According to Human Rights Watch and legal scholar Miles Jackson, apartheid is also prohibited in customary international law although there is still debate as to whether it is criminalized as well.Legal scholars Gerhard Kemp and Windell Nortje noted that in 2021, two individuals (former members of apartheid South Africa's security police) became the first persons ever to be prosecuted for the crime of apartheid under customary international law.
The term apartheid, from Afrikaans for 'apartness', was the official name of the South African system of racial segregation
which existed after 1948. Complaints about the system were brought to
the United Nations as early as 12 July 1948 when Padmanabha Pillai, the
representative of India to the United Nations, circulated a letter to
the secretary-general expressing his concerns over treatment of ethnic
Indians within the Union of South Africa. As it became more widely known, South African apartheid was condemned internationally as unjust and racist
and many decided that a formal legal framework was needed in order to
apply international pressure on the South African government.
In 1971, the Soviet Union and Guinea together submitted early drafts of a convention to deal with the suppression and punishment of apartheid. In 1973, the General Assembly of the United Nations agreed on the text of the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (ICSPCA). The convention has 31 signatories and 107 parties.
The convention came into force in 1976 after 20 countries had ratified it. They were: Benin, Bulgaria, Chad, Czechoslovakia, Ecuador, the German Democratic Republic (East Germany), Guinea, Hungary, Iraq, Mongolia, Poland, Qatar, Somalia, Syria, the USSR, the United Arab Emirates, Tanzania, and Yugoslavia.
"As such, apartheid was declared to be a crime against humanity,
with a scope that went far beyond South Africa. While the crime of
apartheid is most often associated with the racist policies of South
Africa after 1948, the term more generally refers to racially based
policies in any state."
Seventy-six other countries subsequently signed on, but a number
of nations, including Western democracies, have neither signed nor
ratified the ICSPCA, including Canada, France, Germany, Israel, Italy,
the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and the
United States. In explanation of the US vote against the convention, Ambassador Clarence Clyde Ferguson Jr.
said: "[W]e cannot... accept that apartheid can in this manner be made a
crime against humanity. Crimes against humanity are so grave in nature
that they must be meticulously elaborated and strictly construed under
existing international law..."
In 1977, Addition Protocol 1 to the Geneva Conventions designated
apartheid as a grave breach of the protocol and a war crime. There are
169 parties to the protocol.
The International Criminal Court provides for individual criminal responsibility for crimes against humanity, including the crime of apartheid.
The ICC came into being on 1 July 2002, and can only prosecute
crimes committed on or after that date. The court can generally only
exercise jurisdiction in cases where the accused is a national of a
state party, the alleged crime took place on the territory of a state
party, or a situation is referred to the court by the United Nations Security Council.
The ICC exercises complimentary jurisdiction. Many of the member states
have provided their own national courts with universal jurisdiction
over the same offenses and do not recognize any statute of limitations
for crimes against humanity. As of July 2008, 106 countries are states parties (with Suriname and Cook Islands set to join in October 2008), and a further 40 countries have signed but not yet ratified the treaty.
However, many of the world's most populous nations, including China,
India, the United States, Indonesia, and Pakistan are not parties to the
court and therefore are not subject to its jurisdiction, except by
security council referral.
Article II of the ICSPCA defines the crime of apartheid as:
For the purpose of the present
Convention, the term 'the crime of apartheid', which shall include
similar policies and practices of racial segregation
and discrimination as practiced in southern Africa, shall apply to the
following inhumane acts committed for the purpose of establishing and
maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other
racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them:
Denial to a member or members of a racial group or groups of the right to life and liberty of person
By murder of members of a racial group or groups;
By
the infliction upon the members of a racial group or groups of serious
bodily or mental harm, by the infringement of their freedom or dignity,
or by subjecting them to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment;
By arbitrary arrest and illegal imprisonment of the members of a racial group or groups;
Deliberate imposition on a racial group or groups of living conditions calculated to cause its or their physical destruction in whole or in part;
Any
legislative measures and other measures calculated to prevent a racial
group or groups from participation in the political, social, economic
and cultural life of the country and the deliberate creation of
conditions preventing the full development of such a group or groups, in
particular by denying to members of a racial group or groups basic
human rights and freedoms, including the right to work, the right to
form recognised trade unions, the right to education, the right to leave
and to return to their country, the right to a nationality, the right
to freedom of movement and residence, the right to freedom of opinion
and expression, and the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and
association;
Any measures including legislative measures,
designed to divide the population along racial lines by the creation of
separate reserves and ghettos for the members of a racial group or
groups, the prohibition of mixed marriages among members of various
racial groups, the expropriation of landed property belonging to a
racial group or groups or to members thereof;
Exploitation of the labour of the members of a racial group or groups, in particular by submitting them to forced labour;
Persecution of organizations and persons, by depriving them of fundamental rights and freedoms, because they oppose apartheid.
— International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid, Article II
Signatories
to the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment
of the Crime of Apartheid: parties in dark green, signed but not
ratified in light green, non-members in grey
the term "racial discrimination"
shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based
on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the
purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment
or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental
freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field
of public life.
This definition does not make any difference between discrimination based on ethnicity and race, in part because the distinction between the two remains debatable among anthropologists. Similarly, in British law the phrase racial group
means "any group of people who are defined by reference to their race,
colour, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national
origin".
The 'crime of apartheid' means inhumane acts of a
character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the
context of an institutionalised regime of systematic oppression and
domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and
committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.
Evidence-based practice is the idea that occupational practices ought to be based on scientific evidence.
