Which direction for sustainable development? A time series comparison of the impacts of redistributive versus market policies in Bolivia and South Korea

This article examines two major policy frameworks for achieving sustainable development: the market-based ‘Green Economy’ approach (exemplified by South Korea), and the redistributive ‘Living Well’ approach (exemplified by Bolivia). We compare the two paradigms in qualitative terms using document analysis, and we assess quantitatively how they have fared in terms of delivering progress towards sustainable development in each country. Time series data for the Sustainable Development Index and the Gini index were examined. The results show that, since ‘Living Well’ was initiated, social outcomes have continued to improve in Bolivia and, while emissions and material footprint have increased, they remain low and within or near sustainable boundaries. By contrast, South Korea has regressed in terms of sustainability. Social indicators have improved, but the Green Economy policy has failed to reduce ecological pressures. This raises significant questions about the legitimacy of the Green Economy paradigm as a model for achieving sustainable development

Which direction for sustainable development? A time series comparison of the impacts of redistributive versus market policies in Bolivia and South Korea

Unidad de excelencia María de Maeztu CEX2019-000940-MThis article examines two major policy frameworks for achieving sustainable development: the market-based 'Green Economy' approach (exemplified by South Korea), and the redistributive 'Living Well' approach (exemplified by Bolivia). We compare the two paradigms in qualitative terms using document analysis, and we assess quantitatively how they have fared in terms of delivering progress towards sustainable development in each country. Time series data for the Sustainable Development Index and the Gini index were examined. The results show that, since 'Living Well' was initiated, social outcomes have continued to improve in Bolivia and, while emissions and material footprint have increased, they remain low and within or near sustainable boundaries. By contrast, South Korea has regressed in terms of sustainability. Social indicators have improved, but the Green Economy policy has failed to reduce ecological pressures. This raises significant questions about the legitimacy of the Green Economy paradigm as a modelfor achieving sustainable development

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication

A Study into the Supply, Demand, Economic, Social and Institutional Aspects of Optimising Water Supply to Metropolitan Adelaide - Preliminary Research Findings: Summary Report from Project U2.2

In November 2012, the Goyder Institute for Water Research funded a research programme as a contribution to the building of a strong information base to inform debate on how best to underpin an efficient and sustainable water supply for metropolitan Adelaide, now and into the future, due to the likely impacts of a drying climate and population growth. Metropolitan Adelaide has multiple sources of water – surface water, groundwater, desalinated water, stormwater, roof or rain water, recycled water and the River Murray – that can be utilised and managed for supplying the city’s water needs. Using those sources in combination requires consideration of an appropriate balance across objectives such as supply security, economic cost, social preferences and environmental impacts

Deficit discourse – the ‘regime of truth’ preceding the Cape York Welfare Reform

The Cape York Welfare Reform (CYWR) income management regime commenced in 2008. While this regime was supported and funded by the Queensland and federal governments, it was essentially developed by the Cape York Institute for Policy and Leadership (CYI), which was known as an Aboriginal policy development think tank. Income management in Cape York involves quarantining between 60% and 90% of a person's social security payment, if the person is deemed to have breached particular social responsibilities. The decision to income manage social security payments of CYWR community members, was based on a belief and writings by the CYI that there was a social norms deficit in Cape York communities, which income management could play a role in addressing. The language used by the CYI to describe Cape York community life was negative in the extreme, dramatic and evocative. This language, which I describe as deficit discourse, commanded a response to what was described as a dire situation. This article frames this deficit discourse in the broader and continuing context of colonisation. This discourse has been applied consistently throughout Australia's colonial history, perpetuating racial discrimination and justifying continuous governmental intervention into Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people's lives