The Common HOL Platform

The Common HOL project aims to facilitate porting source code and proofs between members of the HOL family of theorem provers. At the heart of the project is the Common HOL Platform, which defines a standard HOL theory and API that aims to be compatible with all HOL systems. So far, HOL Light and hol90 have been adapted for conformance, and HOL Zero was originally developed to conform. In this paper we provide motivation for a platform, give an overview of the Common HOL Platform's theory and API components, and show how to adapt legacy systems. We also report on the platform's successful application in the hand-translation of a few thousand lines of source code from HOL Light to HOL Zero.Comment: In Proceedings PxTP 2015, arXiv:1507.0837

Environmental, social and governance disclosures in Europe

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to shed light on the European Union’s (EU) latest regulatory principles for environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosures. It explains how some of the EU’s member states are ratifying the EU Commission’s directives on ESG reporting by introducing intelligent, substantive and reflexive regulations. Design/methodology/approach – Following a review of EU publications and relevant theoretical underpinnings, this paper reports on the EU member states’ national policies for ESG reporting and disclosures. Findings – The EU has recently revised a number of tools and instruments for the reporting of financial and non-financial information, including the EU’s modernisation directive, the EU’s directive on the disclosure of non-financial and diversity information, the EU Energy Efficiency Directive, the European pollutant release and transfer register, the EU emission trading scheme, the integrated pollution prevention and control directive, among others. Practical implications – Although all member states are transposing these new EU directives, to date, there are no specific requirements in relation to the type of non-financial indicators that can be included in annual reports. Moreover, there is a need for further empirical evidence that analyse how these regulations may (or may not) affect government entities and big corporations. Social implications – Several EU countries are integrating reporting frameworks that require the engagement of relevant stakeholders (including shareholders) to foster a constructive environment that may lead to continuous improvements in ESG disclosures. Originality/value – EU countries are opting for a mix of voluntary and mandatory measures that improve ESG disclosures in their respective jurisdictions. This contribution indicates that there is scope for national governments to give further guidance to civil society and corporate business to comply with the latest EU developments in ESG reporting. When European entities respond to regulatory pressures, they are also addressing ESG and economic deficits for the benefit of all stakeholders.peer-reviewe

Integrating ERW Programs: The Case for Consolidating CWD Activities

For years, the mine-action community has been revising its definition of explosive remnants of war. Viewing unexploded ordnance, landmines, ammunition stockpiles, and small arms/light weapons as individual threats, the mine-action community has created distinct budgets, programs and policies to address each of them. What were beginning to realize, however, is that a more integrated approach allows for greater progress in reducing the ERW threat

Struggling Through the Thicket: Section 301 and the Washington Supreme Court

In this article, Professor Adams examines preemption doctrine under section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act, focusing primarily on the Washington Supreme Court\u27s 1992 decision in Commodore v. University Mechanical Contractors, Inc. The author traces the history of section 301 cases, comparing two different theories regarding its correct application. Under one theory, an employee\u27s state law claim will be preempted if the underlying right is negotiable or if the employer\u27s defenses implicate the collective bargaining agreement. Under the second theory, an employee\u27s state law claim is preempted only when the right at issue derives from the provisions of a collective bargaining agreement; on the other hand, an employee\u27s state law claim will not be preempted if it is based on an independent state law duty. Professor Adams argues that the Washington Supreme Court, in adopting the second theory of section 301 preemption, has remained faithful to the United States Supreme Court\u27s complete preemption doctrine, while providing parties to collective bargaining agreements with a consistent method of adjudicating state law claims. He notes, however, a trend in lower federal courts and in state courts toward adoption of the first model and argues that if allowed to continue, that trend will be detrimental to the ability of unions to recruit employees and effectively bargain to protect their rights