Building better relationships workshop: An intervention fostering identity formation and interpersonal development in middle adolescents

The aim of this study was to further knowledge development concerning the formation of a sense of identity and intimacy. This study drew on the growing recognition by many researchers in the psychosocial development field of the need to target interventions at the interface of the development of identity and intimacy. The specific aim of the study was to address the question of whether it would be possible to develop intervention procedures for fostering identity and intimacy exploration and development. Using both qualitative and quantitative measurements, the results appeared to clearly support an affirmative answer to this question. A total of sixty-three middle adolescent students from an urban, public high school participated in this study. Twenty-nine participants in the treatment group and 34 participants in the comparison group were pre- and post tested on measures of identity and intimacy. Participants in this study consisted of multiethnic, urban youth that presented themselves for relationship counseling. Repeated measures analysis of variance's (RMANOVA's), used to evaluate the impact of the intervention on the quantitative measures of identity and intimacy exploration, clearly supported the efficacy of the intervention. In addition, the findings also provided tentative support for the view that the increase in exploration that results from entering a period of active exploration is associated with a “loosening” of commitment. Finally, the findings of this study also contributed to the empirical knowledge-base about procedures for intervening with respect to the process of intimacy development. More specifically, both the qualitative and quantitative findings of this study began to shed some light on the potential impact of exploration for interpersonal insight as that as a process for fostering intimacy development. ^

Understanding China's climate change mitigation policy development: Structures, processes and outcomes

Climate change is one of the most important and urgent issues of our time. Since 2006, China has overtaken the United States as the world’s largest greenhouse gas (GHG) emitter. China’s role in an international climate change solution has gained increased attention. Although much literature has addressed the functioning, performance, and implications of existing climate change mitigation policies and actions in China, there is insufficient literature that illuminates how the national climate change mitigation policies have been formulated and shaped. This research utilizes the policy network approach to explore China’s climate change mitigation policy making by examining how a variety of government, business, and civil society actors have formed networks to address environmental contexts and influence the policy outcomes and changes. The study is qualitative in nature. Three cases are selected to illustrate structural and interactive features of the specific policy network settings in shaping different policy arrangements and influencing the outcomes in the Chinese context. The three cases include the regulatory evolution of China’s climate change policy making; the country’s involvement in the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) activity, and China’s exploration of voluntary agreement through adopting the Top-1000 Industrial Energy Conservation Program. The historical analysis of the policy process uses both primary data from interviews and fieldwork, and secondary data from relevant literature. The study finds that the Chinese central government dominates domestic climate change policy making; however, expanded action networks that involve actors at all levels have emerged in correspondence to diverse climate mitigation policy arrangements. The improved openness and accessibility of climate change policy network have contributed to its proactive engagement in promoting mitigation outcomes. In conclusion, the research suggests that the policy network approach provides a useful tool for studying China’s climate change policy making process. The involvement of various types of state and non-state actors has shaped new relations and affected the policy outcomes and changes. In addition, through the cross-case analysis, the study challenges the “fragmented authoritarianism” model and argues that this once-influential model is not appropriate in explaining new development and changes of policy making processes in contemporary China.

Disaster Risk Management Disparity in the Caribbean: Evidence from Barbados, Dominican Republic, Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago

This study on risk and disaster management capacities of four Caribbean countries: Barbados, the Dominican Republic, Jamaica, and Trinidad and Tobago, examines three main dimensions: 1) the impact of natural disasters from 1900 to 2010 (number of events, number of people killed, total number affected, and damage in US$); 2) institutional assessments of disaster risk management disparity; and 3) the 2010 Inter-American Bank for Development (IADB) Disaster Risk and Risk Management indicators for the countries under study. The results show high consistency among the different sources examined, pointing out the need to extend the IADB measurements to the rest of the Caribbean countries. Indexes and indicators constitute a comparison measure vis-à-vis existing benchmarks in order to anticipate a capacity to deal with adverse events and their consequences; however, the indexes and indicators could only be tested against the occurrence of a real event. Therefore, the need exists to establish a sustainable and comprehensive evaluation system after important disasters to assess a country‘s performance, verify the indicators, and gain feedback on measurement systems and methodologies. There is diversity in emergency and preparedness for disasters in the four countries under study. The nature of the event (hurricanes, earthquakes, floods, and seismic activity), especially its frequency and the intensity of the damage experienced, is related to how each has designed its risk and disaster management policies and programs to face natural disasters. Vulnerabilities to disaster risks have been increasing, among other factors, because of uncontrolled urbanization, demographic density and poverty increase, social and economic marginalization, and lack of building code enforcement. The four countries under study have shown improvements in risk management capabilities, yet they are far from being completed prepared. Barbados‘ risk management performance is superior, in comparison, to the majority of the countries of the region. However, is still far in achieving high performance levels and sustainability in risk management, primarily when it has the highest gap between potential macroeconomic and financial losses and the ability to face them. The Dominican Republic has shown steady risk performance up to 2008, but two remaining areas for improvement are hazard monitoring and early warning systems. Jamaica has made uneven advances between 1990 and 2008, requiring significant improvements to achieve high performance levels and sustainability in risk management, as well as macroeconomic mitigation infrastructure. Trinidad and Tobago has the lowest risk management score of the 15 countries in the Latin American and Caribbean region as assessed by the IADB study in 2010, yet it has experienced an important vulnerability reduction. In sum, the results confirmed the high disaster risk management disparity in the Caribbean region.

