Explore the vast range of titles available.

1. Wildlife damage to human property threatens human-wildlife coexistence. Conflicts arising from wildlife damage in intensively managed landscapes often undermine conservation efforts, making damage mitigation and compensation of special concern for wildlife conservation. However, the mechanisms underlying the occurrence of damage and claims at large scales are still poorly understood. 2. Here, we investigated the patterns of damage caused by brown bears Ursus arctos and its ecological and socio-economic correlates at a continental scale. We compiled information about compensation schemes across 26 countries in Europe in 2005-2012 and analysed the variation in the number of compensated claims in relation to (i) bear abundance, (ii) forest availability, (iii) human land use, (iv) management practices and (v) indicators of economic wealth. 3. Most European countries have a posteriori compensation schemes based on damage verification, which, in many cases, have operated for more than 30 years. On average, over 3200 claims of bear damage were compensated annually in Europe. The majority of claims were for damage to livestock (59%), distributed throughout the bear range, followed by damage to apiaries (21%) and agriculture (17%), mainly in Mediterranean and eastern European countries. 4. The mean number of compensated claims per bear and year ranged from 0-1 in Estonia to 8-5 in Norway. This variation was not only due to the differences in compensation schemes; damage claims were less numerous in areas with supplementary feeding and with a high proportion of agricultural land. However, observed variation in compensated damage was not related to bear abundance. 5. Synthesis and applications. Compensation schemes, management practices and human land use influence the number of claims for brown bear damage, while bear abundance does not. Policies that ignore this complexity and focus on a single factor, such as bear population size, may not be effective in reducing claims. To be effective, policies should be based on integrative schemes that prioritize damage prevention and make it a condition of payment of compensation that preventive measures are applied. Such integrative schemes should focus mitigation efforts in areas or populations where damage claims are more likely to occur. Similar studies using different species and continents might further improve our understanding of conflicts arising from wildlife damage.

Human-elephant conflicts (HECs) have surged worldwide due to widespread forest habitat destruction and human encroachment. In India, where only a small portion of elephant habitats are protected, these conflicts are particularly severe. West Bengal, with its substantial elephant population, faces significant challenges in addressing HECs, especially in its southern regions where conflict incidences are increasing in recent times. This study aims to elucidate the perceptions of local inhabitants residing in and around conflict-prone zones of elephant habitats in southern West Bengal. A structured questionnaire was employed to gather insights from 204 individuals across four administrative districts in the western part of south West Bengal. Results revealed that socio-economic and demographic factors greatly influence attitudes towards conservation. Despite diverse mitigation practices in response to challenges like crop damage and property loss, dissatisfaction with compensation schemes persists. These findings underscore the complexity of human-elephant interactions in the region and emphasize the need for holistic approaches that consider both conservation and livelihood needs.

This paper presents an innovative methodology for the dynamic emergency response scheme selection (ERSS) problem in post-major natural disasters. It employs a combination of subjective and objective composite weights and the integrated ELECTRE-score approach. The study aims to provide a practical approach for continuously determining optimal decision schemes at various time points during the decision period in the aftermath of significant natural disasters while accommodating evolving real-world scenarios. Firstly, the probabilistic T-spherical hesitant fuzzy set (Pt-SHFS) captures decision-makers’ ambivalence and hesitation regarding diverse evaluation attributes of different schemes. Subsequently, Pt-SHFS is integrated with the best–worst method (BWM) to determine subjective weights, followed by the structured CRITIC method to amalgamate subjective weights and derive the final combination weights of criteria. Additionally, this paper proposes applying a penalty-incentive mechanism to establish dynamic attribute weights during scenario evolution. Furthermore, the ELECTRE-score method, which may fully exploit the advantages of non-compensation situations, is adopted to obtain more reliable dynamic optimal decision outcomes. Consequently, based on these foundations, an integrated dynamic ERSS approach is formulated to determine optimal dynamic emergency response schemes. Finally, a case study on the Gansu Jishishan earthquake, sensitivity analysis, comparative analysis, and continuous analysis are conducted to verify the practicality, stability, and effectiveness of the proposed approach. The result shows that the proposed comprehensive approach can depict variances among experts’ information, dynamically adjust attribute weights in response to evolving scenarios, and assign a score range and a representative score to each scheme at each decision state. Sensitivity and comparative analyses show this model has strong stability and dynamics. Furthermore, the proposed approach can effectively deal with the complex dynamic situation in the earthquake rescue process, such as the secondary collapse of buildings after the earthquake, the damage of materials caused by heavy rain, and the occurrence of aftershocks. The model can continuously optimize decision-making and provide scientific and reliable support for emergency decision-making.

