941 resultados para Valuation of Ecosystem Services


Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

"Contract number 20-42-75-43".

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Running title: Wealth, debt, and taxation.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

"From the Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society of England, vol. 63, 1902, p. 76-114."

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Mode of access: Internet.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

"Department of Veterans Affairs"--Cover.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Mode of access: Internet.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

[1] Union: Clogher/Counties: Monaghan & Tyrone -- [2] Union: Castlerea/Counties: Roscommon & Mayo -- [3] Union: Castletowndelvin/Counties: Meath & Westmeath -- [4] Union: Cootehill/County: Cavan -- [5] Union: Clifton/County: Galway, in which is included the Island of Inishbofin in the County of Mayo -- [6] Union: Claremorris/County: Mayo -- [7] Union: Cootehill/County: Managhan -- [8] Union: Clones/(Part of) County: Monaghan -- [9] Union: Ardee/Counties: Louth & Meath -- [10] Union: Bailieborough/County: Cavan -- [11] Union: Ballina/Counties: Mayo & Sligo -- [12] Union: Ballinasloe/County: Roscommon -- [13] Union: Ballinrobe/County: Mayo -- [14] Union: Ballymahon/Counties: Longford & Westmeath -- [15] Union: Ballymahon/County: Westmeath -- [16] Union: Ballyshannon/County: Donegal -- [17] Union: Ballyshannon/County: Leitrim -- [18] Union: Ballyvaghan/County: Clare -- [19] Union: Baltinglass/County: Wicklow -- [20] Unions: Bandon & Kinsale/County: Cork -- [21] Union: Bawnboy/County: Cavan -- [22] Union: Bawnboy/County: Leitrim -- [23] Union: Belmullet/County: Mayo -- [24] Union: Carrick-on-Shannon/County: Roscommon -- [25] Union: Carrickmacross/County: Monaghan -- [26] Union: Castlebar/County: Mayo -- [27] Union: Castleblayney (part of)/County: Monaghan -- [28] Union: Corrofin/County: Clare -- [29] Barony: Upper Deece/County: Meath -- [30] Barony: Cork/County: Cork -- [31] Barony: Coshmore & Coshbride/County: Waterford -- [32] Barony: Trough/County: Monaghan -- [33] Union: Donegal/County: Donegal -- [34] Union: Drogheda/Counties: Louth & Meath -- [35] Union: Dromore, West/County: Sligo -- [36] Union: Dunfanaghy/County: Donegal -- [37] Unions: Cahersiveen, Kenmare, and Killarney/County: Kerry -- [38] Barony: Dunkerron South/County: Kerry -- [39] Union: Dunshaughlin/County: Meath -- [40] Union: Edenderry/County: Meath -- [41] Union: Edenderry/County: Kildare -- [42] Union: Edenderry/King's County -- [43] Union: Enniskillen/County: Cavan -- [44] Union: Ennistimon/County: Clare -- [45] Barony: Glenahiry/County: Waterford -- [46] Union: Gort/Counties: Galway & Clare -- [47] Union: Granard/County: Longford -- [48] Union: Granard/County: Westmeath -- [49] Barony: Iffa & Offa West/County: Tipperary -- [50] Barony: Imokilly/County: Cork -- [51] Union: Kells/County: Meath -- [52] Barony: Kenry/County: Limerick -- [53] Barony: Kerrycurrihy/County: Cork -- [54] Barony: Kilculliheen/County: Waterford -- [55] Union: Killadysert/County: Clare -- [56] Union: Killala/County: Mayo -- [57] Union: Letterkenny/County: Donegal -- [58] Union: Limerick/County: Limerick -- [59] Union: Longford/County: Longford -- [60] Barony: Magunihy/County: Kerry -- [61] Unions: Mallow & Cork/County: Cork -- [62] Union: Manorhamilton/County: Leitrim -- [63] Union: Millford/County: Donegal -- [64] Union: Mountbellew/County: Galway -- [65] Union: Naas/County: Wicklow -- [66] Union: Navan/County: Meath -- [67] Union: Newport/County: Mayo -- [68] Union: Oldcastle/County: Meath -- [69] Barony: Upper Ormond/County: Tipperary, North Riding -- [70] Barony: Orrery & Kilmore/County: Cork -- [71] Union: Oughterard/ Counties: Galway & Mayo together with that portion of the Union of Ballinrobe in the County of Galway -- [72] Union: Portumna/County: Galway -- [73] Barony: Rathdown/County: Wicklow -- [74] Barony: Salt/County: Kildare -- [75] Barony: South Salt/County: Kildare -- [76] Union: Scarriff/Counties: Clare & Galway -- [77] Union: Shillelagh/County: Wicklow -- [78] Union: Stranorlar/County: Donegal -- [79] Union: Tobercurry/County: Sligo -- [80] Union: Trim/County: Meath -- [81] Barony: Trughanacmy/County: Kerry -- [82] Barony: Upperthird/County: Waterford -- [83] Union: Wexford/County: Wexford -- [84] Barony: Castleknock/County: Dublin -- [85] Barony: Balrothery, East/County: Dublin -- [86] Barony: Newcastle/County: Dublin -- [87] City of Dublin, North Dublin Union, Arran Quay Ward -- [88] City of Dublin, South Dublin Union, Fitzwilliam Ward -- [89] City of Dublin, North Dublin Union, Inns Quay Ward -- [90] City of Dublin, South Dublin Union, Mansion House Ward -- [91] City of Dublin, South Dublin Union, Merchants' Quay Ward -- [92] City of Dublin, North Dublin Union, Mountjoy Ward -- [93] City of Dublin, North Dublin Union, North Dock Ward -- [94] City of Dublin, North Dublin Union, North City Ward -- [95] City of Dublin, North Dublin Union, Rotundo Ward -- [96] City of Dublin, South Dublin Union, Royal Exchange Ward -- [97] City of Dublin, South Dublin Union, South City Ward -- [98] City of Dublin, South Dublin Union, South Dock Ward -- [99] City of Dublin, South Dublin Union, Trinity Ward -- [100] City of Dublin, South Dublin Union, Usher's Quay Ward -- [101] City of Dublin, South Dublin Union, Wood Quay Ward.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The objective of this study is to examine the market valuation of environmental capital expenditure investment related to pollution abatement in the pulp and paper industry. The total environmental capital expenditure of $8.7 billion by our sample firms during 1989-2000 supports the focus on this industry. In order to be capitalized, an asset should be associated with future economic benefits. The existing environmental literature suggests that investors condition their evaluation of the future economic benefits arising from environmental capital expenditure on an assessment of the firms' environmental performance. This literature predicts the emergence of two environmental stereotypes: low-polluting firms that overcomply with existing environmental regulations, and high-polluting firms that just meet minimal environmental requirements. Our valuation evidence indicates that there are incremental economic benefits associated with environmental capital expenditure investment by low-polluting firms but not high-polluting firms. We also find that investors use environmental performance information to assess unbooked environmental liabilities, which we interpret to represent the future abatement spending obligations of high-polluting firms in the pulp and paper industry. We estimate average unbooked liabilities of $560 million for high-polluting firms, or 16.6 percent of market capitalization.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Background: evaluation of the 'Keep Well At Home' (KWAH) Project in West London indicated that a programme of screening persons aged 75 and over had not reduced rates of emergency attendances and admissions to hospital. However, coverage of the target population was incomplete. The present analysis addresses 'efficacy'-whether individuals who completed the screening protocol as intended did subsequently use Accident & Emergency (A&E) services less often. Methods: the target population was divided into five groups, depending on whether an individual had completed none, one or both phases of screening, and whether deviations from the protocol related to incomplete coverage or refusal to participate further. We ascertained use of emergency services before screening and for up to 3 years afterwards by linkage of records from KWAH to those of local A&E Departments. Patterns of emergency care were examined as crude races and, via proportional hazards models, after adjustment for available confounders. Results: there was an increase of 51% (95% CI 22-86%) in the crude rate of emergency admissions in the year after first-phase screening compared with the 12 months before assessment. This was most obvious in individuals deemed at high risk who also underwent the second-phase assessment (adjusted hazard ratio relative to individuals not 'at risk'= 2.33; 95% CI 1.59-3.42). Conclusions: the available data do not allow us to distinguish between several possible explanations for the paradoxical increase in use of emergency services. However, what seem to be sensible policies do not necessarily have their intended effects when implemented in practice.