Disater Risk Management Disparity in the Caribbean: Evidence from Barbados, Dominican Republic, Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago

This study on risk and disaster management capacities of four Caribbean countries: Barbados, the Dominican Republic, Jamaica, and Trinidad and Tobago, examines three main dimensions: 1) the impact of natural disasters from 1900 to 2010 (number of events, number of people killed, total number affected, and damage in US$); 2) institutional assessments of disaster risk management disparity; and 3) the 2010 Inter-American Bank for Development (IADB) Disaster Risk and Risk Management indicators for the countries under study. The results show high consistency among the different sources examined, pointing out the need to extend the IADB measurements to the rest of the Caribbean countries. Indexes and indicators constitute a comparison measure vis-à-vis existing benchmarks in order to anticipate a capacity to deal with adverse events and their consequences; however, the indexes and indicators could only be tested against the occurrence of a real event. Therefore, the need exists to establish a sustainable and comprehensive evaluation system after important disasters to assess a country’s performance, verify the indicators, and gain feedback on measurement systems and methodologies. There is diversity in emergency and preparedness for disasters in the four countries under study. The nature of the event (hurricanes, earthquakes, floods, and seismic activity), especially its frequency and the intensity of the damage experienced, is related to how each has designed its risk and disaster management policies and programs to face natural disasters. Vulnerabilities to disaster risks have been increasing, among other factors, because of uncontrolled urbanization, demographic density and poverty increase, social and economic marginalization, and lack of building code enforcement. The four countries under study have shown improvements in risk management capabilities, yet they are far from being completed prepared. Barbados’ risk management performance is superior, in comparison, to the majority of the countries of the region. However, is still far in achieving high performance levels and sustainability in risk management, primarily when it has the highest gap between potential macroeconomic and financial losses and the ability to face them. The Dominican Republic has shown steady risk performance up to 2008, but two remaining areas for improvement are hazard monitoring and early warning systems. Jamaica has made uneven advances between 1990 and 2008, requiring significant improvements to achieve high performance levels and sustainability in risk management, as well as macroeconomic mitigation infrastructure. Trinidad and Tobago has the lowest risk management score of the 15 countries in the Latin American and Caribbean region as assessed by the IADB study in 2010, yet it has experienced an important vulnerability reduction. In sum, the results confirmed the high disaster risk management disparity in the Caribbean region.

Investigating group processes in a positive youth development program for multi -problem youth

This study investigated group processes as potential mediators or moderators of positive development outcome and negative reduction intervention response by evaluating the utility of a group measure modified from a widely known measure of group impact found in the group therapy research literature. Four group processes were of primary interest, (1) Group Impact; (2) Facilitator Impact; (3) Skills Impact; and (4) Exploration Impact as assessed by the Session Evaluation Form (SEF). Outcome measures included the Personally Expressive Activities Questionnaire (PEAQ), Erikson Psycho-Social Index (EPSI) and the Zill Behavior Items, Behavior Problem Index (ZBI (BPI)). The sample consisted of 121 multi-ethnic participants drawn from four alternative high schools from the Miami-Dade County Public School system. Utilizing a Latent Growth Curve Modeling approach with Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) statistics, preliminary analyses were conducted to evaluate the psychometric properties of the SEF and its role in the mediation or moderation of intervention outcome. Preliminary results revealed evidence of a single higher order factor representing a "General" global reaction, which was hypothesized to be a "Positive Group Climate" construct to the program as opposed to the four distinct group processes that were initially hypothesized to affect outcomes. The results of the evaluation of the mediation or moderation role of intervention outcome of the single "General" global latent factor ("Positive Group Climate" construct) did not significantly predict treatment response on any of the outcome variables. Nevertheless, the evidence of an underlying "General" global latent factor ("Positive Group Climate" construct) has important future directions for research on positive youth development programs as well as in group therapy research.