Collaboration for environmental assessment : opportunities for comprehensive decision-making in western Canada

This research explores opportunities for a more comprehensive assessment process using the ongoing and contentious Environmental Assessment (EA) of the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline project in western Canada. Research on EA in Canada has demonstrated considerable challenges in effectively engaging participants throughout the assessment process. Research suggests that the inability to engage with stakeholders in EA adversely affects the quality of information considered, the integrity of the process, and the legitimacy of EA outcomes. This represents a fundamental challenge for EA, as effective assessment processes are needed to adequately evaluate increasingly complex and contentious projects. Strategies that encourage comprehensive stakeholder engagement in decision making for contentious environmental issues have been identified as being central in generating more thorough and legitimate outcomes, and can produce social learning and other benefits. The study considers insights obtained from literature on collaborative planning, rationality, and sustainability science as well as interviews with EA participants and researchers to pursue that aim. The study reveals common ground that highlights stakeholder equality and cooperation, objectivity and legitimacy, transparency and trust, and the agenda, timing, structure and design of the decision-making process as important in fostering a more comprehensive assessment in this context. Linkages between respondent views about collaboration in the EA process and contemporary interpretations of rationality are also discussed and suggests that further research exploring collaborative strategies that are inspired by these ideas is likely to be fruitful. Finally, the study offers recommendations for decentralized and collaborative process in advance of the project application that encourages consensus, participant equality, and open debate

Structural Separation Logic

This thesis presents structural separation logic, a novel program reasoning approach for software that manipulates both standard heaps and structured data such as lists and trees. Structural separation logic builds upon existing work in both separation logic and context logic. It considers data abstractly, much as it is exposed by library interfaces, ignoring implementation details. We provide a programming language that works over structural heaps, which are similar to standard heaps but allow data to be stored in an abstract form. We introduce abstract heaps, which extend structural heaps to enable local reasoning about abstract data. Such data can be split up with structural addresses. Structural addresses allow sub-data (e.g. a sub-tree within a tree) to be abstractly allocated, promoting the sub-data to an abstract heap cell. This cell can be analysed in isolation, then re-joined with the original data. We show how the tight footprints this allows can be refined further with promises, which enable abstract heap cells to retain information about the context from which they were allocated. We prove that our approach is sound with respect to a standard Hoare logic. We study two large examples. Firstly, we present an axiomatic semantics for the Docu- ment Object Model in structural separation logic. We demonstrate how structural separa- tion logic allows abstract reasoning about the DOM tree using tighter footprints than were possible in previous work. Secondly, we give a novel presentation of the POSIX file system library. We identify a subset of the large POSIX standard that focuses on the file system, including commands that manipulate both the file heap and the directory structure. Axioms for this system are given using structural separation logic. As file system resources are typically identified by paths, we use promises to give tight footprints to commands, so that that they do not require all the resource needed to explain paths being used. We demonstrate our reasoning using a software installer example.Open Acces

Federal Constraints on States’ Ability to License an Undocumented Immigrant to Practice Law

No court has decided whether an undocumented immigrant can be admitted to a state bar in a manner consistent with federal law. At the time of this writing, the issue is pending before the California Supreme Court. Federal law prohibits states from providing public benefits to undocumented immigrants. In its definition of a “public benefit,” 8 U.S.C. § 1621 includes any professional license “provided by an agency of a State . . . or by appropriated funds of a State . . . .” The law’s prohibitions, however, are not unqualified. The statute’s “savings clause” allows states to provide public benefits to immigrants unlawfully present through an affirmative enactment of state law. Current scholarship surrounding this issue has primarily focused on public policy implications. This Note sets out to answer the question of whether 8 U.S.C. § 1621 generally precludes states from issuing law licenses to undocumented immigrants, and if so, how a state may circumvent that prohibition. First, this Note addresses the threshold question of whether a law license is a public benefit under the federal statute. Contrary to the argument put forward by the Committee of Bar Examiners of the State Bar of California, I argue that the most straightforward reading of the statute includes law licenses within the category of prohibited public benefits. Second, this Note explores how a state could use the statute’s savings clause to provide law licenses to undocumented immigrants. By requiring an affirmative enactment of state law, Congress likely had in mind legislative enactments. I argue, however, that in the realm of bar admission where state supreme courts have plenary power to set requirements, a court rule allowing for eligibility of undocumented immigrants should be sufficient to trigger the statute’s savings clause

Federal Constraints on States’ Ability to License an Undocumented Immigrant to Practice Law

No court has decided whether an undocumented immigrant can be admitted to a state bar in a manner consistent with federal law. At the time of this writing, the issue is pending before the California Supreme Court. Federal law prohibits states from providing public benefits to undocumented immigrants. In its definition of a “public benefit,” 8 U.S.C. § 1621 includes any professional license “provided by an agency of a State . . . or by appropriated funds of a State . . . .” The law’s prohibitions, however, are not unqualified. The statute’s “savings clause” allows states to provide public benefits to immigrants unlawfully present through an affirmative enactment of state law. Current scholarship surrounding this issue has primarily focused on public policy implications. This Note sets out to answer the question of whether 8 U.S.C. § 1621 generally precludes states from issuing law licenses to undocumented immigrants, and if so, how a state may circumvent that prohibition. First, this Note addresses the threshold question of whether a law license is a public benefit under the federal statute. Contrary to the argument put forward by the Committee of Bar Examiners of the State Bar of California, I argue that the most straightforward reading of the statute includes law licenses within the category of prohibited public benefits. Second, this Note explores how a state could use the statute’s savings clause to provide law licenses to undocumented immigrants. By requiring an affirmative enactment of state law, Congress likely had in mind legislative enactments. I argue, however, that in the realm of bar admission where state supreme courts have plenary power to set requirements, a court rule allowing for eligibility of undocumented immigrants should be sufficient to trigger the statute’s savings clause

A Keplerian disk around Orion Source I, a ~15 Msun YSO

We report ALMA long-baseline observations of Orion Source I (SrcI) with resolution 0.03-0.06" (12-24 AU) at 1.3 and 3.2 mm. We detect both continuum and spectral line emission from SrcI's disk. We also detect a central weakly resolved source that we interpret as a hot spot in the inner disk, which may indicate the presence of a binary system. The high angular resolution and sensitivity of these observations allow us to measure the outer envelope of the rotation curve of the H$_2$O $5_{5,0}-6_{4,3}$ line, which gives a mass $M_I\approx15\pm2$ Msun. We detected several other lines that more closely trace the disk, but were unable to identify their parent species. Using centroid-of-channel methods on these other lines, we infer a similar mass. These measurements solidify SrcI as a genuine high-mass protostar system and support the theory that SrcI and the Becklin Neugebauer Object were ejected from the dynamical decay of a multiple star system $\sim$500 years ago, an event that also launched the explosive molecular outflow in Orion.Comment: Accepted to ApJ. Data at https://zenodo.org/record/1213350, source repository at https://github.com/keflavich/Orion_ALMA_2016.1.00165.