Suchergebnisse

Purpose
Among the ten Canadian provinces, Quebec has experienced the most significant excess mortality of older persons during COVID-19. This practice paper aims to present the chronology of events leading to this excess mortality in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) and a comprehensive analysis of the phenomenon.


Design/methodology/approach
Documented content from three official sources: daily briefings by the Quebec Premier, a report from the Canadian Armed Forces and a report produced by Royal Society of Canada experts were analysed.


Findings
Two findings emerge: the lack of preparation in LTCFs and a critical shortage of staff. Indeed, the massive transfer of older persons from hospitals to LTCFs, combined with human resources management and a critical shortage of permanent staff before and during the crisis, generates unhealthy living conditions in LTCFs.


Originality/value
To our knowledge, this paper is the first to analyse official Quebec and Canadian statements concerning COVID-19 from the angle of quality of life and protection of older adults in LTCFs.

PurposeThe COVID-19 pandemic has affected the physical, psychological, social and financial health of older persons. On this subject, the United Nations published a policy brief on the impact of COVID-19 on older persons in May 2020. In line with this, the purpose of this general review is to address three issues affecting older persons living in residential care facilities: protective measures implemented to block the virus' entry, the types of mistreatment most frequently experienced and the necessity to promote and defend the rights of these persons.Design/methodology/approachThe design of this study is based on input gathered since the end of April during meetings of the International Network for the Prevention of Elder Abuse (INPEA) and the results of a July survey of its members.FindingsThe survey results indicate variability in the implementation of protective measures in different countries and the significant presence of mistreatment and violation of the rights of older persons. Three major issues demand attention: ageism, systemic and managerial problems and the effects of implemented measures. All these prompt the INPEA to once again plea for the adoption of an international convention of human rights of older persons.Originality/valueTo our knowledge, this is the first article sharing the views of the INPEA from a global perspective in the context of COVID-19.

There is no doubt that "economy" is a keyword in contemporary life, yet what constitutes economy is increasingly contested terrain. Interested in building "other worlds," J.K. Gibson-Graham have argued that the economy is not only diverse but also open to experimentations that foreground the well-being of humans and nonhumans alike. Making Other Worlds Possible brings together in one volume a compelling range of projects inspired by the diverse economies research agenda pioneered by Gibson-Graham. This collection offers perspectives from a wide variety of prominent scholars that put diverse economies into conversation with other contemporary projects that reconfigure the economy as performative. Here, Robert Snyder and Kevin St. Martin explore the emergence of community-supported fisheries; Elizabeth S. Barron documents how active engagements between people, plants, and fungi in the United States and Scotland are examples of highly productive diverse economic practices; and Michel Callon investigates how alternative forms of market organization and practices can be designed and implemented. Firmly establishing diverse economies as a field of research, Making Other Worlds Possible outlines an array of ways scholars are enacting economies differently that privilege ethical negotiation and a politics of possibility. Ultimately, this book contributes to the making of economies that put people and the environment at the forefront of economic decision making. Contributors: Elizabeth S. Barron, U of Wisconsin-Oshkosh; Amanda Cahill; Michel Callon, École des mines de Paris; Jenny Cameron, U of Newcastle, Australia; Stephen Healy, Worcester State U; Yahya M. Madra, Bogazici U; Deirdre McKay, Keele U; Sarah A. Moore, U of Wisconsin-Madison; Ceren Ŏzselçuk, Bogazici U; Marianna Pavlovskaya, Hunter College, CUNY; Paul Robbins, U of Wisconsin-Madison; Maliha

There is growing interest in assessing the effects of changing environmental conditions and management actions on human wellbeing. A challenge is to translate social science expertise regarding these relationships into terms usable by environmental scientists, policymakers, and managers. Here, we present a comprehensive, structured, and transparent conceptual framework of human wellbeing designed to guide the development of indicators and a complementary social science research agenda for ecosystem-based management. Our framework grew out of an effort to develop social indicators for an integrated ecosystem assessment (IEA) of the California Current large marine ecosystem. Drawing from scholarship in international development, anthropology, geography, and political science, we define human wellbeing as a state of being with others and the environment, which arises when human needs are met, when individuals and communities can act meaningfully to pursue their goals, and when individuals and communities enjoy a satisfactory quality of life. We propose four major social science-based constituents of wellbeing: connections, capabilities, conditions, and cross-cutting domains. The latter includes the domains of equity and justice, security, resilience, and sustainability, which may be assessed through cross-cutting analyses of other constituents. We outline a process for identifying policy-relevant attributes of wellbeing that can guide ecosystem assessments. To operationalize the framework, we provide a detailed table of attributes and a large database of available indicators, which may be used to develop measures suited to a variety of management needs and social goals. Finally, we discuss four guidelines for operationalizing human wellbeing measures in ecosystem assessments, including considerations for context, feasibility, indicators and research, and social difference. Developed for the U.S. west coast, the framework may be adapted for other regions, management needs, and scales with appropriate modifications.

There is growing interest in assessing the effects of changing environmental conditions and management actions on human wellbeing. A challenge is to translate social science expertise regarding these relationships into terms usable by environmental scientists, policymakers, and managers. Here, we present a comprehensive, structured, and transparent conceptual framework of human wellbeing designed to guide the development of indicators and a complementary social science research agenda for ecosystem-based management. Our framework grew out of an effort to develop social indicators for an integrated ecosystem assessment (IEA) of the California Current large marine ecosystem. Drawing from scholarship in international development, anthropology, geography, and political science, we define human wellbeing as a state of being with others and the environment, which arises when human needs are met, when individuals and communities can act meaningfully to pursue their goals, and when individuals and communities enjoy a satisfactory quality of life. We propose four major social science-based constituents of wellbeing: connections, capabilities, conditions, and cross-cutting domains. The latter includes the domains of equity and justice, security, resilience, and sustainability, which may be assessed through cross-cutting analyses of other constituents. We outline a process for identifying policy-relevant attributes of wellbeing that can guide ecosystem assessments. To operationalize the framework, we provide a detailed table of attributes and a large database of available indicators, which may be used to develop measures suited to a variety of management needs and social goals. Finally, we discuss four guidelines for operationalizing human wellbeing measures in ecosystem assessments, including considerations for context, feasibility, indicators and research, and social difference. Developed for the U.S. west coast, the framework may be adapted for other regions, management needs, and scales with appropriate modifications.

There is growing interest in assessing the effects of changing environmental conditions and management actions on human wellbeing. A challenge is to translate social science expertise regarding these relationships into terms usable by environmental scientists, policymakers, and managers. Here, we present a comprehensive, structured, and transparent conceptual framework of human wellbeing designed to guide the development of indicators and a complementary social science research agenda for ecosystem-based management. Our framework grew out of an effort to develop social indicators for an integrated ecosystem assessment (IEA) of the California Current large marine ecosystem. Drawing from scholarship in international development, anthropology, geography, and political science, we define human wellbeing as a state of being with others and the environment, which arises when human needs are met, when individuals and communities can act meaningfully to pursue their goals, and when individuals and communities enjoy a satisfactory quality of life. We propose four major social science-based constituents of wellbeing: connections, capabilities, conditions, and cross-cutting domains. The latter includes the domains of equity and justice, security, resilience, and sustainability, which may be assessed through cross-cutting analyses of other constituents. We outline a process for identifying policy-relevant attributes of wellbeing that can guide ecosystem assessments. To operationalize the framework, we provide a detailed table of attributes and a large database of available indicators, which may be used to develop measures suited to a variety of management needs and social goals. Finally, we discuss four guidelines for operationalizing human wellbeing measures in ecosystem assessments, including considerations for context, feasibility, indicators and research, and social difference. Developed for the U.S. west coast, the framework may be adapted for other regions, management needs, and scales with appropriate modifications.