopted the Financial Conglomerates Directive 2002/87/EC8 (‘FCD’) on 16 December 2002. The FCD was transposed into national law in the member states of the EU (‘Member States’) by 11 August 2004 for application to financial years beginning on 1 January 2005 and after. The FCD primarily aims at supplementing the existing sectoral directives to address the additional risks of concentration, contagion and complexity presented by financial conglomerates. It therefore provides for a supervisory framework which is applicable in addition to the sectoral supervision. Most importantly, the FCD has introduced additional capital requirements at the conglomerate level so as to prevent the multiple use of the same capital by different group entities. This paper seeks to examine to what extent the FCD provides for an adequate capital regulation of financial conglomerates in the EU while taking into account the underlying sectoral capital requirements and the inherent risks associated with financial conglomerates. In Part 1, the definition and the basic corporate models of financial conglomerates will be presented (I), followed by an illustration of the core motives behind the phenomenon of financial conglomeration (II) and an overview of the development of the supervision over financial conglomerates in the EU (III). Part 2 begins with a brief elaboration on the role of regulatory capital (I) and gives a general overview of the EU capital requirements applicable to banks and insurance undertakings respectively. A delineation of the commonalities and differences of the banking and the insurance capital requirements will be provided (II). It continues to further examine the need for a group-wide capital regulation of financial conglomerates and analyses the adequacy of the FCD capital requirements. In this context, the technical advice rendered by the Joint Committee on Financial Conglomerates (JCFC) as well as the currently ongoing legislative reforms at the EU level will be discussed (III). The paper finally closes with a conclusion and an outlook on remaining open issues (IV)

Political Economy of International Climate Finance: Navigating Decisions in PPCR and SREP

This working paper explores how countries can build their own 'climate finance readiness' by understanding their internal political economy and use that understanding to steer consensus-based decisions on climate finance investments. For climate finance to be effective, national leaders must build shared commitments. This involves considering the arguments, incentives and power dynamics at play to ensure priorities are more equitable and representative of a broader group of stakeholders. Doing so will also help to reduce the risk of implementation delays. This paper uses case studies from Bangladesh, Ethiopia and Nepal to explore how narratives and incentives within the political economy drive climate investment outcomes under the Pilot Programme for Climate Resilience (PPCR) and the Scaling up Renewable Energy Programme (SREP). It draws from broader analysis of the discourses around these investments, including 80 interviews with government; multilateral development banks (MDBs) and other stakeholders

An Annotated Bibliography of Recent Literature on Current Developments in Philanthropy

As philanthropic organizations play an increasingly important role in societies around the world, the research on philanthropy – from giving and volunteering practices to regulatory frameworks to digital innovations – has also evolved in recent decades. It is important to develop a thorough overview of the relevant scientific discourses and literature on current developments in philanthropy. This will allow researchers and practitioners to enhance the understanding of philanthropy and to improve its practice worldwide. This report provides new insights on current developments and important changes in the global philanthropic landscape, including trends in global philanthropy and its interaction with other sectors of society

Pathways to Coastal Resiliency: the Adaptive Gradients Framework

Current and future climate-related coastal impacts such as catastrophic and repetitive flooding, hurricane intensity, and sea level rise necessitate a new approach to developing and managing coastal infrastructure. Traditional “hard” or “grey” engineering solutions are proving both expensive and inflexible in the face of a rapidly changing coastal environment. Hybrid solutions that incorporate natural, nature-based, structural, and non-structural features may better achieve a broad set of goals such as ecological enhancement, long-term adaptation, and social benefits, but broad consideration and uptake of these approaches has been slow. One barrier to the widespread implementation of hybrid solutions is the lack of a relatively quick but holistic evaluation framework that places these broader environmental and societal goals on equal footing with the more traditional goal of exposure reduction. To respond to this need, the Adaptive Gradients Framework was developed and pilot-tested as a qualitative, flexible, and collaborative process guide for organizations to understand, evaluate, and potentially select more diverse kinds of infrastructural responses. These responses would ideally include natural, nature-based, and regulatory/cultural approaches, as well as hybrid designs combining multiple approaches. It enables rapid expert review of project designs based on eight metrics called “gradients”, which include exposure reduction, cost efficiency, institutional capacity, ecological enhancement, adaptation over time, greenhouse gas reduction, participatory process, and social benefits. The framework was conceptualized and developed in three phases: relevant factors and barriers were collected from practitioners and experts by survey; these factors were ranked by importance and used to develop the initial framework; several case studies were iteratively evaluated using this technique; and the framework was finalized for implementation. The article presents the framework and a pilot test of its application, along with resources that would enable wider application of the framework by practitioners and theorists

Study on cash transfers for seed security in humanitarian settings

This study examines the barriers and opportunities for cash transfers to be used to address seed security in humanitarian situations. Cash, while not a new approach, has gained momentum in recent years, especially with the emergence of the Cash Learning Partnership (CaLP) and humanitarian organizations’ commitments through the Grand Bargain.2 Historically, direct seed distribution (DSD) has dominated agricultural responses in emergencies. While effective in many situations, other modalities of addressing farmers’ needs have also proven to be effective, including seed and voucher fairs and, increasingly, cash transfer responses. The latter response typically provides farmers greater choices to make decisions about their seed needs and preferences. However, as with direct distribution and vouchers, cash can be a viable option but may not always be appropriate in every situation. The quality of seed is of paramount importance in choosing a response and has been an ongoing (and often contentious and political) discussion for decades. The results of this study advocate for a multi- stakeholder perspective on the quality of seed, while offering farmers the most flexible and most appropriate response possible for their given situation. In some cases, this will be cash transfers, but certainly not in all cases. A range of options offers the best chance for a successful, responsive, and appropriate program. The evidence base on outcomes from using cash for seed in humanitarian contexts is limited, however, reviewing a series of examples shows the breadth and range of options that are being explored. The cases from an array of organizations and countries including Iraq, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Malawi, Madagascar, and Guatemala, show that understanding the context is key to the response analysis and the choice of modality. Organizational approaches and previous experience also played a role in the choice of modality. The evidence to date shows that cash, in addition to complementary programming such as technical or business training, offers promise for seed security interventions. In addition, initiatives to support both the demand and supply side of the market have proven to be effective. Key findings include: 1. Market and needs assessments must include a seed component or SSSA to ensure a response designed to address the right problem, not the assumption. For markets, both informal and formal seed markets need to be included. 2. Good needs assessments, response analysis and program design help ensure participants’ spending cash on what implementers anticipate they will. 3. Program participants’ preferences on modalities are not consistently included in response analysis. 4. Mixed modalities (cash and vouchers, or cash and DSD) can broaden crop choices. 5. Quality screenings for seed are taking place; the quality of seed is important to organizations and project participants. 6. Cash for seed security interventions are limited, but growing in prevalence. 7. Providing cash plus complementary support is a promising practice for fostering seed security. 8. The nexus between relief and development is critical—designing projects with a longer-term development view: cash can prepare the way for farmers to continue true market engagement post-relief, spur business development in subsequent seasons, and offer opportunities for financial inclusion. 9. Supporting supply side to bring quality seed markets ‘closer’ to project participants should be considered along with demand-side interventions (cash, voucher and other). 10. Investment in preparedness provides a better foundation to implement impactful cash for seed security response. The risks, mitigating actions, opportunities and enablers for cash and seed security response are also explored. The study concludes with actionable and practical recommendations for further advancing the evidence base, as well as implementation suggestions. Continuous collaboration of key stakeholders in seed systems is essential to advance the discussions and action on the way forward with cash and seed systems

Industrial policy for the medium to long-term

This report reviews the market failure and systems failure rationales for industrial policy and assesses the evidence on part experience of industrial policy in the UK. In the light of this, it reviews options for reshaping the design and delivery of industrial policy towards UK manufacturing. These options are intended to encourage a medium- to long-term perspective across government departments and to integrate science, innovation and industrial policy

The need of standardization and the potential role of voluntary approaches: Issues and trends in Italian GCHP market

Despite the lack of specific incentives, Ground Coupled Heat Pumps (GCHP) installations are booming in Italy both in private and public sectors of the market. Such rapid growth entails an increasing concern for environmental and technical performances since no comprehensive regulation and reliable standards exist yet. By means of an investigation of sectoral opinion leaders and SWOT-based technique for building scenarios, this paper discusses potential schemes for balancing mandatory and voluntary requirements. The analysis suggests that standardization and voluntary schemes are perceived as effective tools to encourage the greening of Italian GCHP-SMEs in short-run while laying the foundations for evolving sustainable policies in the longer run. A potential scheme that has been simulated by reflecting the supply-side orientations of the market and that involves of process and product standards is discussed.

Bridging the Gap Between Energy and Climate Policies in Brazil: Policy Options to Reduce Energy-Related GHG Emissions

Brazil is facing a series of important policy decisions that will determine its energy future over the next several decades, with important implications for the country's economic competitiveness, the well-being of its citizens, and the global climate. The decisions concern the direction of approximately 0.5 trillion U.S. dollars of anticipated investment in energy infrastructure over the next decade -- which can either lock in carbon-intensive infrastructure, or advance Brazil's position as a leader in the low-carbon economy. This report examines Brazil's key energy-related GHG emitting sectors through a climate lens in order to offer recommendations for a more integrated approach that can more effectively reconcile energy and climate needs. It begins with an overview of Brazil's past energy and GHG emissions profiles, current pledges and future trends, and a discussion of the implications for a possible allocation of the remaining global carbon budget. Next, it reviews available scenarios for Brazil's energy-related GHG emissions in order to identify key drivers and results and compare them to a given allocation of the global carbon budget. It then focuses on the top emitting subsectors -- transport, industry, and power generation -- to identify key abatement opportunities. The report concludes with recommendations regarding a portfolio of policies and measures that could achieve both climate and energy objectives