Future Challenges Sample Clauses

Future Challenges. Whilst Magenta Living’s current business plan is strong, there are a number of upcoming challenges to its revenue streams in the future including: • with the continued ‘right to buy’ and selective demolition of non-sustainable homes the organisation needs to be able to build more replacement homes to ensure it continues to have the economies of scale to continue to deliver high quality services. Magenta Living had 13,087 homes at transfer and this has reduced to 12,133 homes as at 31 March 2014. • reduced public subsidy to build new affordable housing will require housing associations to look at raising funding in other ways to provide the ‘subsidy’ for social and affordable rent schemes • with continuing reforms to welfare spending there will be reduced support to rent payers and potentially reduced income which will need to be offset with income from other sources in order for Magenta Living to carry on providing the services presently being delivered • working in more deprived neighbourhoods at a time when competing pressures have resulted in publicly funded services being withdrawn Magenta Living will have to identify new sources of funding in order to provide wider services to support its communities.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Future Challenges. As described above, in the thirty-some years since the Stockholm Conference in 1972, the international commu- nity has held many conferences to try to resolve global environmental issues. Numerous discussions have been held, covering differences dividing the northern and southern hemispheres. For example, in the discussion about a post-2013 framework at the 2002 Johannesburg Summit (attended by heads of States from 104 countries and representatives from over 190 countries), while the developed countries sought a framework that would require the participation of all countries, the Group of 77 (G77) and China (a group of developing states in the UN) were worried about missing out on their countries’ oppor- tunity for economic development and took an opposing stance, saying that until the developed countries could fully implement the Kyoto Protocol, they should not ask other countries for new commitments. The difference in position and opinion also exists within the camps of the developed countries and the developing countries. Among the developed countries, there were debates on how to formulate a post-2013 framework, including methods to determine the national emissions tar- gets and the base year. The developing countries, represent- ed by the G77 and China, are made up of many groups; namely, emerging economies such as China, India, and Brazil; OPEC countries that export oil to developed coun- tries and Arabian oil-producing countries; the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) that are most vulnerable to the impacts (rise in sea level) of global warming; and African countries that have low GHG emissions but are most sus- ceptible to the impacts of global warming. Thus, the groups advocated different claims based on their different positions. For example, the AOSIS, wary of the rise of the emerging economies, asserted that differentiated responsibilities among developing countries should be incorporated into the post-2013 framework. The position and opinion held by different countries are becoming increasingly complicated. As a result, interna- tional negotiations of global warming issues have also become extremely difficult. In order to reduce GHG emis- sions drastically on a global scale and find a solution to global warming issues, the post-2013 framework must 2 A Call for Immediate Action
Future Challenges. Challenges center on Title 21 CFR Part 11. Title 21 CFR Part 11 is part of the code of federal regulation established by the FDA on electronic records and electronic signatures. It defines the regulations through which her, as well as electronic signatures, are considered trustworthy and equivalent to paper records (33,34). It particularly targets pharmaceutical industries, contract research organizations, and biotechnologies companies. It requires the implementation of auditing and validation on any software or IT system that deals with EHR (35-37). This regulation in particular can be challenging because of the costs associated and the possible impracticality due to the FDA’s statements regarding (enforcement discretion) in applying this regulation. Additionally, this regulation is currently under revision. These different factors have led to confusion on how and what exactly is required (37). We will comply with the regulations once the final revision is assigned. We will keep “hard copies” of EHR and use it as the authoritative document for regulation purposes.
Future Challenges. As the post-WTO era will be characterised by further economic development and global integration and will open up business opportunities as well as challenges for Vietnamese enterprises, strategic foci aimed at enhancing competitiveness through human capital should be addressed (see Table 10). This can be seen across the spectrum of the main HRM practices areas, from acquiring, utilising and developing to retaining. Obviously, the level of challenges and prospects concerning HRM may differ considerably in terms of urgency, scope and impact from one type of organisation to another (Xxxxx et al., 2008). Consequently, a company and sector- specific HRM policy is needed in order to respond to the changing labour market and HRD needs. Acquiring • Recruitment and selection (R&S) not regulated or standardised • External channels of recruitment not fully exploited • HR planning and HR information system (HRIS) • Job analysis and description • R&S based on job requirements and qualifications of applicants • Standardisation of processes Utilising • No structured orientation • Placement and appointment based on relationship rather than merit • Socialisation program for recruits (corporate culture) • Best match job/qualifications • Define core staff (downsizing) • Use outsourcing alternatives Developing • No or inappropriate training