A new approach for environmental damage assessment pursuant to the European Union Environmental Liability Directive.

The European Union and Member States national laws require competent authorities to promptly and effectively address environmental incidents, noncompliances, and criminal offenses, necessitating thorough planning of investigation and assessment activities. To enhance environmental damage assessments in line with the European Environmental Liability Directive (ELD, 2004/35/EC), the European Union Network for the Implementation and Enforcement of Environmental Law (IMPEL Network) has introduced the Criteria for the Assessment of the Environmental Damage (CAED) framework. This framework, outlined in a Practical Guide, offers a methodological approach to environmental damage assessment (EDA) focusing on three key objectives: case screening, identification of "clues" of damage, and determination of "evidence" of damage. Given the critical importance of structured data collection and evaluation, the CAED project has adopted a Driver, Pressure, State, Impact, and Response (DPSIR) model adapted to environmental damage and developed the Practical Tables. These tables serve as a comprehensive tool for systematically identifying investigative priorities and collecting standardized data and information using a predefined list of qualitative or quantitative indicators. This article provides an overview of the Practical Guide and Practical Tables, collectively referred to as the CAED Toolkit, aiming to establish a common framework for environmental damage assessments among various competent authorities and stakeholders across Europe. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2024;00:1-10. © 2024 SETAC.

Clinical Judgment Development and Assessment in Clinical Nursing Education.

BACKGROUND: There is a gap in evidence for effective clinical teaching strategies to promote nursing students' development of clinical judgment (CJ). PURPOSE: This study examined the effect of active learning strategies (ALSs) during clinical postconference sessions on the CJ of undergraduate nursing students. METHODS: This quasi-experimental study of ALSs or standard postconferences used the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR) to rate CJ at 3 time points. All faculty members and students were trained on use of the LCJR. Ratings were done by both faculty and students. RESULTS: All ratings of CJ improved over time ( P < .001). Ratings of CJ varied between the control and intervention groups. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study contribute to knowledge regarding the effectiveness of clinical teaching strategies for CJ and preparation for entry to nursing practice.