While seemingly obviously desirable, the proposal has been
controversial, with some arguing that results may not specialize to
individuals as well as traditional practices. Evidence-based practices
have been gaining ground since the formal introduction of evidence-based medicine in 1992 and have spread to the allied health professions, education, management, law, public policy, architecture, and other fields. In light of studies showing problems in scientific research (such as the replication crisis),
there is also a movement to apply evidence-based practices in
scientific research itself. Research into the evidence-based practice of
science is called metascience.
The movement towards evidence-based practices attempts to
encourage and, in some instances, require professionals and other
decision-makers to pay more attention to evidence to inform their
decision-making. The goal of evidence-based practice is to eliminate
unsound or outdated practices in favor of more-effective ones by
shifting the basis for decision making from tradition, intuition, and
unsystematic experience to firmly grounded scientific research.
An individual or organisation is justified in claiming that a
specific practice is evidence-based if, and only if, three conditions
are met. First, the individual or organisation possesses comparative
evidence about the effects of the specific practice in comparison to the
effects of at least one alternative practice. Second, the specific
practice is supported by this evidence according to at least one of the
individual's or organisation's preferences in the given practice area.
Third, the individual or organisation can provide a sound account for
this support by explaining the evidence and preferences that lay the
foundation for the claim.
History
For most of history, professions have based their practices on expertise derived from experience passed down in the form of tradition. Many of these practices have not been justified by evidence, which has sometimes enabled quackery
and poor performance. Even when overt quackery is not present, quality
and efficiency of tradition-based practices may not be optimal. As the scientific method
has become increasingly recognized as a sound means to evaluate
practices, evidence-based practices have become increasingly adopted.
One of the earliest proponents of evidence-based practice was Archie Cochrane, an epidemiologist who authored the book Effectiveness and Efficiency: Random Reflections on Health Services
in 1972. Cochrane's book argued for the importance of properly testing
health care strategies, and was foundational to the evidence-based
practice of medicine.
Cochrane suggested that because resources would always be limited, they
should be used to provide forms of health care which had been shown in
properly designed evaluations to be effective. Cochrane maintained that
the most reliable evidence was that which came from randomised controlled trials.
The term "evidence-based medicine" was introduced by Gordon Guyatt in 1990 in an unpublished program description, and the term was later first published in 1992.
This marked the first evidence-based practice to be formally
established. Some early experiments in evidence-based medicine involved
testing primitive medical techniques such as bloodletting,
and studying the effectiveness of modern and accepted treatments. There
has been a push for evidence-based practices in medicine by insurance
providers, which have sometimes refused coverage of practices lacking
in systematic evidence of usefulness. It is now expected by most clients
that medical professionals should make decisions based on evidence, and
stay informed about the most up-to-date information. Since the
widespread adoption of evidence-based practices in medicine, the use of
evidence-based practices has rapidly spread to other fields.
More recently, there has been a push for evidence-based education. The use of evidence-based learning techniques such as spaced repetition can improve students' rate of learning. Some commentators
have suggested that the lack of any substantial progress in the field
of education is attributable to practice resting in the unconnected and
noncumulative experience of thousands of individual teachers, each
re-inventing the wheel and failing to learn from hard scientific
evidence about 'what works'. Opponents of this view argue that it is
hard to assess teaching methods because it depends on a host of factors,
not least those to do with the style, personality and beliefs of the
teacher and the needs of the particular children.
Others argue the teacher experience could be combined with research
evidence, but without the latter being treated as a privileged source.
This is in line with a school of thought suggesting that evidence-based
practice has limitations and a better alternative is to use Evidence-informed Practice (EIP).
This process includes quantitative evidence, does not include
non-scientific prejudices, but includes qualitative factors such as
clinical experience and the discernment of practitioners and clients.
Versus tradition
Evidence-based practice is a philosophical approach that is in opposition to tradition.
Some degree of reliance on "the way it was always done" can be found in
almost every profession, even when those practices are contradicted by
new and better information.
Some critics argue that since research is conducted on a
population level, results may not generalise to each individual within
the population. Therefore, evidence-based practices may fail to provide
the best solution to each individual, and traditional practices may
better accommodate individual differences. In response, researchers have
made an effort to test whether particular practices work better for
different subcultures, personality types etc.
Some authors have redefined evidence-based practice to include practice
that incorporates common wisdom, tradition, and personal values
alongside practices based on evidence.
Evaluating scientific research is extremely complex. The process can by greatly simplified with the use of a heuristic that ranks the relative strengths of results obtained from scientific research called a hierarchy of evidence. The design of the study and the endpoints measured (such as survival or quality of life) affect the strength of the evidence. Typically, systematic reviews and meta-analysis rank at the top of the hierarchy while randomized controlled trials rank above observational studies, and expert opinion and case reports
rank at the bottom. There is broad agreement on the relative strength
of the different types of studies, but there is no single,
universally-accepted hierarchy of evidence. More than 80 different
hierarchies have been proposed for assessing medical evidence.
Evidence-based medicine is an approach to medical practice intended to optimize decision-making by emphasizing the use of evidence from well-designed and well-conducted research. Although all medicine based on science has some degree of empirical support, evidence-based medicine goes further, classifying evidence by its epistemologic strength and requiring that only the strongest types (coming from meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and randomized controlled trials) can yield strong recommendations; weaker types (such as from case-control studies)
can yield only weak recommendations. The term was originally used to
describe an approach to teaching the practice of medicine and improving
decisions by individual physicians about individual patients.
Use of the term rapidly expanded to include a previously described
approach that emphasized the use of evidence in the design of guidelines
and policies that apply to groups of patients and populations
("evidence-based practice policies").