and development (T&D) program • No career planning or succession chart • Promotion based on seniority and relationship • Reserve budget for T&D • Career plan for each employee • Succession planJob rotationDevelopment plan for executives, potential managers and professionals Retaining • Pay under industry standard; no link between pay and performance • Competent and willing performers not recognised and rewarded properly • No relationship between reward policy and corporate business development strategyLack of support from management • Working environment not appropriate • Industry remuneration review (participation in industry salary survey) • Pay for performance; incentives linked to key business indicators • Linking goal-setting and performance achievement • 360° degree evaluation and feedback; performance management system • Better employee-employer relationship; regular employee satisfaction survey SOURCE: Adapted from Xxxxx (2006: 249)
Future Challenges. Fish Flow Releases‌ 5 The City has not yet finalized a flow agreement with state and federal fishery agencies. Two flow 6 regimes have been identified and are being used by the WSAC to assess water supply reliability 7 implications. The lower bound flow regime is called “City Proposal” and the upper bound flow regime 8 is called “DFG-5.” Both result in less water available for diversion than the natural flows discussed 9 above and both have different impacts on the long-term availability of water to meet City needs. 10 i) Potential implications of Fish Flow Releases on the Frequency and Severity of Water 11 Shortages 12 Table 7and Table 8 respectively show the forecasted peak-season shortage profiles in 2020 and 2035. 13 Table 7 – 2020 Shortage Profiles Natural 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% City Prop 86% 12% 0% 1% 0% 34% DFG-5 81% 10% 7% 1% 1% 68% 14 15 Table 8 – 2035 Shortage Profiles Natural 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% City Prop 86% 12% 0% 1% 0% 34% DFG-5 81% 10% 4% 4% 1% 69% 16 17 ii) Committee Conclusions on Fish Flow Releases 18 The Committee discussed this information and agreed that the following conclusions can be drawn 19 from these profiles: 1 • With unconstrained natural flows, there are no shortages of any magnitude under any 2 hydrologic condition. Since we saw above that there are no expected shortages under worst- 3 year conditions, this is not surprising. 4 • As expected, the DFG-5 profile is worse (i.e., results in a higher likelihood of larger shortages) 5 than the profile for City Proposed flows. For example, in both forecast years, there is about a 6 10% likelihood (7 out of 73 years) of a peak-season shortage larger than 15% under DFG-5. This 7 compares to around 1% (1 out of 73 years) under the City Proposal. 8 • Even under the most stringent flow regime (DFG-5), there are no expected shortages in 80% of 9 historic hydrologic conditions. Without taking into account the possible impacts of climate 10 change, the City’s supply reliability challenges have been and will continue to be in the driest 11 years.
Future Challenges. The sustainability strategies implemented by CSRA depend on securing Bolivian Government funds. This is a high-risk business. CSRA has been very successful to date, given the limited time frame during which decentralization and municipal financial management and decision- making processes have been in place in Bolivia. A key requirement for future success in shared management of health systems is to tighten formal agreements with municipal and regional governments and MOH Districts. Another requirement is on-going training of municipal authorities in the basics of health governance. This is essential given the frequent changes that take place among municipal leaders. Another key for success is for CSRA to reduce its commitment to municipal governments that do not provide the agreed upon counterpart funding. As CSRA enters into new geographical areas, clear conditions are now placed on municipal government partners, including a commitment for on-going operational expenses for local health systems.
Future Challenges. It is desirable that new examples of Good Practices are added and accumulated continually and systematically. This will allow the final report of Annex VIII activities to cover a wider regional area and collect more cases covering the full range of issues. This will overcome the present deficiencies in some areas and enhance the value of this report to users. For example, although sand sedimentation into reservoirs is one of the most urgent issues that require prompt measures all over the world, the collection of cases includes only one example which is related to a small-scale reservoir in Asia. In addition, it is possible to collect cases on subjects and issues not already included in this report. This could include “change in river topography associated with flooding or sand sedimentation” and “outbreak of water- borne infectious diseases”, which have already been recognized widely, and cases dealing with contributions towards the reduction of global warming (for example, CDM using hydropower) as a contemporary case related to benefits brought about by hydropower development. Table 1: List of Good Practice Reports (1/2) Key Issue & Project Name (*1) Country Main Subject (GP) (*2) Project Type (*3) GP Phase (*4) Sub Key Issues Climate (*5) Major Reasons for Success 1 Okinawa Seawater PSPP Japan Ecosystem Conservation Measures PS CO Cf Consult Experts 2 Okutadami & Ohtori Expansion Hydropower Project Japan Ecosystem Conservation Measures R PC 11 Cf EMS, Proper Design, Adadptive Mnagement 3 Shin-Hannou Substation Japan Afforestation and Revegetation of Construction Site in Harmony with Surrounding Environments SS PCO 10 Cf Consult Experts 4 Tomura PP Japan Post-Project Investigation of River Ecosystem Recovery R O Df Consult Experts & Stakeholders, Proper Monitering 5 Palmiet PSPP South Africa Ecosystem Conservation by Environmental Management Plan PS PCO 14 Cs EIA & Proper Planning, Consult Experts & Stakeholders
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Future Challenges

