4.6 Article

Capacity building measures for chemical accident prevention and preparedness: Benchmark of EU neighbourhood countries

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.07.023

关键词

Capacity building; Chemical accidents prevention and preparedness (CAPP); EU neighbourhood countries; Survey profiling

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The purpose of this study is to review and present the contribution of the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission to the development of a new methodological approach for measuring the effective capacity of national programmes aimed at reducing the risk of chemical accidents. This new methodology is specifically intended to enable comprehensive assessment and monitoring of the progress of European Union (EU) Neighbourhood Countries in building capacity to implement effective chemical accident prevention and preparedness (CAPP) programmes. The paper describes indicators developed for the EU Neighbourhood Countries project for Seveso capacity building, in which the Seveso Directive experience in the EU is the reference model for capacity building efforts and measuring progress. Measurement of key programme elements, implementing practices, competences, and resources was operationalized into a broader survey of the national chemical accident risk reduction programmes and strategies. The responses to selected questions were then aggregated into three capacity building indices. This innovative approach illustrates how the specific indices may be applied to measure progress, benchmark against other countries and identify trends in capacity building growth. Implications and benefits of the capacity building indices are discussed in terms of their relevance as leading indicators in developing capacity building strategies in specific countries and regions. It is noted that the same framework can also be used to measure capacity building towards other sustainability goals, based on specific data availabilities.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据