Whether applied to medical education, decisions about
individuals, guidelines and policies applied to populations, or
administration of health services in general, evidence-based medicine
advocates that to the greatest extent possible, decisions and policies
should be based on evidence, not just the beliefs of practitioners,
experts, or administrators. It thus tries to assure that a clinician's opinion, which may be limited by knowledge gaps or biases, is supplemented with all available knowledge from the scientific literature so that best practice
can be determined and applied. It promotes the use of formal, explicit
methods to analyze evidence and makes it available to decision makers.
It promotes programs to teach the methods to medical students,
practitioners, and policymakers.
A process has been specified that provides a standardised route
for those seeking to produce evidence of the effectiveness of
interventions.
Originally developed to establish processes for the production of
evidence in the housing sector, the standard is general in nature and is
applicable across a variety of practice areas and potential outcomes of
interest.
Mental health
To improve dissemination of evidence-based practices, the Association for Behavioral and Cognitive Therapies (ABCT) and the Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology (SCCAP, Division 53 of the American Psychological Association)
maintain updated information on their websites on evidence-based
practices in psychology for practitioners and the general public. An
evidence-based practice consensus statement was developed at a summit on
mental healthcare in 2018. As of June 23, 2019, this statement has been
endorsed by 36 organizations.
There has since been a movement for the use of evidence-based
practice in conducting scientific research in attempt to address the replication crisis and other major issues affecting scientific research. The application of evidence-based practices to research itself is called metascience,
which seeks to increase the quality of scientific research while
reducing waste. It is also known as "research on research" and "the
science of science", as it uses research methods
to study how research is done and where improvements can be made. The
five main areas of research in metascience are methodology, reporting, reproducibility, evaluation, and incentives. Metascience has produced a number of reforms in science such as the use of study pre-registration and the implementation of reporting guidelines with the goal of bettering scientific research practices.
Evidence-based education (EBE), also known as evidence-based interventions,
is a model in which policy-makers and educators use empirical evidence
to make informed decisions about education interventions (policies,
practices, and programs). In other words, decisions are based on scientific evidence rather than opinion.
EBE has gained attention since English author David H. Hargreaves suggested in 1996 that education would be more effective if teaching, like medicine, was a "research-based profession".
Since 2000, studies in Australia, England, Scotland and the USA
have supported the use of research to improve educational practices in
teaching reading.
In 1997, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development convened a national panel to assess the effectiveness of different approaches used to teach children to read. The resulting National Reading Panel
examined quantitative research studies on many areas of reading
instruction, including phonics and whole language. In 2000 it published a
report entitled Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-based
Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and its
Implications for Reading Instruction that provided a comprehensive review of what was known about best practices in reading instruction in the U.S.
The following websites offer free analysis and information on education research:
The Best Evidence Encyclopedia is a free website created by the Johns Hopkins University School of Education's Center for Data-Driven Reform in Education (established in 2004) and is funded by the Institute of Education Sciences,
U.S. Department of Education. It gives educators and researchers
reviews about the strength of the evidence supporting a variety of
English programs available for students in grades K–12. The reviews cover programs in areas such as Mathematics, Reading, Writing, Science, Comprehensive school reform, and Early childhood Education; and includes such topics as effectiveness of technology and struggling readers.
The Education Endowment Foundation was established in 2011 by The Sutton Trust,
as a lead charity in partnership with Impetus Trust, together being the
government-designated What Works Centre for UK Education.
Evidence for the Every Student Succeeds Act began in 2017 and is produced by the Center for Research and Reform in Education at Johns Hopkins University School of Education.
It offers free up-to-date information on current PK-12 programs in
reading, writing, math, science, and others that meet the standards of
the Every Student Succeeds Act
(the United States K–12 public education policy signed by President
Obama in 2015). It also provides information on programs that do meet
the Every Student Succeeds Act standards as well as those that do not.
What Works Clearinghouse,
established in 2002, evaluates numerous educational programs, in twelve
categories, by the quality and quantity of the evidence, and the
effectiveness. It is operated by the federal National Center for
Education Evaluation, and Regional Assistance, part of Institute of Education Sciences.
Social programs that work is administered by the Arnold Ventures LLC's Evidence-Based Policy team. The team is composed of the former leadership of the Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization advocating the use of well-conducted randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in policy decisions. It offers information on twelve types of social programs including education.
UNESCO designations of national geopark, national and regional, or national, regional, and global
Budget
Sustainable
Parking
Possibly
Connecting transport
Possibly
Facilities
Possibly
Website
Typically
A geopark is a protected area with internationally significant geology within which sustainable
development is sought and which includes tourism, conservation,
education and research concerning not just geology but other relevant
sciences.
In 2005, a European Geopark was defined as being:
"a territory with a particular geological heritage and with a
sustainable territorial development....the ultimate aim of a European
Geopark is to bring enhanced employment opportunities for the people who
live there."
Today the geopark is virtually synonymous with the UNESCO geopark, which is defined and managed under the voluntary authority of UNESCO's International Geoscience and Geoparks Programme (IGGP).
UNESCO provides a standard for geoparks and a certification service to
territories that apply for it. The service is available to member states of UNESCO.
The list of members is not the same as the member states of the United Nations.
Membership in the UN does not automatically imply membership of UNESCO,
even though UNESCO is part of the UN. Both lists have about 193 member
nations, but not exactly the same 193. The UN list covers most of the
geopolitical world, but the UNESCO list lacks Israel, for example, which
resigned in 2018 because they believed UNESCO is anti-Israel.
The UNESCO Global Geoparks Network
co-ordinates the activities of the many UNESCO Global Geoparks (UGGp's)
around the world. It is divided into regional networks, such as the European Geoparks Network.
The EGN historically preceded the UGGN, being founded in 2000 with the
first four geoparks. It joined with UNESCO in 2001 and in 2005 agreed in
the Madonie Declaration to be a regional network of the UGGps, which
had been created by UNESCO in 2004.
The Madonie Declaration of 2004, which was signed by Nikolas Zouros for the EGN and Wolfgang Eder for UNESCO, established what was later called a "bottom up" system of precedence.
An applicant geopark must first be a member of the EGN before applying
to the UGGN. Furthermore, another level was created, the National
Geoparks Network, which at first glance seems a contradiction in terms.
Geoparks are international. What the Declaration meant was, if a
potentially international type of site (a possible geosite) existed
within the candidate park's country, the park must belong to it before
it can apply to the regional network. This type was dubbed an NGN. Its
sites could then be included under the geopark umbrella by being
candidates for the international network. In 2014 the creation of other
regions besides the EGN was allowed and encouraged, permitting geoparks
to fulfill their declared global nature.
Etymology and usage of geopark
Ge- or geo-
is a word-formative prefix derived from the ancient Greek word for
"Earth." Due to the use of ancient Greek and Latin words to form international scientific vocabulary, geo- might appear in any modern language of any type by the process of compounding.
Since geo- is well known in most modern languages it is especially
amenable to word production, the impromptu manufacture of words of
self-evident meaning. Geopark and all its associated new geo- words
began as produced neologisms but are fast becoming legitimate scientific compounds.
Produced words are often open to interpretation: they mean
whatever the writer intended them to mean or whatever the reader
interpreted them to mean. Eventually the word receives a common
understanding that can be dictionary-defined. "Geopark" is right at that
point. Henriques and Brilha, after listing four interpretations not to
be allowed now,
cite features that must be present in the application of "geopark:" a
development plan, a geoheritage, conservation, and sustainability. These
are features that must receive the credibility of the international
organizations certifying the park as a geopark, without which
certification they cannot be scientific geoparks. The overall
qualification, therefore, is that they must be certified as geoparks by
the accepted international organizations. No certification, no geopark.
The innovation of geo-compounds is neither new or recent, the
most ancient perhaps being the geo-metria, "earth measurement," of
ancient Greece.
There have been a smattering of "Earth" words ever since. Geo-logia is a
relative newcomer, in mediaeval Latin "the study of earthly things"
(such as law) in contrast to divine things. It was preempted to refer to
the 18th century topics of fossils and rock stratification.
Most geo-compounds come from the 19th and early 20th century. Geo-
means "Earth" rather than "geological," which would be redundant.
After a floruit of international exploration, scientific
research, and park-building in the later 19th century, the world wars
represent a sharp decline of conservation and tourism, as the goals of
war are opposite those of peace. Even the League of Nations, predecessor of the United Nations,
did not unite. The last world war saw the irrecoverable destruction of
national heritages and the terrible misuse of science. The United
Nations and its and educational, scientific, and cultural branch, UNESCO, heir to the League's International Committee on Intellectual Cooperation, both founded in 1945 to do a better job at peace-keeping and cooperation, were at first hindered by the Cold War.
As it manifestly drew to an end in the 1970's, and the countries of
east Europe would be open once more, UNESCO began to be more effective,
formulating organizations to respond to a growing demand for the
protection of the heritage that was left.
The current round of innovation to which geo-park belongs dates
to the last decades of the 20th century and the first of the 21st,
although it may not be over yet. They began as marketing terms in the
vending of what Farsani calls "sustainable tourism," characterizing it as "a new niche market," the key words being, in addition to geopark, geotourism, geoheritage, geosite, geoconservation, and geodiversity.
It is not possible to discover what individuals first innovated the
words. Authors such as Farsani can only state the groups among which
they were thought to be first current.
The term “geopark” was apparently first used to describe a newly instituted park in the west Vulkaneifel district of the Eifel Mountains of Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany.
The region had tended to be economically depressed due to the
preference of buyers and sellers for markets in nearby France. They did
have a noted geological asset: a now dormant forested volcanic range.
The land shows evidence of ancient volcanos, including crater lakes,
mineral springs, and pipe formations.
The place also abounds in fossils. Although of interest to scientists
and hikers, the terrain was generally regarded as a liability, some
19th-century plans even having been made to fill lakes.
Types of geopark
The
word geopark is no longer open to the process of innovation through
word production. It has been defined by various organizations in the
field of earth science.
An essential element of the definition is that a geopark must be
branded as part of an international geopark network. A national park is
not necessarily a geopark. For example, the United States has a system
of national parks, but none of them are geoparks. Canada, on the other
hand, has several.
A geopark network requires the branding of an international
scientific association. They only brand protected areas that meet
certain standards, as presented above. The branding has no effect on the
previous status of an area. It might already have been other types of
park, such as a national park. If the geopark branding is removed, it is
still those other types of park. No matter what the type, management, the exercise of authority over the area, is always national;
the scientific organizations have no sovereignty; they are simply
advisory and certifying agencies guided by decisions made at
international conventions.
National geoparks
A
"national geopark" is a post de facto designation by UNESCO of a
"geographical area" or a transnational geographical area already known
to be "of international, regional, and/or national importance" as a
candidate geopark. It has not yet been certified as belonging to a
regional or the global UNESCO geopark network. It has been "already
inscribed" as a member of some other network; that is, "national
geopark" is a sort of floating candidacy that can be attached to any
other parkland of interest, after which attachment the parkland
qualifies for the designation of geopark. The candidates so designated are termed a "national network for geoparks."
If it exists in a member nation all geoparks of the regional network in
that nation as well as the global network must also belong to it.
Some of the networks from which UNESCO national geoparks might be chosen are World Heritage Sites, Agenda 21, Man and the Biosphere Programme. UNESCO also provides a list of recommended geosite types, such as "minerals and mineral resources," "fossils," etc.
