Search results

We are all experts! Does stakeholder engagement in health impact scoping lead to consensus? A Dutch case study

Stakeholder engagement in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Health Impact Assessment (HIA) provides opportunities for inclusive environmental decision-making contributing to the attainment of agreement about the potential environmental and health impacts of a plan. A case evaluation of stakeholder engagement was carried out to assess its effect in terms of consensus-building. The case consisted in two health impact scoping workshops engaging 20 stakeholders: policy-makers, experts and residents. A Participatory Action Research approach was adopted. Methods included observation, semi-structured questionnaires and interviews. Analysis methods consisted of several coding rounds, in-depth reading and discussion of Atlas.ti output reports, as well as studying questionnaire results. Participants reported a broadening of perspectives on health in relation to the environment and attainment of shared perspectives. Still, meaningful differences remained, indicating that joint learning experiences, trust and mutual respect created a ‘sense of consensus’ rather than a joint view on the issues at stake. To avoid disappointment and conflict in later project development, explicit acknowledgment and acceptance of disagreements should be included as a ground rule in future stakeholder engagement processes.

Criteria for comparing economic impact models of tourism

There are substantial differences between models of the economic impacts of tourism. Not only do the nature and precision of results vary, but data demands, complexity and underlying assumptions also differ. Often, it is not clear whether the models chosen are appropriate for the specific situation to which they are applied. The goal of this article is to provide an overview and evaluation of criteria for the selection of economic impact models. A literature review produced 52 potential criteria, subdivided into 10 groups. Based on an analysis of experts' opinions, the perceived importance of each criterion was determined and a set of essential criteria created. To illustrate the usage of these essential criteria, five models (export base, Keynesian, ad hoc, input-output and computable general equilibrium) were evaluated and compared based on their performance on these criteria. This paper builds on the existing literature by showing that it is possible to make a more informed choice among economic impact models of tourism.

Which features are important for effectiveness of sport- and health-related apps?

Do experts agree when assessing risks?

Risk matrices have been widely used in the industry under the notion that risk is a product of likelihood by severity of the hazard or safety case under consideration. When reliable raw data are not available to feed mathematical models, experts are asked to state their estimations. This paper presents two studies conducted in a large European airline and partially regarded the weighting of 14 experienced pilots’ judgment though software, and the calculation of agreement amongst 10 accident investigators when asked to assess the worst outcome, most credible outcome and risk level for 12 real events. According to the results, only 4 out of the 14 pilots could be reliably used as experts, and low to moderate agreement amongst the accident investigators was observed.

Opinions and priorities for an e-health platform

Background: To prevent deterioration after admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), and to improve rehabilitation, the ICU team should use digital technologies to provide comprehensive and practical information alongside personalised support for survivors and their family members. However, a knowledge gap exists on the users’ preferences for such an e-health platform in ICU follow-up services. Objectives: This study aims to explore the opinions and priorities for an e-health platform, including choices in digital elements, according to survivors of critical illness and their family members. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was used among members and other interested individuals of the Dutch volunteer organisation ‘Foundation Family- and Patient-Centred Intensive Care’. An investigator-developed questionnaire was disseminated through the newsletter and social media channels of the Foundation Family- and Patient-Centred Intensive Care. The results of this member consultation were analysed and reported as descriptive statistics on demographic variables and outcome measures in opinions and priorities of the participants. Results: Most of the 227 participants were female (76%), aged 46–55 years (33%), and completed higher education (70%). The participants reported high confidence in advice delivered through an e-health platform (72%). They prioritised the provision of a guide including relevant professionals who may support them during their recovery when using an e-health platform. Conclusions: ICU survivors prioritised the provision of relevant professionals who may support them during their recovery when using an e-health platform; however, selection bias means the population studied is likely to be more digitally connected than the general ICU population. Digital solutions could cater to their information and support needs. For family members, the highest priority reported was receiving help in managing their emotional distress. The development of an e-health platform considering the opinions and priorities of this target group could contribute to a personalised recovery trajectory promoting self-management while including digital elements addressing relevant ICU follow-up services.

Expert opinions on SME Transfers Hazards for policymakers and entrepreneurs

The EU and national governments rely on expert panels and opinions for their policies (EU, 2003; EU, 2006a; EU, 2006b) on SME ownership transfers. Also entrepreneurs depend on expert opinions and advice. We know from expert studies that expert judgment may lead to confusion and conflicting results. Can we rely on expert opinions in ownership transfers, especially if there are different specialists involved? 71 Dutch SME specialists on ownership transfers (accountants, bankers, business brokers, business consultants) and 10 entrepreneurs were interviewed with open questions. The answers were counted and the averages of different groups of specialists were tested by one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD. The results indicate that expert opinions are largely divergent on issues, but become convergent on solutions. Most given solutions by experts are more awareness/information and involving professional advice. Not the accountant, the international most widely used advisor by entrepreneurs in ownership transfers, but the business broker seems best fit to advice. Business brokers are active in more phases of the ownership transfer, are better connected to other specialists and have the most structured working method. We detect serious market failure to provide advice for entrepreneurs on business transfers. More than one specialist is needed, the best suited advisor - the business brokers - are unattainable for most micro firms. To overcome market failure transfer vouchers might connect entrepreneurs better to business brokers. Our results are confined by the sample, being small, select and national