  • Challenges The Experts may be challenged by either Party if circumstances exist that give rise to justifiable doubts as to any of their impartiality or independence. In such circumstances the challenge shall be brought by written notice to the ICC copied to the other Party within fourteen (14) calendar days of the appointment of the relevant Expert or within fourteen (14) calendar days of the challenging Party becoming aware of the circumstances giving rise to the challenge. Unless the challenged Expert withdraws. or whichever of the Parties that has not brought the challenge agrees to the challenge, within fourteen (14) calendar days of the challenge, the ICC shall decide the challenge and, if appropriate, shall appoint a replacement Expert in accordance with the criteria set out herein.

  • No Challenges In no event shall any Secured Party take any action to challenge, contest or dispute the validity, extent, enforceability, or priority of the Collateral Agent’s Liens hereunder or under any other Security Document with respect to any of the Collateral, or that would have the effect of invalidating any such Lien or support any Person who takes any such action. Each of the Secured Parties agrees that it will not take any action to challenge, contest or dispute the validity, enforceability or secured status of any other Secured Party’s claims against any Obligor (other than any such claim resulting from a breach of this Agreement by a Secured Party, or any challenge, contest or dispute alleging arithmetical error in the determination of a claim), or that would have the effect of invalidating any such claim, or support any Person who takes any such action.

  • Legal Action There shall not have been instituted or threatened any legal proceeding relating to, or seeking to prohibit or otherwise challenge the consummation of, the transactions contemplated by this Agreement, or to obtain substantial damages with respect thereto.

  • Legal Actions A Receiver may bring, prosecute, enforce, defend and abandon any action, suit or proceedings in relation to any Security Asset which he thinks fit.

  • Infringement Proceedings Each Party agrees to promptly notify the other Party of any unauthorized use of the other Party's Marks of which it has actual knowledge. Each Party will have the sole right and discretion to bring proceedings alleging infringement of its Marks or unfair competition related thereto; provided, however, that each Party agrees to provide the other Party with its reasonable cooperation and assistance with respect to any such infringement proceedings.

  • Infringement and Litigation 11.1 Each party shall promptly notify the other in writing in the event that it obtains knowledge of infringing activity by third parties, or is sued or threatened with an infringement suit, in any country in the LICENSED TERRITORY as a result of activities that concern the LICENSED PATENTS, and shall supply the other party with documentation of the infringing activities that it possesses. 11.2 During the TERM of this Agreement: (a) LICENSEE shall have the first right (but not the obligation) to defend the LICENSED PATENTS against infringement or interference in the FIELD and in the LICENSED TERRITORY by third parties. This right includes bringing any legal action for infringement and defending any counter claim of invalidity or action of a third party for declaratory judgment for non-infringement or non-interference. If, in the reasonable opinion of LICENSEE’s counsel, YALE is required to be a named party to any such suit for standing purposes, LICENSEE may join YALE as a party; provided, however, that (i) YALE shall not be the first named party in any such action, (ii) the pleadings and any public statements about the action shall state that the action is being pursued by LICENSEE and that LICENSEE has joined YALE as a party; and (iii) LICENSEE shall keep YALE reasonably apprised of all developments in any such action. LICENSEE may settle such suits solely in its own name and solely at its own expense and through counsel of its own selection; provided, however, that no settlement shall be entered without YALE’s prior written consent, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld. Without limiting the foregoing, YALE may withhold its consent to any settlement that would in any manner affect the validity, scope or enforceability of any LICENSED PATENT. LICENSEE shall bear the expense of such legal actions. Except for providing reasonable assistance (including joining such actions as described above), at the request and expense of LICENSEE, YALE shall have no obligation regarding the legal actions described in Article 11.2 unless required to participate by law. However, YALE shall have the right to participate in any such action through its own counsel and at its own expense. Any recovery shall first be applied to LICENSEE’s out of pocket expenses and second shall be applied to YALE’s out of pocket expenses, including legal fees. YALE shall recover [***]% of any excess recovery over those expenses. (b) In the event LICENSEE fails to initiate and pursue or participate in the actions described in Article 11.2(a) or in lieu of such actions to initiate negotiations for a sublicense of the infringer, and the infringement has not otherwise abated, within [***] of notification of infringement from YALE, YALE may, in its sole discretion, convert the LICENSE granted in Article 3 to a non-exclusive license. Additionally, YALE shall have the right to initiate legal action such as that described in Article 11.2(a) at its own expense. If, in the reasonable opinion of YALE’s counsel, LICENSEE is required to be a named party to any such suit for standing purposes, YALE may join LICENSEE as party plaintiff to uphold the LICENSED PATENTS, provided, however, that YALE shall keep LICENSEE reasonably apprised of all developments in any such action. In such case, LICENSEE shall provide reasonable assistance to YALE if requested to do so, at YALE’s expense. YALE may settle such actions solely through its own counsel any recovery shall be retained by YALE. YALE may terminate the LICENSE in the country where such legal action is taken. (c) In the event LICENSEE is permanently enjoined from exercising its LICENSE under this Agreement pursuant to an infringement action brought by a third party, or if both LICENSEE and YALE elect not to undertake the defense or settlement of a suit alleging infringement for a period of [***] from notice of such suit, then either party shall have the right to terminate this Agreement in the country where the suit was filed with respect to the LICENSED PATENT following [***] written notice to the other party in accordance with the terms of Article 15.

