Suchergebnisse

OBJECTIVE: Rates of some psychological disorders are higher among enlisted U.S. military personnel than socio-demographically matched civilians. Indirect evidence suggests some internalizing and externalizing psychological problems among enlistees onset prior to enlistment. However, the consistency and strength of the associations between pre-enlistment psychological problems and enlistment over time is unknown. We address this uncertainty by examining whether internalizing and externalizing problems in high school predicted subsequent military enlistment using a large cohort-sequential panel study. METHOD: The Monitoring the Future study administered baseline surveys from 1989–2014 and biennial follow-up surveys two and four years later to national samples of high-school seniors (n = 20,823). Validated self-report scales assessed internalizing (depression, low self-esteem) and externalizing (risk-taking, school misbehavior, conduct disorder, interpersonal violence, alcohol, and drug use) problems in each survey. Follow-up surveys assessed military enlistment. Logistic regression models were used to estimate associations of problems scales with subsequent enlistment. RESULTS: School misbehavior in 12(th) grade, and risk-taking in 12(th) grade and two years after graduation were associated with significantly elevated odds of enlistment at follow-up. Although modest, these associations were linear and invariant across respondent sex and baseline survey year. CONCLUSIONS: School misbehavior and risk-taking predicted subsequent enlistment and there was no evidence of historical changes in these associations over the course of 25 years; these pre-enlistment psychological problems do not fully explain the high rates of psychological disorders among enlisted military personnel. Further research is needed to determine whether these predictors are associated with negative outcomes during or after military service.

Conventional regulatory air quality monitoring sites tend to be sparsely located. The availability of lower-cost air pollution sensors, however, allows for their use in spatially dense community monitoring networks, which can be operated by various stakeholders, including concerned residents, organizations, academics, or government agencies. Networks of many community monitors have the potential to fill the spatial gaps between existing government-operated monitoring sites. One potential benefit of finer scale monitoring might be the ability to discern elevated air pollution episodes in locations that have not been identified by government-operated monitoring sites, which might improve public health warnings for populations sensitive to high levels of air pollution. In the Imperial Air study, a large network of low-cost particle monitors was deployed in the Imperial Valley in Southeastern California. Data from the new monitors is validated against regulatory air monitoring. Neighborhood-level air pollution episodes, which are defined as periods in which the PM(2.5) (airborne particles with sizes less than 2.5 μm in diameter) hourly average concentration is equal to or greater than 35 μg m(−3), are identified and corroborate with other sites in the network and against the small number of government monitors in the region. During the period from October 2016 to February 2017, a total of 116 episodes were identified among six government monitors in the study region; however, more than 10 times as many episodes are identified among the 38 community air monitors. Of the 1426 episodes identified by the community sensors, 723 (51%) were not observed by the government monitors. These findings suggest that the dense network of community air monitors could be useful for addressing current limitations in the spatial coverage of government air monitoring to provide real-time warnings of high pollution episodes to vulnerable populations.

International audience ; Corporate social responsibility has gone mainstream, and many companies have taken meaningful steps towards a more sustainable future. Yet global environmental indicators continue to worsen, and individual corporate efforts may be hitting the point of diminishing returns. Voluntary action by the private sector is not a panacea-regulatory action by the public sector remains necessary. Such public sector progress will be more likely if it is supported by influential segments of the business community. Recent court rulings in the U.S. make it easy for companies to hide their political activities from the public, yet the indicators of CSR used by ratings agencies and socially responsible investment funds mostly ignore corporate political action. We argue that it is time for CSR metrics to be expanded to critically assess and evaluate firms based on the sustainability impacts of their public policy positions. To enable such assessments, firms need to become as transparent about their political activity as many have become about their CSR efforts, and CSR rating services and ethical investment funds need to demand such information from firms and include an assessment of corporate political activity in their ratings. † We thank the Albert and Elaine Borchard Foundation for their generous financial support.

International audience ; Corporate social responsibility has gone mainstream, and many companies have taken meaningful steps towards a more sustainable future. Yet global environmental indicators continue to worsen, and individual corporate efforts may be hitting the point of diminishing returns. Voluntary action by the private sector is not a panacea-regulatory action by the public sector remains necessary. Such public sector progress will be more likely if it is supported by influential segments of the business community. Recent court rulings in the U.S. make it easy for companies to hide their political activities from the public, yet the indicators of CSR used by ratings agencies and socially responsible investment funds mostly ignore corporate political action. We argue that it is time for CSR metrics to be expanded to critically assess and evaluate firms based on the sustainability impacts of their public policy positions. To enable such assessments, firms need to become as transparent about their political activity as many have become about their CSR efforts, and CSR rating services and ethical investment funds need to demand such information from firms and include an assessment of corporate political activity in their ratings. † We thank the Albert and Elaine Borchard Foundation for their generous financial support.