The national networks (one for each nation) are intended as the
bottom level of the bottom-up system. They support national
conservation, education, cultural development, research, as well as
economic sustainability.
There is some effort to control conflict of mandate; for example,
Fossils are not allowed to be sold, which practice would favor
sustainability, but work against conservation. For some geoparks, such
as Sitia
geopark (east Crete), the conflict between geotourist development and
the conservation of archaeological sites is a severe one, reaching the
law courts. As with the other levels of geopark, the parks are subject
to review for recertification every four years.
A
transnational geopark crosses a national border to extend continuously
in two member nations. The park must belong to two national geoparks,
one in each nation, and one regional geopark. Both national geoparks
collaborate to prepare a single application, which is submitted by both
to the regional and global networks. Both member nations must endorse
the park. The management bodies in each nation must collaborate to
establish a single set of activities and strategies for the entire park.
They can appoint either two collaborating managements or one
management.
A
regional geopark is a member of an independent network of geoparks that
has agreed with UNESCO to provide candidates for the global network.
All members of the regional network are a priori members of a national
geopark network. They are also members of the global network if they are
certified for it. A regional geopark would not be a global geopark if
it has not yet been certified as such or its certification has lapsed
and it has applied for recertification (Yellow Card status).
A region is more than one country. A current list of accepted regions is:
Canada
has some geoparks. The most logical regional classification for these
might have been the "North American Regional Geopark Network," following
a proposed continental tradition for geopark regions. However, the
United States does not have any geoparks, and Mexico is covered under
Latin America. There are no other nations in North America that can be
combined into a region. The United States and Israel resigned from
UNESCO in 2018 because they believed that UNESCO is anti-Israel, though
the US re-joined in 2023.
Canadian geoparks according to the rules must belong to a
regional network before they can apply for global status, but there is
none, and may not be any in the foreseeable future. UNESCO therefore
treating Canada as a special case allows the national geoparks network,
the Canadian Geoparks Network, to give global and green card
certification. A regionalization based strictly on continents did not
turn out to be practical for other regions also.
A global geopark is one that has been certified to the fullest extent,
and is therefore a member of UNESCO's global network of geoparks. It is
per se also a member of a regional geopark network and also a member of a
national geopark network, if its nation has one, or a transnational
geopark. A certification is good for four years, after which it must be
certified again. In the language of certification, a recertified global
geopark is termed a "green-card geopark." If a geopark fails recertification it is given two years to pass, in which it is a "yellow-card geopark."
After two years if it is still unrecertified it is a "red-card
geopark;" that is, no longer a geopark, and is removed from connection
with or concern by UNESCO. To reapply, it must start the application
over. Recertified geoparks do not have to keep the same borders; only a
portion may be recertified.
Evidence-based practice is the idea that occupational practices ought to be based on scientific evidence.
While seemingly obviously desirable, the proposal has been
controversial, with some arguing that results may not specialize to
individuals as well as traditional practices. Evidence-based practices
have been gaining ground since the formal introduction of evidence-based medicine in 1992 and have spread to the allied health professions, education, management, law, public policy, architecture, and other fields. In light of studies showing problems in scientific research (such as the replication crisis),
there is also a movement to apply evidence-based practices in
scientific research itself. Research into the evidence-based practice of
science is called metascience.
The movement towards evidence-based practices attempts to
encourage and, in some instances, require professionals and other
decision-makers to pay more attention to evidence to inform their
decision-making. The goal of evidence-based practice is to eliminate
unsound or outdated practices in favor of more-effective ones by
shifting the basis for decision making from tradition, intuition, and
unsystematic experience to firmly grounded scientific research.
An individual or organisation is justified in claiming that a
specific practice is evidence-based if, and only if, three conditions
are met. First, the individual or organisation possesses comparative
evidence about the effects of the specific practice in comparison to the
effects of at least one alternative practice. Second, the specific
practice is supported by this evidence according to at least one of the
individual's or organisation's preferences in the given practice area.
Third, the individual or organisation can provide a sound account for
this support by explaining the evidence and preferences that lay the
foundation for the claim.
History
For most of history, professions have based their practices on expertise derived from experience passed down in the form of tradition. Many of these practices have not been justified by evidence, which has sometimes enabled quackery
and poor performance. Even when overt quackery is not present, quality
and efficiency of tradition-based practices may not be optimal. As the scientific method
has become increasingly recognized as a sound means to evaluate
practices, evidence-based practices have become increasingly adopted.
One of the earliest proponents of evidence-based practice was Archie Cochrane, an epidemiologist who authored the book Effectiveness and Efficiency: Random Reflections on Health Services
in 1972. Cochrane's book argued for the importance of properly testing
health care strategies, and was foundational to the evidence-based
practice of medicine.
Cochrane suggested that because resources would always be limited, they
should be used to provide forms of health care which had been shown in
properly designed evaluations to be effective. Cochrane maintained that
the most reliable evidence was that which came from randomised controlled trials.
The term "evidence-based medicine" was introduced by Gordon Guyatt in 1990 in an unpublished program description, and the term was later first published in 1992.
This marked the first evidence-based practice to be formally
established. Some early experiments in evidence-based medicine involved
testing primitive medical techniques such as bloodletting,
and studying the effectiveness of modern and accepted treatments. There
has been a push for evidence-based practices in medicine by insurance
providers, which have sometimes refused coverage of practices lacking
in systematic evidence of usefulness. It is now expected by most clients
that medical professionals should make decisions based on evidence, and
stay informed about the most up-to-date information. Since the
widespread adoption of evidence-based practices in medicine, the use of
evidence-based practices has rapidly spread to other fields.
