Appraisal of the Karnalí Employment Programme as a regional social protection scheme

The Karnali Employment Programme (KEP) is a public works based social protection scheme in one of the poorest parts of Nepal attempting to address the regional dimension of poverty and vulnerability.

Social and scientific issues in the acceptibility of radiation risks

Ionising radiation hazards are perhaps the most documented and regulated occupational and environmental hazard. In the radiological protection field a single expert advisory organisation has had an unusually large influence on the international standard setting process. This is the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). Two common, and opposing views, exist over the formulation of protection recommendations by the ICRP. The first, and most widely accepted, is that its recommendations are scientifically determined. The second view, is that its recommendations are politically or socially determined. Neither of these analyses adequately accounts for the complex process in which protection recommendations are formulated. A third view, provided by studies of the origins of scientific controversy, suggests that both science and social factors are important in the assessment and limitation of risk. The aim of this thesis is not simply to examine the origin of controversy. Issues of equal, if not more, importance are the resolution of controversy, the formation of consensus and the maintenance of expert authority and influence. These issues form the central focus of this thesis. The aim is to assess the process through which the ICRP formulates its radiological protection recommendations and comment on the extent that these are influenced by the affiliations of its members. This thesis concludes that the ICRP's recommendations have been shaped by a complex relationship of scientific and social considerations, in which a socio-technical commitment to nuclear energy has played a key role. The Commission has responded to new scientific data by making complex changes to its philosophy and methods of describing risk. Where reductions in numerical limits have been applied they have been accompanied by practical measures designed to limit the impact of the change and provide continuity with the old limits and flexibility in the application of the new recommendations.

Take up of property-level flood protection:an exploratory study in Worcester

Significant numbers of homes within the UK are at risk of flooding. Although community level flood protection schemes are the first line of defence for mitigating flood risk, not all properties are protectable. Property-Level Flood Protection (PLFP) provides those unprotected homeowners with an approach for protecting their homes from flooding. This study sought to establish why property-level flood protection is needed and secondly assess the extent of take up using Worcester as the study area. An exploratory questionnaire survey was conducted to achieve these objectives. After consultation of available literature it was established that the introduction of PLFP protection provided numerous benefits including limiting the health & psychological effects flooding poses, the direct financial benefits and also the possible influence on gaining flood insurance. Despite the benefits and the recognition given to PLFP by the government it was found that the overall take up of the measures was low, findings which were further backed up by data collected in the study area of Worcester with only 23% of the sample having introduced PLFP measures. Reasoning for the low take up numbers typically included; unawareness of the measures, low risk of flood event, installation costs and inability to introduce due to tenancy. Age was noted as a significant impacting factor in the study area with none of the respondents under 25 suggesting they had “a good amount of knowledge of PLFP measures” even when they claimed their properties to be at risk of flooding. Guidance and support is especially recommended to those who are unable to manage their own flood risk for e.g. social housing/rental tenants.