  • Challenge If Executive violates or challenges the enforceability of any provisions of the Restrictive Covenants or this Release, no further payments, rights or benefits under Section 5 of the Agreement will be due to Executive (except where such provision would be prohibited by applicable law, rule or regulation).

  • Infringement (a) For Xxxxxx Products, only, and subject to the limitations of liability stated in Section 13, Xxxxxx agrees to: (1) defend any suit or proceeding against Customer, insofar as it is based on a claim or action by third parties alleging that a Xxxxxx Product delivered to Customer directly infringes a U.S. trademark, copyright, mask works right or patent of a third party, and (2) pay all damages and costs, including legal fees, which may be assessed against Customer in such action that are attributable to such claim; provided, however, that Customer shall give Xxxxxx prompt notice, in writing, of all such claims or actions instituted against it, and an opportunity to elect to take over, settle or defend the same through counsel of Xxxxxx’ own choice and under Xxxxxx’ sole discretion and at Xxxxxx’ own expense, and will make available to Xxxxxx in the event of such election, all defenses against such claims or actions, known or available to Customer. If a Xxxxxx Product become (or in Xxxxxx’ reasonable opinion is likely to become) the subject of any such action or claim, Xxxxxx shall, at its option and expense, pursue one or more of the following options: (i) Procure for Customer the right to continue using such Xxxxxx Product; or (ii) Replace or modify such Xxxxxx Product so that it becomes non-infringing while providing equivalent performance; or (iii) Grant a refund for the payments made by Customer to Xxxxxx for all units of such Xxxxxx Product then in Customer’s possession (upon Xxxxxx’ receipt of such units within ninety (90) days after notifying Customer of the granting of such refund), and terminate this Agreement with respect to such Xxxxxx Product. Notwithstanding the above, Xxxxxx shall not be obligated to indemnify or hold harmless Customer if the alleged infringement arises out of : (1) any combination of Xxxxxx Products with products not supplied or approved in writing by Xxxxxx, where such infringement would not have occurred but for such combination; (2) the modification or customization of Xxxxxx Products not performed by Xxxxxx, where such infringement would not have occurred but for such modification or customization; (3) the use of a Xxxxxx Product in an application for which it was not designed or intended, where such infringement would not have occurred but for such use; (4) a claim based on intellectual property rights owned by Customer or any of companies controlled by, controlling or under common control with Customer; or (5) where the Xxxxxx Products were designed by Xxxxxx to Customer’s specification. Contributory infringement is specifically excluded from this indemnity. (a) states Customer’s sole and exclusive remedy in the event that a Xxxxxx Product infringes on the intellectual property right of any third party. (b) In the event a claim is based partially on an indemnified claim described in Article 11(a) above and partially on a non-indemnified claim , any payments and reasonable attorney fees incurred in connection with such claims are to be apportioned between the parties in accordance with the degree of cause attributable to each party. (c) Obligations related to Third Party Products are expressly excluded from Xxxxxx’ obligations to Customer under this Section 11.

  • No Challenge Each Stockholder agrees not to commence, join in, facilitate, assist or encourage, and agrees to take all actions necessary to opt out of any class in any class action with respect to, any claim, derivative or otherwise, against Parent, Merger Sub, the Company or any of their respective successors or directors (a) challenging the validity of, or seeking to enjoin the operation of, any provision of this Agreement or the Merger Agreement or (b) alleging a breach of any fiduciary duty of any person in connection with the evaluation, negotiation or entry into the Merger Agreement.

  • Shareholder Litigation The Company shall give Parent the opportunity to participate in the defense or settlement of any shareholder litigation against the Company and/or its directors relating to the transactions contemplated by this Agreement, and no such settlement shall be agreed to without Parent’s prior written consent.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!