More recently, there has been a push for evidence-based education. The use of evidence-based learning techniques such as spaced repetition can improve students' rate of learning. Some commentators
have suggested that the lack of any substantial progress in the field
of education is attributable to practice resting in the unconnected and
noncumulative experience of thousands of individual teachers, each
re-inventing the wheel and failing to learn from hard scientific
evidence about 'what works'. Opponents of this view argue that it is
hard to assess teaching methods because it depends on a host of factors,
not least those to do with the style, personality and beliefs of the
teacher and the needs of the particular children.
Others argue the teacher experience could be combined with research
evidence, but without the latter being treated as a privileged source.
This is in line with a school of thought suggesting that evidence-based
practice has limitations and a better alternative is to use Evidence-informed Practice (EIP).
This process includes quantitative evidence, does not include
non-scientific prejudices, but includes qualitative factors such as
clinical experience and the discernment of practitioners and clients.
Versus tradition
Evidence-based practice is a philosophical approach that is in opposition to tradition.
Some degree of reliance on "the way it was always done" can be found in
almost every profession, even when those practices are contradicted by
new and better information.
Some critics argue that since research is conducted on a
population level, results may not generalise to each individual within
the population. Therefore, evidence-based practices may fail to provide
the best solution to each individual, and traditional practices may
better accommodate individual differences. In response, researchers have
made an effort to test whether particular practices work better for
different subcultures, personality types etc.
Some authors have redefined evidence-based practice to include practice
that incorporates common wisdom, tradition, and personal values
alongside practices based on evidence.
Evaluating scientific research is extremely complex. The process can by greatly simplified with the use of a heuristic that ranks the relative strengths of results obtained from scientific research called a hierarchy of evidence. The design of the study and the endpoints measured (such as survival or quality of life) affect the strength of the evidence. Typically, systematic reviews and meta-analysis rank at the top of the hierarchy while randomized controlled trials rank above observational studies, and expert opinion and case reports
rank at the bottom. There is broad agreement on the relative strength
of the different types of studies, but there is no single,
universally-accepted hierarchy of evidence. More than 80 different
hierarchies have been proposed for assessing medical evidence.
Evidence-based medicine is an approach to medical practice intended to optimize decision-making by emphasizing the use of evidence from well-designed and well-conducted research. Although all medicine based on science has some degree of empirical support, evidence-based medicine goes further, classifying evidence by its epistemologic strength and requiring that only the strongest types (coming from meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and randomized controlled trials) can yield strong recommendations; weaker types (such as from case-control studies)
can yield only weak recommendations. The term was originally used to
describe an approach to teaching the practice of medicine and improving
decisions by individual physicians about individual patients.
Use of the term rapidly expanded to include a previously described
approach that emphasized the use of evidence in the design of guidelines
and policies that apply to groups of patients and populations
("evidence-based practice policies").
Whether applied to medical education, decisions about
individuals, guidelines and policies applied to populations, or
administration of health services in general, evidence-based medicine
advocates that to the greatest extent possible, decisions and policies
should be based on evidence, not just the beliefs of practitioners,
experts, or administrators. It thus tries to assure that a clinician's opinion, which may be limited by knowledge gaps or biases, is supplemented with all available knowledge from the scientific literature so that best practice
can be determined and applied. It promotes the use of formal, explicit
methods to analyze evidence and makes it available to decision makers.
It promotes programs to teach the methods to medical students,
practitioners, and policymakers.
A process has been specified that provides a standardised route
for those seeking to produce evidence of the effectiveness of
interventions.
Originally developed to establish processes for the production of
evidence in the housing sector, the standard is general in nature and is
applicable across a variety of practice areas and potential outcomes of
interest.
Mental health
To improve dissemination of evidence-based practices, the Association for Behavioral and Cognitive Therapies (ABCT) and the Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology (SCCAP, Division 53 of the American Psychological Association)
maintain updated information on their websites on evidence-based
practices in psychology for practitioners and the general public. An
evidence-based practice consensus statement was developed at a summit on
mental healthcare in 2018. As of June 23, 2019, this statement has been
endorsed by 36 organizations.
There has since been a movement for the use of evidence-based
practice in conducting scientific research in attempt to address the replication crisis and other major issues affecting scientific research. The application of evidence-based practices to research itself is called metascience,
which seeks to increase the quality of scientific research while
reducing waste. It is also known as "research on research" and "the
science of science", as it uses research methods
to study how research is done and where improvements can be made. The
five main areas of research in metascience are methodology, reporting, reproducibility, evaluation, and incentives. Metascience has produced a number of reforms in science such as the use of study pre-registration and the implementation of reporting guidelines with the goal of bettering scientific research practices.
Evidence-based education (EBE), also known as evidence-based interventions,
is a model in which policy-makers and educators use empirical evidence
to make informed decisions about education interventions (policies,
practices, and programs). In other words, decisions are based on scientific evidence rather than opinion.
EBE has gained attention since English author David H. Hargreaves suggested in 1996 that education would be more effective if teaching, like medicine, was a "research-based profession".
Since 2000, studies in Australia, England, Scotland and the USA
have supported the use of research to improve educational practices in
teaching reading.
In 1997, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development convened a national panel to assess the effectiveness of different approaches used to teach children to read. The resulting National Reading Panel
examined quantitative research studies on many areas of reading
instruction, including phonics and whole language. In 2000 it published a
report entitled Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-based
Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and its
Implications for Reading Instruction that provided a comprehensive review of what was known about best practices in reading instruction in the U.S.
The following websites offer free analysis and information on education research:
The Best Evidence Encyclopedia is a free website created by the Johns Hopkins University School of Education's Center for Data-Driven Reform in Education (established in 2004) and is funded by the Institute of Education Sciences,
U.S. Department of Education. It gives educators and researchers
reviews about the strength of the evidence supporting a variety of
English programs available for students in grades K–12. The reviews cover programs in areas such as Mathematics, Reading, Writing, Science, Comprehensive school reform, and Early childhood Education; and includes such topics as effectiveness of technology and struggling readers.
