Credible Certification Research Articles

A Research Agenda for the Study of the Regulation of Invasive Species Introduced Unintentionally Via Maritime Trade

I propose a queuing theoretic research agenda for studying five questions about the effects that alternate invasive species control regulations have on consumers and producers in a nation such as the USA. The five questions are as follows. First, when can one justify a trade ban as an effective regulatory policy? Second, what are the attributes of credible pre-export certification schemes? Third, how does one determine the optimal number of inspectors in a stochastic context in which arriving ships may or may not be able to queue in a particular port? Fourth, should a port manager have a small number of inspectors inspect ships less stringently or should this manager have a large number of inspectors inspect ships more stringently? Finally, when should a port manager in (say) the USA use information about (i) the dollar value of the products being transported by ships from two exporting firms and (ii) the mean time it takes to inspect ships from these two firms to grant preferential treatment to one or the other exporting firm?

Class Certification and the Substantive Merits

The United States Supreme Court, in its 1974 decision, Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin, held that judges should not conduct a preliminary inquiry into the merits of a suit as part of the decision whether to certify a class. The federal courts ever since have struggled to honor Eisen's bar while still conducting a credible certification analysis - a task complicated by the fact that merits-related factors are often relevant to Rule 23 requirements. The result is a muddled body of case law in which courts tend to certify generously and avoid inquiring into the merits of substantive issues even when those issues are crucial to the certification analysis. This approach creates high social costs by inviting frivolous and weak class action suits. This article argues that the Eisen rule should be abolished. Trial judges should assess competing evidence, not just allegations, and evaluate case strength, whenever the specific requirements of Rule 23 call for an inquiry into merits-related factors. For example, a party relying on a substantive issue to show commonality or predominance should have to demonstrate a significant likelihood of success on the issue. The article goes further and recommends that judges always conduct a preliminary inquiry into the merits before certifying a class, whether or not merits-related factors are directly relevant to a specific requirement of Rule 23. The article first reviews the history of the Eisen rule and surveys the state of current law, before turning to a policy analysis of the rule's effects. The policy discussion criticizes the traditional arguments and then offers a systematic evaluation of error and process costs. Error costs must be evaluated in light of the extremely high probability of post-certification settlement. Eisen's liberal approach creates a substantial risk of erroneous certification grants that cannot be corrected later when a case settles. This risk coupled with the high likelihood of settlement invites frivolous and weak class action suits. The result is a serious error cost problem with regard to certification grants. At the same time, requiring a merits review at the certification stage increases the risk of erroneous certification denials. But for several reasons this risk is not likely to increase dramatically, and the associated costs are not likely to be large. The net result therefore supports a merits inquiry, and this conclusion remains valid even after process costs are added to the policy mix.

Ten‐Year Responses of Soil Quality and Conifer Growth to Silvicultural Treatments

The development of sustainable forestry practices and credible certification systems relies on continuous monitoring of indicators. In the present study, carried out at the Petawawa Research Forest (Ontario, Canada), we evaluated the impacts of three intensive silvicultural treatments: scarification, fertilization, and herbicide treatment, applied alone or in combination—on indicators of organic layer quality, foliar nutrition, and tree growth—10 yr after establishment of eastern white pine (Pinus strobus L.) and white spruce [Picea glauca (Moench) Voss] plantations. We compared these 10‐yr results with measurements made 3 to 4 yr after plantation establishment. In both 1989 and 1996, the herbicide treatment had the greatest effect on organic layer quality. In 1996, compared with the no‐treatment control, herbicide application reduced organic C mass by 46%, total N mass by 15%, and acid phosphatase activity by 64%. These negative effects were offset when herbicide was applied in combination with fertilizer. The negative impact of herbicide on microbial biomass C noted in 1990 was no longer evident in 1996. In herbicide‐treated plots, the nitrate‐dominated cycle observed 1989–1990 was replaced by an ammonium‐dominated cycle in 1996. Although herbicide application negatively affected soil quality, it increased tree growth and generally improved foliar nutrition; thus organic layer and tree responses were not correlated. The indicators used were sensitive to changes in the ecosystem over time and signaled soil impacts that could have consequences for long‐term productivity.

Achieving excellence in dietetics practice: Certification of specialists and advanced-level practitioners

Achieving excellence in dietetics practice: Certification of specialists and advanced-level practitioners