To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Many recent integral field spectroscopy (IFS) survey teams have used stellar kinematic maps combined with imaging to statistically infer the underlying distributions of galaxy intrinsic shapes. With now several IFS samples at our disposal, the method, which was originally proposed by M. Franx and collaborators in 1991, is gaining in popularity, having been so far applied to ATLAS3D, SAMI, MANGA and MASSIVE. We present results showing that a commonly assumed relationship between dynamical and intrinsic shape alignment does not hold in Illustris, affecting our ability to recover accurate intrinsic shape distributions. A further implication is that so-called “prolate rotation”, where the bulk of stars in prolate galaxies are thought to rotate around the projected major axis, is a misnomer.
Guaiac stool testing has been routinely used as a method to detect gastrointestinal complications in infants with critical congenital heart disease (CHD); however, the sensitivity and specificity have not been established.
A retrospective chart review was performed investigating the presence of heme-positive stools and subsequent gastrointestinal complications as well as time to goal caloric intake and radiograph exposure.
The presence of heme-positive stools was not a statistically significant factor in patients with critical CHD that experienced gastrointestinal complications. Additionally, patients with heme-positive stools did undergo more abdominal X-rays than those with heme-negative stools.
The routine use of guaiac stool testing in infants with critical CHD is not a predictor of possible gastrointestinal complications and leads to more radiograph exposure for the patient. Close clinical monitoring can be used to evaluate feeding tolerance in infants with critical CHD.
When patients are admitted onto psychiatric wards, sleep problems are highly prevalent. We carried out the first trial testing a psychological sleep treatment at acute admission (Oxford Ward sLeep Solution, OWLS).
This assessor-blind parallel-group pilot trial randomised patients to receive sleep treatment at acute crisis [STAC, plus standard care (SC)], or SC alone (1 : 1). STAC included cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) for insomnia, sleep monitoring and light/dark exposure for circadian entrainment, delivered over 2 weeks. Assessments took place at 0, 2, 4 and 12 weeks. Feasibility outcomes assessed recruitment, retention of participants and uptake of the therapy. Primary efficacy outcomes were the Insomnia Severity Index and Warwick–Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale at week 2. Analyses were intention-to-treat, estimating treatment effect with 95% confidence intervals.
Between October 2015 and July 2016, 40 participants were recruited (from 43 assessed eligible). All participants offered STAC completed treatment (mean sessions received = 8.6, s.d. = 1.5). All participants completed the primary end point. Compared with SC, STAC led to large effect size (ES) reductions in insomnia at week 2 (adjusted mean difference −4.6, 95% CI −7.7 to −1.4, ES −0.9), a small improvement in psychological wellbeing (adjusted mean difference 3.7, 95% CI −2.8 to 10.1, ES 0.3) and patients were discharged 8.5 days earlier. One patient in the STAC group had an adverse event, unrelated to participation.
In this challenging environment for research, the trial was feasible. Therapy uptake was high. STAC may be a highly effective treatment for sleep disturbance on wards with potential wider benefits on wellbeing and admission length.
Integral field unit spectrographs allow the 2D exploration of the kinematics and stellar populations of galaxies, although they are generally restricted to small fields-of-view. Using the large field-of-view of the DEIMOS multislit spectrograph on Keck and our Stellar Kinematics using Multiple Slits technique, we are able to extract sky-subtracted stellar light spectra to large galactocentric radii. Here, we present a new DEIMOS mask design named SuperSKiMS that explores large spatial scales without sacrificing high spatial sampling. We simulate a set of observations with such a mask design on the nearby galaxy NGC 1023, measuring stellar kinematics and metallicities out to where the galaxy surface brightness is orders of magnitude fainter than the sky. With this technique we also reproduce the results from literature integral field spectroscopy in the innermost galaxy regions. In particular, we use the simulated NGC 1023 kinematics to model its total mass distribution to large radii, obtaining comparable results with those from published integral field unit observation. Finally, from new spectra of NGC 1023, we obtain stellar 2D kinematics and metallicity distributions that show good agreement with integral field spectroscopy results in the overlapping regions. In particular, we do not find a significant offset between our Stellar Kinematics using Multiple Slits and the ATLAS3D stellar velocity dispersion at the same spatial locations.
