IBRD Operational Decision Framework

The IBRD Operational Decision Framework in this document is an expansion of an emerging general risk management framework under development by an interagency working group. It provides the level of detail necessary to develop a general Consequence Management Guidance Document for biological contamination remediation and restoration. It is the intent of this document to support both wide area and individual site remediation and restoration activities. This product was initiated as a portion of the IBRD Task 1 Systems Analysis to aid in identification of wide area remediation and restoration shortcomings and gaps. The draft interagency general risk management framework was used as the basis for the analysis. The initial Task 1 analysis document expanded the draft interagency framework to a higher level of resolution, building on both the logic structure and the accompanying text explanations. It was then employed in a qualitative manner to identify responsible agencies, data requirements, tool requirements, and current capabilities for each decision and task. This resulted in identifying shortcomings and gaps needing resolution. Several meetings of a joint LLNL/SNL working group reviewed and approved the initial content of this analysis. At the conclusion of Task 1, work continued on the expanded framework to generate this Operational Decision Framework which is consistent with the existing interagency general risk management framework. A large LLNL task group met repeatedly over a three-month period to develop the expanded framework, coordinate the framework with the biological remediation checklist, and synchronize the logic with the Consequence Management Plan table of contents. The expanded framework was briefed at a large table top exercise reviewing the interagency risk management framework. This exercise had representation from major US metropolitan areas as well as national agencies. This product received positive comments from the participants. Upon completion of the Operational Decision Framework, another joint LLNL/SNL working group conducted a day-long review. Identified modifications were made to the document, resulting in the included product

Labour supply and skills demands in fashion retailing

If, as Adam Smith once famously suggested, Britain was a nation of shopkeepers then it is now a nation of shopworkers. Retail is now a significant part of the UK economy, accounting for £256 billion in sales and one-third of all consumer spending (Skillsmart, 2007). It is the largest private sector employer in the UK, employing 3m workers, or 1 in 10 of the working population. For future job creation in the UK economy retail is also similarly prominent and the sector is expected to create a further 250,000 jobs to 2014 (Skillsmart, 2007). The centrality of retail to economic success and job creation is apparent in other advanced economies. For example, within the US, retail sales is the occupation with the largest projected job growth in the period 2004-2014 (Gatta et al., 2009) and in Australia retail accounts for 1 in 6 workers (Buchanan et al., 2003). Within the UK these workers are employed in approximately 290,000 businesses, encompassing large and small organizations and also a number of sub-sectors. This variance suggests that retail should not be regarded as homogenous in its labour demands. Hart et al. (2007) note how skill requirements and the types of workers employed may differ across the sector. This chapter further opens up this point, providing an analysis of the labour supply and skills demands for the sub-sectors of clothing, footwear and leather goods, which are described by Skillsmart (2007: 48) as being 'significant categories in UK retailing'

Presupposition projection as proof construction

Even though Van der Sandt's presuppositions as anaphora approach is empirically successful, it fails to give a formal account of the interaction between world-knowledge and presuppositions. In this paper, an algorithm is sketched which is based on the idea of presuppositions as anaphora. It improves on this approach by employing a deductive system, Constructive Type Theory (CTT), to get a formal handle on the way world-knowledge influences presupposition projection. In CTT, proofs for expressions are explicitly represented as objects. These objects can be seen as a generalization of DRT's discourse markers. They are useful in dealing with presuppositional phenomena which require world-knowledge, such as Clark's bridging examples and Beaver's conditional presuppositions

Evaluation of two interaction techniques for visualization of dynamic graphs

Several techniques for visualization of dynamic graphs are based on different spatial arrangements of a temporal sequence of node-link diagrams. Many studies in the literature have investigated the importance of maintaining the user's mental map across this temporal sequence, but usually each layout is considered as a static graph drawing and the effect of user interaction is disregarded. We conducted a task-based controlled experiment to assess the effectiveness of two basic interaction techniques: the adjustment of the layout stability and the highlighting of adjacent nodes and edges. We found that generally both interaction techniques increase accuracy, sometimes at the cost of longer completion times, and that the highlighting outclasses the stability adjustment for many tasks except the most complex ones.Comment: Appears in the Proceedings of the 24th International Symposium on Graph Drawing and Network Visualization (GD 2016

Conversation acts in task-oriented spoken dialogue

A linguistic form\u27s compositional, timeless meaning can be surrounded or even contradicted by various social, aesthetic, or analogistic companion meanings. This paper addresses a series of problems in the structure of spoken language discourse, including turn-taking and grounding. It views these processes as composed of fine-grained actions, which resemble speech acts both in resulting from a computational mechanism of planning and in having a rich relationship to the specific linguistic features which serve to indicate their presence. The resulting notion of Conversation Acts is more general than speech act theory, encompassing not only the traditional speech acts but turn-taking, grounding, and higher-level argumentation acts as well. Furthermore, the traditional speech acts in this scheme become fully joint actions, whose successful performance requires full listener participation. This paper presents a detailed analysis of spoken language dialogue. It shows the role of each class of conversation acts in discourse structure, and discusses how members of each class can be recognized in conversation. Conversation acts, it will be seen, better account for the success of conversation than speech act theory alone

