scholarly journals CSR Unconscious Consumption by Generation Z in the COVID-19 Era—Responsible Heretics Not Paying CSR Bonus?

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (8) ◽  
pp. 390
Author(s):  
Radka MacGregor Pelikánová ◽  
Martin Hála
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Prima Facie ◽  
Modern Concept ◽  
Generation Z ◽  
Informal Interview ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
Stakeholder Model ◽  
Multi Stakeholder ◽  
Corporate Social ◽  
New Generation

The COVID-19 pandemic brought a myriad of challenges and opportunities and has influenced the modern concept of sustainability as projected into the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and the underlying multi-stakeholder model. The new generation of consumers, Generation Z, has progressively increased its participation in the market and its shopping trends have been impacting the entire CSR scenery. However, little is known about their attitudes, consumption preferences and expectations. In Spring 2021, this induced a pioneering case study survey involving members of Generation Z, students from a private university in Prague, focusing on their (lack of) readiness to pay any “CSR bonus”. The principal research aim was to study and understand the rather surprising unwillingness of a solvent part of the new generation of consumers to support CSR during the COVID-19 era by paying at least a symbolic CSR bonus. A formal survey involving a questionnaire, replied to by 228 students, out of which 18 totally rejected the CSR bonus, was assessed via contingency tables. It was accompanied by a complementary questioning via an informal interview and glossing. This plethora of data was processed by meta-analysis and lead to an unexpected proposition: prima facie sustainability heretics denying to pay any CSR bonus can be conscious consumers and responsible and progressive supporters of the sustainability and CSR. Their rejection is a deontological cry in a desert for more transparency, trust and the rule of law.

scholarly journals The Willingness of Generation Z to Financially Support CSR – A Central European Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 271-282
Author(s):  
Radka MacGregor Pelikánová ◽  
Robert K. MacGregor
Keyword(s):  
Private University ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Generation Z ◽  
Stakeholder Model ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Multi Stakeholder ◽  
Corporate Social ◽  
Open Question ◽  
New Generation ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Sustainability, with its three pillars, is projected into Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and their effectiveness and efficiency depend upon the operation of the multi-stakeholder model. Both the EU and the EU member states depone clearly that, via CSR, we can exit from the COVID-19 crises stronger and better. The feasibility of the CSR depends upon the eager support of all stakeholders, including consumers. Therefore, it is highly relevant to assess whether the new group of consumers, known as Generation Z, is open to financially support CSR, to what extent and why and/or under what conditions. These three research questions became the foundation of a survey of 179 college students paying for their tertiary study at a private university in Prague. The survey included both closed and open question, brought forth a highly revealing and surprisingly consistent message about the conditional and rather generous readiness of this new generation of consumers in Central Europe, and led to a set of recommendations.

Challenges and Opportunities for Neuroimaging in Young Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury: a Coordinated Effort towards Advancing Discovery from the ENIGMA Pediatric Moderate/Severe TBI Group

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily L. Dennis ◽  
Karen Caeyenberghs ◽  
Robert F. Asarnow ◽  
Talin Babikian ◽  
Brenda Bartnik-Olson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Young Patients ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Childhood And Adolescence ◽  
Developmental Issues ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
Severe Tbi ◽  
Advance Research

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major cause of death and disability in children in both developed and developing nations. Children and adolescents suffer from TBI at a higher rate than the general population; however, research in this population lags behind research in adults. This may be due, in part, to the smaller number of investigators engaged in research with this population and may also be related to changes in safety laws and clinical practice that have altered length of hospital stays, treatment, and access to this population. Specific developmental issues also warrant attention in studies of children, and the ever-changing context of childhood and adolescence may require larger sample sizes than are commonly available to adequately address remaining questions related to TBI. The ENIGMA (Enhancing NeuroImaging Genetics through Meta-Analysis) Pediatric Moderate-Severe TBI (msTBI) group aims to advance research in this area through global collaborative meta-analysis. In this paper we discuss important challenges in pediatric TBI research and opportunities that we believe the ENIGMA Pediatric msTBI group can provide to address them. We conclude with recommendations for future research in this field of study.

The ENIGMA Brain Injury Working Group: Approach, Challenges, and Potential Benefits

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elisabeth A. Wilde ◽  
Emily L. Dennis ◽  
David F Tate
Keyword(s):  
Brain Injury ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Group Approach ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
Brain Structure And Function ◽  
Potential Benefits ◽  
And Function ◽  
Neuroimaging Genetics

The Enhancing NeuroImaging Genetics through Meta-Analysis (ENIGMA) consortium brings together researchers from around the world to try to identify the genetic underpinnings of brain structure and function, along with robust, generalizable effects of neurological and psychiatric disorders. The recently-formed ENIGMA Brain Injury working group includes 8 subgroups, based largely on injury mechanism and patient population. This introduction to the special issue summarizes the history, organization, and objectives of ENIGMA Brain Injury, and includes a discussion of strategies, challenges, opportunities and goals common across 6 of the subgroups under the umbrella of ENIGMA Brain Injury. The following articles in this special issue, including 6 articles from different subgroups, will detail the challenges and opportunities specific to each subgroup.