The Education Endowment Foundation was established in 2011 by The Sutton Trust,
as a lead charity in partnership with Impetus Trust, together being the
government-designated What Works Centre for UK Education.
Evidence for the Every Student Succeeds Act began in 2017 and is produced by the Center for Research and Reform in Education at Johns Hopkins University School of Education.
It offers free up-to-date information on current PK-12 programs in
reading, writing, math, science, and others that meet the standards of
the Every Student Succeeds Act
(the United States K–12 public education policy signed by President
Obama in 2015). It also provides information on programs that do meet
the Every Student Succeeds Act standards as well as those that do not.
What Works Clearinghouse,
established in 2002, evaluates numerous educational programs, in twelve
categories, by the quality and quantity of the evidence, and the
effectiveness. It is operated by the federal National Center for
Education Evaluation, and Regional Assistance, part of Institute of Education Sciences.
Social programs that work is administered by the Arnold Ventures LLC's Evidence-Based Policy team. The team is composed of the former leadership of the Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization advocating the use of well-conducted randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in policy decisions. It offers information on twelve types of social programs including education.
Evidence-based practice is the idea that occupational practices ought to be based on scientific evidence.
While seemingly obviously desirable, the proposal has been
controversial, with some arguing that results may not specialize to
individuals as well as traditional practices. Evidence-based practices
have been gaining ground since the formal introduction of evidence-based medicine in 1992 and have spread to the allied health professions, education, management, law, public policy, architecture, and other fields. In light of studies showing problems in scientific research (such as the replication crisis),
there is also a movement to apply evidence-based practices in
scientific research itself. Research into the evidence-based practice of
science is called metascience.
The movement towards evidence-based practices attempts to
encourage and, in some instances, require professionals and other
decision-makers to pay more attention to evidence to inform their
decision-making. The goal of evidence-based practice is to eliminate
unsound or outdated practices in favor of more-effective ones by
shifting the basis for decision making from tradition, intuition, and
unsystematic experience to firmly grounded scientific research.
An individual or organisation is justified in claiming that a
specific practice is evidence-based if, and only if, three conditions
are met. First, the individual or organisation possesses comparative
evidence about the effects of the specific practice in comparison to the
effects of at least one alternative practice. Second, the specific
practice is supported by this evidence according to at least one of the
individual's or organisation's preferences in the given practice area.
Third, the individual or organisation can provide a sound account for
this support by explaining the evidence and preferences that lay the
foundation for the claim.
History
For most of history, professions have based their practices on expertise derived from experience passed down in the form of tradition. Many of these practices have not been justified by evidence, which has sometimes enabled quackery
and poor performance. Even when overt quackery is not present, quality
and efficiency of tradition-based practices may not be optimal. As the scientific method
has become increasingly recognized as a sound means to evaluate
practices, evidence-based practices have become increasingly adopted.
One of the earliest proponents of evidence-based practice was Archie Cochrane, an epidemiologist who authored the book Effectiveness and Efficiency: Random Reflections on Health Services
in 1972. Cochrane's book argued for the importance of properly testing
health care strategies, and was foundational to the evidence-based
practice of medicine.
Cochrane suggested that because resources would always be limited, they
should be used to provide forms of health care which had been shown in
properly designed evaluations to be effective. Cochrane maintained that
the most reliable evidence was that which came from randomised controlled trials.
The term "evidence-based medicine" was introduced by Gordon Guyatt in 1990 in an unpublished program description, and the term was later first published in 1992.
This marked the first evidence-based practice to be formally
established. Some early experiments in evidence-based medicine involved
testing primitive medical techniques such as bloodletting,
and studying the effectiveness of modern and accepted treatments. There
has been a push for evidence-based practices in medicine by insurance
providers, which have sometimes refused coverage of practices lacking
in systematic evidence of usefulness. It is now expected by most clients
that medical professionals should make decisions based on evidence, and
stay informed about the most up-to-date information. Since the
widespread adoption of evidence-based practices in medicine, the use of
evidence-based practices has rapidly spread to other fields.
More recently, there has been a push for evidence-based education. The use of evidence-based learning techniques such as spaced repetition can improve students' rate of learning. Some commentators
have suggested that the lack of any substantial progress in the field
of education is attributable to practice resting in the unconnected and
noncumulative experience of thousands of individual teachers, each
re-inventing the wheel and failing to learn from hard scientific
evidence about 'what works'. Opponents of this view argue that it is
hard to assess teaching methods because it depends on a host of factors,
not least those to do with the style, personality and beliefs of the
teacher and the needs of the particular children.
Others argue the teacher experience could be combined with research
evidence, but without the latter being treated as a privileged source.
This is in line with a school of thought suggesting that evidence-based
practice has limitations and a better alternative is to use Evidence-informed Practice (EIP).
This process includes quantitative evidence, does not include
non-scientific prejudices, but includes qualitative factors such as
clinical experience and the discernment of practitioners and clients.
Versus tradition
Evidence-based practice is a philosophical approach that is in opposition to tradition.
Some degree of reliance on "the way it was always done" can be found in
almost every profession, even when those practices are contradicted by
new and better information.
Some critics argue that since research is conducted on a
population level, results may not generalise to each individual within
the population. Therefore, evidence-based practices may fail to provide
the best solution to each individual, and traditional practices may
better accommodate individual differences. In response, researchers have
made an effort to test whether particular practices work better for
different subcultures, personality types etc.
