Oil and Gas in America\u27s Arctic Ocean: Past Problems Counsel Precaution

This Article provides context for the controversy facing government agencies charged with making decisions about the future of America’s Arctic Ocean. It then distill themes that, if addressed, could help further a lasting solution for this region that respects its natural and human values while crafting a reasonable path forward for decisions about development. First, this Article offers background about the region, the threats facing it, and some of the challenges in managing the natural resources there. Second, it provides an overview of the legal framework through which the United States government makes decisions about whether and under what conditions offshore oil and gas activities should occur. Third, this Article highlights decisions about Arctic Ocean resources that have been made pursuant to that legal framework and discusses the resulting court challenges. Based on that review, this Articles concludes that the controversy has resulted in large part from: (1) the failure to ensure necessary preparedness; (2) the lack of community involvement; and (3) the need for more specific mandates to ensure that management decisions about resources in important and unique places, like the Arctic, are based on sufficient science, precaution, and an equitable balancing of costs and benefits

Oil and Gas in America\u27s Arctic Ocean: Past Problems Counsel Precaution

This Article provides context for the controversy facing government agencies charged with making decisions about the future of America’s Arctic Ocean. It then distill themes that, if addressed, could help further a lasting solution for this region that respects its natural and human values while crafting a reasonable path forward for decisions about development. First, this Article offers background about the region, the threats facing it, and some of the challenges in managing the natural resources there. Second, it provides an overview of the legal framework through which the United States government makes decisions about whether and under what conditions offshore oil and gas activities should occur. Third, this Article highlights decisions about Arctic Ocean resources that have been made pursuant to that legal framework and discusses the resulting court challenges. Based on that review, this Articles concludes that the controversy has resulted in large part from: (1) the failure to ensure necessary preparedness; (2) the lack of community involvement; and (3) the need for more specific mandates to ensure that management decisions about resources in important and unique places, like the Arctic, are based on sufficient science, precaution, and an equitable balancing of costs and benefits

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries