This applied research project aims to generate a better understanding of the effects of heatwaves on vulnerable population groups in the municipality of The Hague, and suggests ways in which the municipality can help such groups to cope with these heatwaves. The research was performed as a cooperation between The Hague University of Applied Sciences (THUAS), the International Institute of Social Studies (ISS, Erasmus University Rotterdam) and the International Centre for Frugal Innovation (ICFI, Leiden-Delft-Erasmus Universities). Heatwaves constitute an important yet often overlooked part of climate change and their impacts qualify as disasters. According to the World Disasters Report 2020, the three heatwaves affecting Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Switzerland and the UK in the summer of 2019 caused 3,453 deaths.1 2020 was a new record year for the Netherlands because it was the first time that a heatwave included five days in a row during which the temperature reached 35 degrees or more. In addition, 40 degrees was measured for the first time, and periods of tropical days and nights are generally getting longer. Most importantly, this trend is accelerating faster than the climate change models are predicting.2 In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic is compounding the effect of heatwaves, as vulnerable individuals may be reluctant to seek cool spaces out of fear of infection. Already in 2006, the Netherlands ranked near the top of the global disaster index due to the number of excess deaths that could be attributed to the heatwave. In the same year, the EU published the first climate strategy in which heat is recognised as a priority. In 2008, the Netherlands developed its first national heat plan.4 The municipality of The Hague has a municipal climate adaptation strategy and has developed a draft local heat plan in the summer of 2021, which was published in February 2022 . This research was not meant to be and was not set up as an evaluation of the current heat plan, which has not yet been activated. At the level of municipalities and cities, the concept of urban resilience is key. It refers to “the capacity of individuals, communities, institutions, businesses, and systems within a city to survive, adapt, and grow no matter what kinds of chronic stresses and acute shocks they experience”. Heatwaves clearly constitute acute shocks which are rapidly developing into chronic stresses. In turn, heatwaves also exacerbate the chronic stresses that are already there, i.e. existing chronic stresses also lead to greater impact of a heatwave. In other words, there are negative interaction effects. Addressing these effects requires overcoming the silo approach to urban governance, in which different municipal departments as well as other stakeholders (such as the Red Cross, housing corporations, tenants’ associations, care organisations, entrepreneurs etc.) each address different parts of the problem, rather than doing so in an integrated and inclusive manner. The dataset for this study is archived in DANS Easy: https://doi.org/10.17026/dans-xeb-h8uk
MULTIFILE
Reporting of research findings is often selective. This threatens the validity of the published body of knowledge if the decision to report depends on the nature of the results. The evidence derived from studies on causes and mechanisms underlying selective reporting may help to avoid or reduce reporting bias. Such research should be guided by a theoretical framework of possible causal pathways that lead to reporting bias. We build upon a classification of determinants of selective reporting that we recently developed in a systematic review of the topic. The resulting theoretical framework features four clusters of causes. There are two clusters of necessary causes: (A) motivations (e.g. a preference for particular findings) and (B) means (e.g. a flexible study design). These two combined represent a sufficient cause for reporting bias to occur. The framework also features two clusters of component causes: (C) conflicts and balancing of interests referring to the individual or the team, and (D) pressures from science and society. The component causes may modify the effect of the necessary causes or may lead to reporting bias mediated through the necessary causes. Our theoretical framework is meant to inspire further research and to create awareness among researchers and end-users of research about reporting bias and its causes.
Previous research shows that automatic tendency to approach alcohol plays a causal role in problematic alcohol use and can be retrained by Approach Bias Modification (ApBM). ApBM has been shown to be effective for patients diagnosed with alcohol use disorder (AUD) in inpatient treatment. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of adding an online ApBM to treatment as usual (TAU) in an outpatient setting compared to receiving TAU with an online placebo training. 139 AUD patients receiving face-to-face or online treatment as usual (TAU) participated in the study. The patients were randomized to an active or placebo version of 8 sessions of online ApBM over a 5-week period. The weekly consumed standard units of alcohol (primary outcome) was measured at pre-and post-training, 3 and 6 months follow-up. Approach tendency was measured pre-and-post ApBM training. No additional effect of ApBM was found on alcohol intake, nor other outcomes such as craving, depression, anxiety, or stress. A significant reduction of the alcohol approach bias was found. This research showed that approach bias retraining in AUD patients in an outpatient treatment setting reduces the tendency to approach alcohol, but this training effect does not translate into a significant difference in alcohol reduction between groups. Explanations for the lack of effects of ApBM on alcohol consumption are treatment goal and severity of AUD. Future ApBM research should target outpatients with an abstinence goal and offer alternative, more user-friendly modes of delivering ApBM training.