Some authors have redefined evidence-based practice to include practice
that incorporates common wisdom, tradition, and personal values
alongside practices based on evidence.
Evaluating scientific research is extremely complex. The process can by greatly simplified with the use of a heuristic that ranks the relative strengths of results obtained from scientific research called a hierarchy of evidence. The design of the study and the endpoints measured (such as survival or quality of life) affect the strength of the evidence. Typically, systematic reviews and meta-analysis rank at the top of the hierarchy while randomized controlled trials rank above observational studies, and expert opinion and case reports
rank at the bottom. There is broad agreement on the relative strength
of the different types of studies, but there is no single,
universally-accepted hierarchy of evidence. More than 80 different
hierarchies have been proposed for assessing medical evidence.
Evidence-based medicine is an approach to medical practice intended to optimize decision-making by emphasizing the use of evidence from well-designed and well-conducted research. Although all medicine based on science has some degree of empirical support, evidence-based medicine goes further, classifying evidence by its epistemologic strength and requiring that only the strongest types (coming from meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and randomized controlled trials) can yield strong recommendations; weaker types (such as from case-control studies)
can yield only weak recommendations. The term was originally used to
describe an approach to teaching the practice of medicine and improving
decisions by individual physicians about individual patients.
Use of the term rapidly expanded to include a previously described
approach that emphasized the use of evidence in the design of guidelines
and policies that apply to groups of patients and populations
("evidence-based practice policies").
Whether applied to medical education, decisions about
individuals, guidelines and policies applied to populations, or
administration of health services in general, evidence-based medicine
advocates that to the greatest extent possible, decisions and policies
should be based on evidence, not just the beliefs of practitioners,
experts, or administrators. It thus tries to assure that a clinician's opinion, which may be limited by knowledge gaps or biases, is supplemented with all available knowledge from the scientific literature so that best practice
can be determined and applied. It promotes the use of formal, explicit
methods to analyze evidence and makes it available to decision makers.
It promotes programs to teach the methods to medical students,
practitioners, and policymakers.
A process has been specified that provides a standardised route
for those seeking to produce evidence of the effectiveness of
interventions.
Originally developed to establish processes for the production of
evidence in the housing sector, the standard is general in nature and is
applicable across a variety of practice areas and potential outcomes of
interest.
Mental health
To improve dissemination of evidence-based practices, the Association for Behavioral and Cognitive Therapies (ABCT) and the Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology (SCCAP, Division 53 of the American Psychological Association)
maintain updated information on their websites on evidence-based
practices in psychology for practitioners and the general public. An
evidence-based practice consensus statement was developed at a summit on
mental healthcare in 2018. As of June 23, 2019, this statement has been
endorsed by 36 organizations.
There has since been a movement for the use of evidence-based
practice in conducting scientific research in attempt to address the replication crisis and other major issues affecting scientific research. The application of evidence-based practices to research itself is called metascience,
which seeks to increase the quality of scientific research while
reducing waste. It is also known as "research on research" and "the
science of science", as it uses research methods
to study how research is done and where improvements can be made. The
five main areas of research in metascience are methodology, reporting, reproducibility, evaluation, and incentives. Metascience has produced a number of reforms in science such as the use of study pre-registration and the implementation of reporting guidelines with the goal of bettering scientific research practices.
Evidence-based education (EBE), also known as evidence-based interventions,
is a model in which policy-makers and educators use empirical evidence
to make informed decisions about education interventions (policies,
practices, and programs). In other words, decisions are based on scientific evidence rather than opinion.
EBE has gained attention since English author David H. Hargreaves suggested in 1996 that education would be more effective if teaching, like medicine, was a "research-based profession".
Since 2000, studies in Australia, England, Scotland and the USA
have supported the use of research to improve educational practices in
teaching reading.
In 1997, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development convened a national panel to assess the effectiveness of different approaches used to teach children to read. The resulting National Reading Panel
examined quantitative research studies on many areas of reading
instruction, including phonics and whole language. In 2000 it published a
report entitled Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-based
Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and its
Implications for Reading Instruction that provided a comprehensive review of what was known about best practices in reading instruction in the U.S.
The following websites offer free analysis and information on education research:
The Best Evidence Encyclopedia is a free website created by the Johns Hopkins University School of Education's Center for Data-Driven Reform in Education (established in 2004) and is funded by the Institute of Education Sciences,
U.S. Department of Education. It gives educators and researchers
reviews about the strength of the evidence supporting a variety of
English programs available for students in grades K–12. The reviews cover programs in areas such as Mathematics, Reading, Writing, Science, Comprehensive school reform, and Early childhood Education; and includes such topics as effectiveness of technology and struggling readers.
The Education Endowment Foundation was established in 2011 by The Sutton Trust,
as a lead charity in partnership with Impetus Trust, together being the
government-designated What Works Centre for UK Education.
Evidence for the Every Student Succeeds Act began in 2017 and is produced by the Center for Research and Reform in Education at Johns Hopkins University School of Education.
It offers free up-to-date information on current PK-12 programs in
reading, writing, math, science, and others that meet the standards of
the Every Student Succeeds Act
(the United States K–12 public education policy signed by President
Obama in 2015). It also provides information on programs that do meet
the Every Student Succeeds Act standards as well as those that do not.
What Works Clearinghouse,
established in 2002, evaluates numerous educational programs, in twelve
categories, by the quality and quantity of the evidence, and the
effectiveness. It is operated by the federal National Center for
Education Evaluation, and Regional Assistance, part of Institute of Education Sciences.
Social programs that work is administered by the Arnold Ventures LLC's Evidence-Based Policy team. The team is composed of the former leadership of the Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization advocating the use of well-conducted randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in policy decisions. It offers information on twelve types of social programs including education.
