Biodiversity and financing : Review of tools in the Nordic countries

Financial institutions have facilitated the expansion of business activities detrimental to biological diversity. However, the demand for investing in activities with positive impact on nature is rapidly rising, and the financial sector is increasingly urged to align their portfolios with biodiversity positive outcomes. This report provides a status of existing analytical tools and public and private strategies that ensure that public and private investments strengthen, not weaken, biodiversity. The report also looks closer at the approaches to biodiversity safeguards in the Nordic financial institutions Nefco (Nordic Environment Finance Corporation), NDF (Nordic Development Fund) and NIB (Nordic Investment Bank), and examines their methods to support biodiversity and nature through their financial activities

Nature Risk : An analysis of use and applicability in the Nordic countries

This report generates an overview of the use of the nature risk concept, describes the scope, and assesses the applicability in the Nordic countries, and in international organisations. The concept of nature-related risks is found to be mainly in use in the financial sector. The application of the term has increased rapidly in recent years, with numerous efforts to implement the concept. Moreover, similar concepts precede, within the same scope; the earliest being biodiversity risk. It is recommended that each of the Nordic countries take active steps to implement the concept of nature risk in relevant policies, regulations and sectors. It is also recommended that the Nordic countries follow the international development on nature risk and related policy areas, such as the EU taxonomy and the TNFD framework, and ensure that national policy is aligned with the international agenda

Pre-study: Indicators on circular economy in the Nordic countries

A systematic and continuously measurement of the progress towards the circular economy can inform decision making and policies, and thus strengthen the circular transition. However, this pre-study, mapping circular economy indicators across the Nordic countries on both national and sub-national level, reveals that as of 2020, data streams and indicators are missing for the inner loops of the circular economy. A monitoring system embracing only selected aspects of the circular economy (where data is readily available) risks exaggerating the focus on these areas and downgrade the importance of other areas where data is unattainable, even though the latter may (in principle) be creating more circular value (such as prolonging products’ lifetimes).

Synergies between climate and biodiversity objectives in laws, policies and management practices

The study supports the exchange of knowledge to further develop effective policy and management tools for nature-based solutions for the climate and the environment. The study compiles good examples which shed light on how the Nordic countries have been successful inimplementing measures to simultaneously address climate change, pollution and biodiversityobjectives in laws, policies and administrative practices, including highlighting potential barriers forimplementing integrated policy solutions. Moreover, it provides recommendations for screening methods of laws, policies and management practices to revealuntapped synergies between climate change, pollution and biodiversity measures. Finally, the report proposes joint Nordic initiatives that can maximise synergies between biodiversity, climateand pollution initiatives in the Nordic region and globally

Low-Carbon Circular Transition in the Nordics : Part I. Areas with significant circular transition potential

The study was aimed at generating insight on the potential of circular economy in the Nordic region and providing recommendations for unlocking this potential. This report covers the first part of the study. Based on a review of circular economy priorities in the Nordic countries, the study revealed focus areas where the Nordic countries share strategic interests. These combine some key industrial branches – the bioeconomy; the food and beverage industry; real estate and construction; and transport, logistics, and mobility – with two significant drivers of change: digitalisation and new circular business models. In the next phase of the work, the aim will be to understand the circularity transition’s impacts on the climate, environment, and economy in the Nordic region while also identifying the obstacles to transition.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in a Randomized Trial of Closed-Loop Control: The Pivotal International Diabetes Closed-Loop Trial

International audienceBackground: Closed-loop control (CLC) has been shown to improve glucose time in range and other glucose metrics; however, randomized trials >3 months comparing CLC with sensor-augmented pump (SAP) therapy are limited. We recently reported glucose control outcomes from the 6-month international Diabetes Closed-Loop (iDCL) trial; we now report patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in this iDCL trial. Methods: Participants were randomized 2:1 to CLC (N = 112) versus SAP (N = 56) and completed questionnaires, including Hypoglycemia Fear Survey, Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS), Hypoglycemia Awareness, Hypoglycemia Confidence, Hyperglycemia Avoidance, and Positive Expectancies of CLC (INSPIRE) at baseline, 3, and 6 months. CLC participants also completed Diabetes Technology Expectations and Acceptance and System Usability Scale (SUS). Results: The Hypoglycemia Fear Survey Behavior subscale improved significantly after 6 months of CLC compared with SAP. DDS did not differ except for powerless subscale scores, which worsened at 3 months in SAP. Whereas Hypoglycemia Awareness and Hyperglycemia Avoidance did not differ between groups, CLC participants showed a tendency toward improved confidence in managing hypoglycemia. The INSPIRE questionnaire showed favorable scores in the CLC group for teens and parents, with a similar trend for adults. At baseline and 6 months, CLC participants had high positive expectations for the device with Diabetes Technology Acceptance and SUS showing high benefit and low burden scores. Conclusion: CLC improved some PROs compared with SAP. Participants reported high benefit and low burden with CLC. Clinical Trial Identifier: NCT03563313