Wintering wildfowl are widely perceived to damage agricultural crops, resulting in economic losses and conflict between farmers and conservationists. However, examinations of the nature and extent of the damage show very variable outcomes, ranging from no detectable impact to yield losses exceeding 50%; this makes it hard to infer losses in unstudied systems. In Bulgarian Dobrudzha, a large wintering goose population almost exclusively consumes winter wheat, but the impact on wheat yields is poorly understood. We used crop exclosures and dropping counts to manipulate and measure goose grazing intensity, and estimated crop yield and its components (grain mass, grains per stem, stem density). Crop yield was 13.2% lower in unfenced control plots than in exclosures in one winter during which goose grazing intensity was high but mainly occurred relatively early in the season, but there was no effect of goose exclusion in an earlier winter when goose grazing intensity was relatively low but occurred late in the season. A negative relationship between grazing intensity and crop yield was found, mainly driven by a lower stem density in heavily grazed plots. We use this relationship to infer total yield loss and calculate the economic impact for the study area to be in the order of €15,000–100,000. However, the generality of these results remains unclear because the impact of a given grazing intensity appears likely to vary according to factors such as timing of grazing, weather, stage of crop development and soil conditions. We discuss the results in light of a new agri-environment scheme that has been launched in the area with the aim of securing appropriate forage conditions for wintering geese whilst compensating farmers for losses and reducing conflict.

In his interesting and important article, “Settlement, ADR, and Class Action Superiority,” Professor Rave argues that courts should review private ADR schemes established to compensate for mass harms before denying certification of subsequently filed class actions. This Comment makes three points. First, any evaluation of an ADR scheme can and should consider deterrence more seriously than Rave suggests. Second, Rave’s analysis should pay more attention to the potential effects of ex post review on ex ante incentives to create private schemes. Third, Rave’s balancing test for evaluating the adequacy of a private ADR scheme needs more development.

Purpose - This paper seeks to provide an analysis of historic and current criminal injuries compensation schemes in Great Britain.Design methodology approach - The paper aims to explain the nature of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA) that administers the present scheme and to identify the qualifying criteria to establish eligibility for awards of compensation and obstacles to success. It deals with the nature and amounts of the awards available, the evidence gathering process, causes of delay and impediments to the achievement of fair outcomes. In the context of cases of serious injury, including acquired brain injury, it examines specific problems that are likely to be encountered and a perceived inadequacy of the compensation available to victims of such injury. The paper considers the involvement of the National Health Service in cases where applications for compensation are made and the possibility that medical professionals might inadvertently hinder the chances of a fair award. The position of local authorities and social services departments is also addressed, as is the danger that proper claims for injured victims might not be identified.Findings - From the point of view of the victim of crime who is faced with making an application to CICA, the problems that they face lie with the process, the possibility of being refused on technical grounds, limits on compensation, gaps in the scheme - which might leave victims or their relatives going uncompensated or under-compensated, and finally the lack of financial support with the cost of representation where it is needed. Of equal concern is the fact that the description of the circumstances of the assault and the injuries suffered can be crucial to ensure that full, proper, and relevant evidence gathering is undertaken. Without suitable skills, it is very easy for the lay applicant inadvertently to mislead, or to give the CICA the opportunity to reject or under-compensate.Originality value - This paper provides a detailed analysis of CICA and reflects upon what the future might hold for injured victims of crime.

Sweden, Finland, Denmark, and Norway each operate successful no fault compensation schemes for injuries caused by both medical treatment and use of medicinal products. The existence of these schemes avoids the necessity for claims to be resolved through the courts, as medical negligence or product liability claims. The schemes are administrative/inquisitorial and cheap to operate, both in terms of administration costs and cost of sums paid. The low level of the latter costs is due to both low historic levels of damages, as would be awarded by courts, and particularly the fact that compensation is paid to injured persons from various sources, with no recourse being taken between the different sources. The schemes offer significant attractions, but it is difficult to see how they could be applied in other States given the background economic pre-conditions. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

The interaction between tort law and liability insurance is a complex problem that is difficult to deal with. This article provides a broad overview by distinguishing two approaches or models of the tort/insurance interface. One is the Deterrence Model in which tort law takes the leading role, whereas insurance is an auxiliary, and at times problematic, device. The alternative approach is the Compensation Model in which tort and insurance switch roles in order to provide optimal compensation to those in need. From there on, it is only a small step to no-fault schemes currently considered in some European countries as a substitute for traditional medical malpractice law.

This chapter contains sections titled: The purposes of a system of compensation An outline of the scheme The benefits available Making a claim Review of decisions Compensation for accidents Accidents on the way to work Accidents during breaks from work Emergencies Compensation for prescribed diseases Sequelae Recrudescence Pneumoconiosis Assessment of disablement Loss of faculty Disablement Multiple disabilities Reduced earnings allowance (REA) Incapacity for work The regular occupation Alternative employment Subsequent ill‐health