| 1. |
- Mohammadi Fazel, A., et al.
(författare)
-
A process for identifying national solutions to challenges faced in developing countries in reporting to environmental conventions : Insight from the facilitating national reporting to the rio conventions project
- 2015
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Environmental Research. - 1735-6865. ; 9:4, s. 1163-1172
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Almost all countries in the world are party to the Rio Conventions. This entails a number of responsibilities, including reporting periodically on aspects of environmental health and national implementation of the convention. These reports can cover hundreds of pages, so completing reports is often a significant undertaking. Since countries can be party to numerous Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs), they may have several such reports to prepare at any one time, often using similar information. This article shares insights from a project that piloted nationally-driven, integrated approaches to reporting to the Rio Conventions and developed flexible methods for enhancing the national reporting process, in a way that is relevant for a particular country. The project found that a focus on collaborative institutional arrangements and building capacity as a nation, rather than as a series of departments, could enhance this reporting process. These lessons can inform decisions of United Nations agencies, MEA secretariats, Country Parties to these MEAs and the wider sustainability community to reduce the reporting burden and increase the synergistic implementation of environmental conventions.
|
|
| 2. |
- Fazel, S., et al.
(författare)
-
Reply to comments by Mr. Carlin and Mr. Hardisty
- 2008
-
Ingår i: Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology. - 0271-0749. ; 28:4, s. 477-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Reply by the current authors to the comments made by Carlin and Hardisty on the original article. Carlin and Hardisty question whether, in our postmortem study of 14,691 suicides in Sweden during 1992-2004, the methodology was sensitive enough to allow any conclusions. In addition, they question our disclosure of funding and consultancy arrangement. There was no funding for the study. Author disclosure information was submitted with the paper. It was the Journal's decision not to publish it because it was deemed not relevant to the study or paper.
|
|
