Altered images: the 2001 state of corporate responsibility in India poll. Understanding and encouraging corporate responsibility in South Asia: update one

TERI-Europe and the New Academy of Business are currently working with various partners on a new initiative to understand and encourage corporate responsibility across South Asia. The initiative seeks to raise awareness and stimulate a proactive corporate responsibility agenda in three South Asian countries - Bangladesh, India, and Sri Lanka. The partners are the Centre for Policy Dialogue (Bangladesh), TERI (India), and LGA Consultants (Sri Lanka). The project is funded by the Asia Division of the UK Department for International Development. Additional support has been obtained from the Commonwealth Science Council, UK. Our vision is to contribute to a positive change towards business practices and attitudes that support sustainable development and poverty eradication in the region. The focus is on expanding the knowledge base of corporate practices in South Asia relating to working conditions within factories; living conditions in surrounding communities; environmental protection; and corporate accountability and transparency. In this way, we aim to provide useful information and tools (such as training materials) for South Asian companies and civil society groups, especially the more vulnerable income groups, in the three countries. We hope that this will assist in eventually elaborating a home-grown agenda of corporate responsibility sensitive to the social, cultural, and economic situation in India, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh

Altered images: the 2003 state of corporate responsibility. Understanding and encouraging corporate responsibility in South Asia update two: Sri Lanka

TERI-Europe and the New Academy of Business have been working with various partners on an initiative to understand and encourage corporate responsibility across South Asia. The initiative seeks to raise awareness and stimulate a proactive corporate responsibility agenda in three South Asian countries - Bangladesh, India, and Sri Lanka. The partners are the Centre for Policy Dialogue (Bangladesh), TERI (India), and LGA Consultants (Sri Lanka). The project is funded by the Asia Division of the Department for International Development, UK. Our vision is to contribute to a positive change towards business practices and attitudes that support sustainable development and poverty eradication in the region. The focus is on expanding the knowledge base of corporate practices in South Asia relating to working conditions within factories; living conditions in surrounding communities; environmental protection; and corporate accountability and transparency. In this way, we aim to provide useful information and tools (such as training materials) for South Asian companies and civil society groups, especially the more vulnerable income groups, in the three countries. We hope that this will assist in eventually elaborating a home-grown agenda of corporate responsibility sensitive to the social, cultural, and economic situation in Bangladesh, India, and Sri Lanka. This report presents the results of the initiative’s second activity - an agenda-setting survey on corporate responsibility in Sri Lanka. The survey explored the views and expectations of workers, company executives, and civil society groups towards the social, economic, and environmental responsibilities of companies operating in Sri Lanka. It was the first to include workers in a survey on corporate responsibility. The survey was carried out in 2003 through a partnership between TERI-Europe, LGA Consultants, and the Sri Lanka Business Development Centre in Colombo. The results presented in this report are intended to provide a better understanding of attitudes and practices and develop targeted training materials for company executives, workers, and community representatives

Altered images: the 2003 state of corporate responsibility. Understanding and encouraging corporate responsibility in South Asia update three: Bangladesh

TERI-Europe and the New Academy of Business have been working with various partners on an initiative to understand and encourage corporate responsibility across South Asia. The initiative seeks to raise awareness and stimulate a proactive corporate responsibility agenda in three South Asian countries - Bangladesh, India, and Sri Lanka. The partners are the Centre for Policy Dialogue (Bangladesh), TERI (India), and LGA Consultants (Sri Lanka). The project is funded by the Asia Division of the Department for International Development, UK. Our vision is to contribute to a positive change towards business practices and attitudes that support sustainable development and poverty eradication in the region. The focus is on expanding the knowledge base of corporate practices in South Asia relating to working conditions within factories; living conditions in surrounding communities; environmental protection; and corporate accountability and transparency. In this way, we aim to provide useful information and tools (such as training materials) for South Asian companies and civil society groups, especially the more vulnerable income groups, in the three countries. We hope that this will assist in eventually elaborating a home-grown agenda of corporate responsibility sensitive to the social, cultural, and economic situation in Bangladesh, India, and Sri Lanka. This report presents the results of the initiative’s third activity - an agenda-setting survey on corporate responsibility in Bangladesh. The survey explored the views and expectations of workers, company executives, and civil society groups towards the social, economic, and environmental responsibilities of companies operating in Bangladesh. It was the first to include workers in a survey on corporate responsibility. The survey was carried out in 2003 through a partnership between TERI-Europe, LGA Consultants, and the Centre for Policy Dialogue in Dhaka. The results presented in this report are intended to provide a better understanding of attitudes and practices and develop targeted training materials for company executives, workers, and community representatives

The potential impact of reforms to the essential parameters of the council tax

Council Tax was introduced in Britain in 1993 and represents a unique international property tax. There is a growing belief that it is time to reform the number and structure of council tax bands but such views have a minimal empirical base. This paper sets out to assess the impact on personal and local government finances, and extends the analysis to the role of the tax multipliers linked to each band. The research is based on the experience of a representative sample of local authorities in Scotland. A statistical revaluation for 2000 is estimated for the existing eight band system, and from this base a ten band system is calculated. Financial implications are then simulated for each local authority taking account of central resource equalisation mechanisms. The results indicate that increases in bands will have little impact on the burden of the council tax compared with regular revaluations. Changing the tax multiplier range has the greatest impact on local authority finances and council tax payments

Development and Implementation of Clinical Practice Guidelines: Current Status in Korea

Documentation of unexplained geographic variations in medical practices and use of inappropriate interventions has led to the proliferation of clinical practice guidelines. With increased enthusiasm for guidelines, evidence exists that clinical practice guidelines often influence clinical practices or health outcomes. Their successful implementation may improve the quality of care by decreasing in appropriate variation and expediting the application of effective advances to healthcare practices. In Korea, physicians and healthcare professionals have begun to take interests in clinical practice guidelines. Currently, over 50 practice guidelines have been developed through professional academic organizations or via other routes; however, the quality of the guidelines is unsatisfactory, implementation in clinical settings is incomplete, and there is insufficient infrastructure to develop clinical practice guidelines. Korea must develop policies and invest resources to enhance the development and implementation of clinical practice guidelines

The systematic guideline review: method, rationale, and test on chronic heart failure

Background: Evidence-based guidelines have the potential to improve healthcare. However, their de-novo-development requires substantial resources-especially for complex conditions, and adaptation may be biased by contextually influenced recommendations in source guidelines. In this paper we describe a new approach to guideline development-the systematic guideline review method (SGR), and its application in the development of an evidence-based guideline for family physicians on chronic heart failure (CHF). Methods: A systematic search for guidelines was carried out. Evidence-based guidelines on CHF management in adults in ambulatory care published in English or German between the years 2000 and 2004 were included. Guidelines on acute or right heart failure were excluded. Eligibility was assessed by two reviewers, methodological quality of selected guidelines was appraised using the AGREE instrument, and a framework of relevant clinical questions for diagnostics and treatment was derived. Data were extracted into evidence tables, systematically compared by means of a consistency analysis and synthesized in a preliminary draft. Most relevant primary sources were re-assessed to verify the cited evidence. Evidence and recommendations were summarized in a draft guideline. Results: Of 16 included guidelines five were of good quality. A total of 35 recommendations were systematically compared: 25/35 were consistent, 9/35 inconsistent, and 1/35 un-rateable (derived from a single guideline). Of the 25 consistencies, 14 were based on consensus, seven on evidence and four differed in grading. Major inconsistencies were found in 3/9 of the inconsistent recommendations. We re-evaluated the evidence for 17 recommendations (evidence-based, differing evidence levels and minor inconsistencies) - the majority was congruent. Incongruity was found where the stated evidence could not be verified in the cited primary sources, or where the evaluation in the source guidelines focused on treatment benefits and underestimated the risks. The draft guideline was completed in 8.5 man-months. The main limitation to this study was the lack of a second reviewer. Conclusion: The systematic guideline review including framework development, consistency analysis and validation is an effective, valid, and resource saving-approach to the development of evidence-based guidelines

Risk of Suicide Is Insufficient Warrant for Coercive Treatment for Mental Illness

Mental health laws in many jurisdictions currently permit coercive treatment for persons with mental illness who are thought to be at risk of harm to themselves or others. These laws are often used to provide involuntary treatment to persons who are thought to be at risk of suicide. In this article we argue that legislated coercive psychiatric treatment should not be triggered by an assessment of the likelihood of harm, including a likelihood of suicide, but should be available only where a person is found to lack capacity to make their own decisions about their own health risks, after appropriate support has been given. We suggest that current opposition this approach may find its origin in factors including uncertainties about the idea of vulnerability and its relationship to capacity as well as tendency to minimise the real costs of psychiatric treatment and coercion against the aim of suicide prevention. Given the limits of suicide risk assessment, we argue that a public policy that allows involuntary preventative detention of competent persons thought to be at risk of suicide, places too great a burden on all persons living with mental illness to be justified. We suggest that we are better placed to serve the interests and respect the human rights of people with mental illness if we respect and support the right of persons to make decisions, rather than focussing on perceived vulnerabilities and calculations of suicide risk

How do we know that research ethics committees are really working? The neglected role of outcomes assessment in research ethics review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Countries are increasingly devoting significant resources to creating or strengthening research ethics committees, but there has been insufficient attention to assessing whether these committees are actually improving the protection of human research participants.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Research ethics committees face numerous obstacles to achieving their goal of improving research participant protection. These include the inherently amorphous nature of ethics review, the tendency of regulatory systems to encourage a focus on form over substance, financial and resource constraints, and conflicts of interest. Auditing and accreditation programs can improve the quality of ethics review by encouraging the development of standardized policies and procedures, promoting a common base of knowledge, and enhancing the status of research ethics committees within their own institutions. However, these mechanisms focus largely on questions of structure and process and are therefore incapable of answering many critical questions about ethics committees' actual impact on research practices.</p> <p>The first step in determining whether research ethics committees are achieving their intended function is to identify what prospective research participants and their communities hope to get out of the ethics review process. Answers to this question can help guide the development of effective outcomes assessment measures. It is also important to determine whether research ethics committees' guidance to investigators is actually being followed. Finally, the information developed through outcomes assessment must be disseminated to key decision-makers and incorporated into practice. This article offers concrete suggestions for achieving these goals.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Outcomes assessment of research ethics committees should address the following questions: First, does research ethics committee review improve participants' understanding of the risks and potential benefits of studies? Second, does the process affect prospective participants' decisions about whether to participate in research? Third, does it change participants' subjective experiences in studies or their attitudes about research? Fourth, does it reduce the riskiness of research? Fifth, does it result in more research responsive to the local community's self-identified needs? Sixth, is research ethics committees' guidance to researchers actually being followed?</p