scholarly journals Researcher perspectives on challenges and opportunities in conservation physiology revealed from an online survey

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine L Madliger ◽  
Oliver P Love ◽  
Vivian M Nguyen ◽  
Neal R Haddaway ◽  
Steven J Cooke
Keyword(s):  
Online Survey ◽  
Stakeholder Involvement ◽  
Reference Ranges ◽  
Conservation Science ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Conservation Action ◽  
Conservation Physiology ◽  
Biodiversity Crisis ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
Multi Stakeholder

Abstract Conservation physiology represents a recently emerging arm of conservation science that applies physiological tools and techniques to understand and solve conservation issues. While a multi-disciplinary toolbox can only help to address the global biodiversity crisis, any field can face challenges while becoming established, particularly highly applied disciplines that require multi-stakeholder involvement. Gaining first-hand knowledge of the challenges that conservation physiologists are facing can help characterize the current state of the field and build a better foundation for determining how it can grow. Through an online survey of 468 scientists working at the intersection of physiology and conservation, we aimed to identify characteristics of those engaging in conservation physiology research (e.g. demographics, primary taxa of study), gauge conservation physiology’s role in contributing to on-the-ground conservation action, identify the perceived barriers to achieving success and determine how difficult any identified barriers are to overcome. Despite all participants having experience combining physiology and conservation, only one-third considered themselves to be ‘conservation physiologists’. Moreover, there was a general perception that conservation physiology does not yet regularly lead to tangible conservation success. Respondents identified the recent conceptualization of the field and the broader issue of adequately translating science into management action as the primary reasons for these deficits. Other significant barriers that respondents have faced when integrating physiology and conservation science included a lack of funding, logistical constraints (e.g. sample sizes, obtaining permits) and a lack of physiological baseline data (i.e. reference ranges of a physiological metric’s ‘normal’ or pre-environmental change levels). We identified 12 actions based on suggestions of survey participants that we anticipate will help deconstruct the barriers and continue to develop a narrative of physiology that is relevant to conservation science, policy and practice.

scholarly journals Transcatheter aortic valve replacement for bicuspid aortic valve stenosis with first- and new-generation bioprostheses: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
D Ueshima ◽  
L.N.F Nai Fovino ◽  
S.J.B Brener ◽  
A.P Pavei ◽  
C.F Fraccaro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Bicuspid Aortic Valve ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Pacemaker Implantation ◽  
Vascular Complications ◽  
Device Failure ◽  
Paravalvular Leakage ◽  
Transcatheter Aortic Valve ◽  
Outcome Differences ◽  
New Generation

Abstract Background Subjects with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) have been excluded from transcatheter aortic valve re- placement (TAVR) randomized trials. Methods With this meta-analysis of observational studies we first compared TAVR outcomes of BAV vs. tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) patients, stratifying the results by device generation. Then, we looked for differences between balloon-expandable (BE) and self-expandable (SE) bioprostheses in BAV patients. Primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were 30-day stroke, moderate-severe paravalvular leakage, new pacemaker im- plantation, vascular complications and 1-year mortality. Results Thirteen studies (11,032 patients, 7291 TAV and 3741 BAV) and seven studies (706 patients, 367 treated with BE, 339 with SE valve) met inclusion criteria. Thirty-day (OR=1.13; 95% CI: 0.88–1.46, p=0.33) and 1-year mortality (OR=1.02; 95% CI: 0.77–1.37, p=0.87) were similar between patients receiving TAVR for BAV or TAV. Subjects treated for BAV were at higher risk of conversion to conventional surgery (OR=2.35; 95% CI: 1.30–4.23, p=0.005), implantation of a second valve (OR=2.06; 95% CI: 1.31–3.25; p=0.002), moderate/severe paravalvular leakage (PVL) (OR=1.67; 95% CI: 1.29–2.17; p=0.0001) and device failure (OR=1.26; 95% CI: 1.02–1.56; p=0.04). Rates of adverse events decreased significantly with the use of new-generation devices, but outcome differences remained consistent. BAV patients treated with BE vs. SE valves had similar 30-day and 1-year mortality, stroke and moderate-severe PVL. Balloon-expandable valves were associated with lower rates of a second valve and new pacemaker implantation but carried higher risk of annular rupture. Conclusions BAV patients treated with TAVR had similar 30-day and 1-year mortality as well as stroke and new pacemaker implantation rates compared to TAV subjects, but carried higher risk of moderate/severe PVL, conver- sion to surgery and device failure. Event rates significantly decreased with the use of new-generation devices, but TAVR still showed better procedural results in TAV compared to BAV. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document