There is a paucity of information on the cetacean fauna of Guinea-Bissau in West Africa. We compiled records published in the literature and novel unpublished sighting data (2008–2014) to examine the occurrence and distribution of cetacean species. At least 10 species were verified to occur in Guinea-Bissau waters, of which eight were documented from a small number of sightings, whaling captures or skeletal remains. By far the most frequently recorded species were the common bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) (N = 146) and the Atlantic humpback dolphin (Sousa teuszii) (N = 110). These two species were sympatric in distribution, both being found throughout coastal waters from the northern regions of Canal de Jeta and Rio Mansôa south to the Rio Cacine and around the Arquipélago dos Bijagós. However, differences were apparent in their finer-scale distribution and in the distance of sightings from shore, with bottlenose dolphin sightings generally occurring further from shore (and especially in the region of the Canal do Gêba) than Atlantic humpback dolphins. Sightings indicate that both species likely inhabit Guinea-Bissau waters throughout the year. Dedicated systematic cetacean survey work is urgently needed in coastal Bissau-Guinean waters in order to ascertain the abundance, spatio-temporal distribution, population structure and causes of mortality of bottlenose and Atlantic humpback dolphins, particularly given the Vulnerable conservation status of the latter species. Clarification of the status of cetaceans in offshore waters requires survey effort throughout the Guinea-Bissau EEZ.
The idea of investment treaty arbitration as public law is in tension with the concept of international law as a law between representative public agencies. This concept of international law is valuable for its capacity to progress a broad range of public policy aims in an integrated and coordinated manner, including aims extending beyond the economic sphere such as international social, environmental, cultural and related aims. The probable effect on this concept of international law of a radical ‘internationalized public law’ approach to investment treaty arbitration requires further thought, especially with regard to the potential implications of recognizing investor rights under international law.
The SAGES Legacy Unifying Galaxies and GlobularS (SLUGGS) survey probes the outskirts of early-type galaxies (ETGs). SLUGGS uses the DEIMOS spectrograph on Keck to simultaneously obtain globular cluster and spatially resolved galaxy spectra. The galaxy spectra allow for the reconstruction of kinematic maps out to ∼3 effective radii (Re), while globular clusters (GCs) push the galactocentric limit out to ∼8–10Re. Stellar population parameters (abundances) can also be recovered. This provides a unique dataset for exploring the outer gradients (abundance and/or kinematic transition). We briefly present recent and salient results of the SLUGGS survey so far.
Scientific disputes pose new challenges within the rationalist conception of adjudication in the international setting. Important factual elements of such disputes are acknowledged as unknowable, and so it becomes difficult to maintain a strict traditional rationalist conception of adjudication as a process where the law is applied to the facts. As a result, scientific disputes are generating renewed attention to rules about evidence and proof in international courts and tribunals.
The scientific disputes discussed in this book are ‘live’ policy cases where complainants want respondents to change their conduct. These cases differ from other disputes where complainants are seeking only compensation or the restoration of their dignity. At the national level it has been suggested that policy disputes call for a modification to traditional adversarial procedure. This is precisely what is taking place in international courts and tribunals, as they increasingly experiment with a wide range of methods for investigating central aspects of these scientific disputes.
Among the results of this experimentation is a greater reliance on expert evidence. Here, complex problems begin to arise. Many of the legal rules that are applicable will have been crafted with scientific uncertainty in mind. They may incorporate tests according to which a state is required to conduct itself as ‘necessary’ in the circumstances, or take steps based on ‘sufficient’ scientific evidence, for example. International courts and tribunals will need the close assistance of experts to interpret and apply these tests in different contexts.
The importance of co-operation between disputing parties
Co-operation between the disputing parties will often be key to the successful resolution of a scientific or technical dispute, and may also allow for a calibrated application of the precautionary principle that may not be as achievable through adjudicatory dispute settlement. Whether or not disputants ultimately do co-operate effectively cannot by any means be guaranteed, but judicial prompting may assist. The two awards in the well-known Trail Smelter Arbitration (US v. Canada) provide an early demonstration of how helpful it may be to allow time for co-operative study of how to address or ameliorate a problem, here the distribution of sulphur dioxide from the Canadian smelter at Trail through cross-border currents in the upper air. In its first award the Tribunal decided that three consultants would be appointed for the gathering of meteorological observations, and prescribed a temporary emissions limitations regime. In its second award the Tribunal was then in a position to lay down a detailed and permanent regime.
Adjudicatory proceedings may be just one of the stages through which a dispute proceeds, and it is part of the function of an international court or tribunal to take this into account in deciding how to deal with a case. The practical significance of scientific and administrative co-operation is apparent upon considering the various high-profile international disputes involving scientific uncertainties introduced in the pages that follow.
The previous chapter dealt with two procedural avenues that could be helpful in dealing with situations where it is asserted that new scientific evidence requires an international adjudicatory decision to be reconsidered. However, it was found that neither the revision procedure nor the doctrine of nullity offers the type of process that may be needed. This final chapter therefore proposes the institutionalisation of reassessment proceedings for disputes involving scientific uncertainty, drawing on experience in the WTO in the Continued Suspension of Obligations cases. Additionally the chapter addresses the application of the rules on res judicata in subsequent proceedings in scientific cases.