IBRD Operational Decision Framework

The IBRD Operational Decision Framework in this document is an expansion of an emerging general risk management framework under development by an interagency working group. It provides the level of detail necessary to develop a general Consequence Management Guidance Document for biological contamination remediation and restoration. It is the intent of this document to support both wide area and individual site remediation and restoration activities. This product was initiated as a portion of the IBRD Task 1 Systems Analysis to aid in identification of wide area remediation and restoration shortcomings and gaps. The draft interagency general risk management framework was used as the basis for the analysis. The initial Task 1 analysis document expanded the draft interagency framework to a higher level of resolution, building on both the logic structure and the accompanying text explanations. It was then employed in a qualitative manner to identify responsible agencies, data requirements, tool requirements, and current capabilities for each decision and task. This resulted in identifying shortcomings and gaps needing resolution. Several meetings of a joint LLNL/SNL working group reviewed and approved the initial content of this analysis. At the conclusion of Task 1, work continued on the expanded framework to generate this Operational Decision Framework which is consistent with the existing interagency general risk management framework. A large LLNL task group met repeatedly over a three-month period to develop the expanded framework, coordinate the framework with the biological remediation checklist, and synchronize the logic with the Consequence Management Plan table of contents. The expanded framework was briefed at a large table top exercise reviewing the interagency risk management framework. This exercise had representation from major US metropolitan areas as well as national agencies. This product received positive comments from the participants. Upon completion of the Operational Decision Framework, another joint LLNL/SNL working group conducted a day-long review. Identified modifications were made to the document, resulting in the included product

Draft Guidance: Response, Restoration, and Recovery Checklist for Biologically Contaminated Facilities

The Checklist for Facility Response, Restoration, and Recovery presented in this document is principally focused on the Consequence Management Phase of a biothreat agent (i.e., Bacillus anthracis) release at a large facility, such as an airport or subway. Information in this document conforms to the National Response Plan (NRP) (DHS 2004) and the National Incident Management System (NIMS 2004). Under these two guidance documents, the personnel responsible for managing biological response and recovery efforts--that is, the decision-makers--are members of an Incident Command (IC), which is likely to transition to a Unified Command (UC) in the event of a biological warfare agent attack. A UC is used when more than one agency has incident jurisdiction or when incidents cross political jurisdictions. The location for primary, tactical-level command and management is referred to as the Incident Command Post (ICP), as described in the NRP. Thus, regardless of whether an IC or an UC is used, the responsible entities are located at an ICP. Agencies work together through designated members of the UC to establish their designated Incident Commanders at a single ICP and to establish a common set of objectives and strategies and a single Incident Action Plan. Initially during the Crisis Management Phase, the Incident Commander is likely to be the Chief of the fire department that serves the affected facility. As life-safety issues are resolved and the Crisis Management Phase shifts to the Consequence Management Phase, the work of characterization, decontamination, and facility clearance begins. There will likely be a coincident transition in organizational structure as well, and new restoration-focused groups, units, and personnel will be added as restoration needs are anticipated. Depending on the specific facility and type of incident, the responsible individual (Incident Commander or Unified Commander) within the UC during the Consequence Management Phase could be the Facility Manager, the Facility Emergency Operations Manager, or their designee. In an incident involving large-scale biological contamination, the Governor of the state would typically request, and the President of the United States would likely declare, an emergency under the Stafford Act (1974; amended 2002). The Secretary of Homeland Security would likely determine that the event is an Incident of National Significance on the basis of criteria established in Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5 (HSPD-5), ''Management of Domestic Incidents''. Incidents of National Significance are those high-impact events that require a coordinated and effective response by an appropriate combination of Federal, state, local, tribal, private-sector, and nongovernmental entities to save lives, minimize damage, and provide the basis for long-term community recovery and mitigation activities. If facility authorities request outside assistance, or if an emergency is declared under the Stafford Act, then other members of the UC could include local and state agencies as well as Federal agencies, such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). If an Incident of National Significance is declared, a Principal Federal Official will be appointed by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to facilitate Federal support to the UC structure. The following Checklist for Facility Response, Restoration, and Recovery presents the critical steps that would be taken by organizations involved in responding to a biological incident. It is intended for use by key decision-makers in the event that an incident occurs and steps must be taken immediately and systematically. The organizations would follow the Incident Command System (ICS). See Appendix A for more information on the ICS and how the responsible personnel identified in the checklist map into the consequence management organizational structure. The Notification and First-Response Phases are cursorily addressed in the checklist, whereas the main focus is on consequence management actions. The order of actions is generally sequential. However, depending on the specifics of an event and how the response is implemented, actions may be reordered. For example, preparing a Remediation Action Plan (RAP) is identified in the checklist as a critical step of the Remediation Phase. However, it is likely that preparation of the RAP would begin before completing all actions identified in the Characterization Phase. In addition to the actions recommended in the checklist, any emergency response conducted at a major metropolitan facility should comply with notification and response procedures established by the facility, as well as applicable procedures established by the jurisdictional responding agencies

Corporate environmental responsibility and criminology

This article addresses corporate environmental responsibility (CER) and aims to present a criminological analysis of it. We studied the opinion of a number of principle actors involved in CER in Europe in order to determine how they perceive it in terms of its definition, aetiology and approaches. For each of these dimensions we relate back to a criminological framework to ascertain how it is positioned in the green criminological debate. We start out by providing information on what corporate environmental responsibility is and how it relates to corporate social responsibility and sustainable development. Then we outline the theoretical framework in accordance with the three central themes for the criminological analysis of CER: definition, aetiology and approaches. We also explain the method that was used (semi-structured interviews). Next, we present the results according to the same threefold structure. Finally we discuss these results in a last part, which is divided in two. First, we look at the challenges that the criminological perspective poses for CER in terms of definition, aetiology and approaches. The second part of the discussion turns the question around and wonders how CER could contribute to greening criminology

Erratum: Sequence data and association statistics from 12,940 type 2 diabetes cases and controls.

This corrects the article DOI: 10.1038/sdata.2017.179