‘Reassessment’ proceedings would be concentrated on assessing an original respondent's compliance with its international legal obligations at the point in time after new scientific research has been invoked. A number of factors point to the need to treat the idea of reassessment with caution. There are obvious problems in providing what would be an opportunity for a reasonably full rehearing. Making use of such a procedure would consume considerable resources, and the procedure is open to abuse. The issues lying behind ongoing litigation in disputes involving potential future harm may in some instances be social and political, and ongoing litigation may not be the best way to resolve them. Further, for all concerned it is most desirable to make an enduring decision at the time of the original proceedings.
Cases involving scientific knowledge and the risk of future harm raise a host of new problems in connection with evidence, proof and the finality of adjudicatory decision-making. Indeed, international rules relating to evidence and proof in international courts and tribunals are evolving as a result of the increasingly high incidence of such disputes. Increased use is being made of different methods for the taking of expert evidence; the rules on the allocation of the burden of proof are coming under scrutiny; and the rules ensuring the finality of international adjudication require consideration. This book explores and evaluates the procedural developments that are taking place and assesses further steps to be taken, particularly with a view to recognising and accommodating the precautionary principle.
According to the precautionary principle, action to counter a serious threat to human health or the environment should not be delayed merely because of scientific uncertainty. The need to protect human life or health and the environment should be assumed, once certain thresholds are crossed. Proving that harm will occur is not required. This approach sits awkwardly with the usual precepts of adjudication, which revolve around the proof of fact. The challenge is for adjudicators to make reasoned decisions that pay due heed to the harm that is threatened in every dispute, despite the absence of perfect knowledge.
The judgments and awards of international courts and tribunals provide points of stability in international politics, permanently allocating resources and responsibility according to law. They offer disputing parties a decision that will enable them to close down their disputes and move on. They also reinforce the status of the law and help to clarify and develop its content. The finality of international adjudication is important in enabling international courts' and tribunals' decisions to fulfil these systemic functions. For judgments and awards dependent on continually advancing scientific research there is thus an awkward problem. Within a relatively short period of time it is always possible that new scientific evidence could show a judgment or award to have been based on erroneous factual foundations.
The principle of finality should not be seen as an end in itself. Appropriately circumscribed processes of review are also an essential aspect of international adjudication. International law has always readily accommodated the need for procedures allowing the rectification, interpretation and even the revision of judgments and awards. On rare occasions, express provision is also made by an international court or tribunal for a decision to be revisited, as in the Nuclear Tests cases (Australia v. France) (New Zealand v. France). There are also other case-specific rubrics under which the parties might return to the courtroom. In the Case concerning the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Slovakia invoked Article 5(3) of its Special Agreement with Slovakia in 1998.
By canvassing a range of international scientific disputes, including the EC-Biotech and EC-Hormones disputes in the WTO, the case concerning Pulp Mills and the Gabcíkovo–Nagymaros case in the International Court of Justice, and the Mox Plant and Land Reclamation cases dealt with under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Caroline Foster examines how the precautionary principle can be accommodated within the rules about proof and evidence and advises on the boundary emerging between the roles of experts and tribunals. A new form of reassessment proceedings for use in exceptional cases is proposed. Breaking new ground, this book seeks to advance international adjudicatory practice by contextualising developments in the taking of expert evidence and analysing the justification of and potential techniques for a precautionary reversal of the burden of proof, as well as methods for dealing with important scientific discoveries subsequent to judgements and awards.
The exercise of the international adjudicatory function in disputes involving scientific uncertainty may meet its greatest test in relation to the allocation of the burden of proof. The traditional rule on the burden of proof has the potential to provide a high degree of predictability in international adjudication, yet there may arise cases where fairness calls strongly for an international court to reassess or adjust the allocation of the burden of proof. This may especially be so in the light of the precautionary principle. This chapter investigates the origins and the logic of the rule on burden of proof, establishing its parameters and the desirable directions for its future development. Chapter 6 then explores the potential for a modification in the articulation or application of the existing rules on burden of proof, in order to permit the reversal of the burden of proof to give effect to the precautionary principle.
The rule on the allocation of the burden of proof that is applied in international courts and tribunals is that the party making an assertion must prove that assertion: actori incumbit probatio. The rule derives from the rule applying in civil trials in Roman law: ei incumbit probatio qui dicit non qui negat. According to the maxim reus in exceptione fit actor, a party relying on an exception in the substantive law will attract the burden of proving the applicability of the exception or defence. Thus, as Rosenne has written:
Generally, in application of the principle actori incumbit probatio the Court will formally require the party putting forward a claim or a particular contention to establish the elements of fact and of law on which the decision in its favour might be given.