International audience ; Corporate social responsibility has gone mainstream, and many companies have taken meaningful steps towards a more sustainable future. Yet global environmental indicators continue to worsen, and individual corporate efforts may be hitting the point of diminishing returns. Voluntary action by the private sector is not a panacea-regulatory action by the public sector remains necessary. Such public sector progress will be more likely if it is supported by influential segments of the business community. Recent court rulings in the U.S. make it easy for companies to hide their political activities from the public, yet the indicators of CSR used by ratings agencies and socially responsible investment funds mostly ignore corporate political action. We argue that it is time for CSR metrics to be expanded to critically assess and evaluate firms based on the sustainability impacts of their public policy positions. To enable such assessments, firms need to become as transparent about their political activity as many have become about their CSR efforts, and CSR rating services and ethical investment funds need to demand such information from firms and include an assessment of corporate political activity in their ratings. † We thank the Albert and Elaine Borchard Foundation for their generous financial support.

International audience ; Corporate social responsibility has gone mainstream, and many companies have taken meaningful steps towards a more sustainable future. Yet global environmental indicators continue to worsen, and individual corporate efforts may be hitting the point of diminishing returns. Voluntary action by the private sector is not a panacea-regulatory action by the public sector remains necessary. Such public sector progress will be more likely if it is supported by influential segments of the business community. Recent court rulings in the U.S. make it easy for companies to hide their political activities from the public, yet the indicators of CSR used by ratings agencies and socially responsible investment funds mostly ignore corporate political action. We argue that it is time for CSR metrics to be expanded to critically assess and evaluate firms based on the sustainability impacts of their public policy positions. To enable such assessments, firms need to become as transparent about their political activity as many have become about their CSR efforts, and CSR rating services and ethical investment funds need to demand such information from firms and include an assessment of corporate political activity in their ratings. † We thank the Albert and Elaine Borchard Foundation for their generous financial support.

International audience ; Corporate social responsibility has gone mainstream, and many companies have taken meaningful steps towards a more sustainable future. Yet global environmental indicators continue to worsen, and individual corporate efforts may be hitting the point of diminishing returns. Voluntary action by the private sector is not a panacea-regulatory action by the public sector remains necessary. Such public sector progress will be more likely if it is supported by influential segments of the business community. Recent court rulings in the U.S. make it easy for companies to hide their political activities from the public, yet the indicators of CSR used by ratings agencies and socially responsible investment funds mostly ignore corporate political action. We argue that it is time for CSR metrics to be expanded to critically assess and evaluate firms based on the sustainability impacts of their public policy positions. To enable such assessments, firms need to become as transparent about their political activity as many have become about their CSR efforts, and CSR rating services and ethical investment funds need to demand such information from firms and include an assessment of corporate political activity in their ratings. † We thank the Albert and Elaine Borchard Foundation for their generous financial support.

International audience ; Corporate social responsibility has gone mainstream, and many companies have taken meaningful steps towards a more sustainable future. Yet global environmental indicators continue to worsen, and individual corporate efforts may be hitting the point of diminishing returns. Voluntary action by the private sector is not a panacea-regulatory action by the public sector remains necessary. Such public sector progress will be more likely if it is supported by influential segments of the business community. Recent court rulings in the U.S. make it easy for companies to hide their political activities from the public, yet the indicators of CSR used by ratings agencies and socially responsible investment funds mostly ignore corporate political action. We argue that it is time for CSR metrics to be expanded to critically assess and evaluate firms based on the sustainability impacts of their public policy positions. To enable such assessments, firms need to become as transparent about their political activity as many have become about their CSR efforts, and CSR rating services and ethical investment funds need to demand such information from firms and include an assessment of corporate political activity in their ratings. † We thank the Albert and Elaine Borchard Foundation for their generous financial support.

International audience Corporate social responsibility has gone mainstream, and many companies have taken meaningful steps towards a more sustainable future. Yet global environmental indicators continue to worsen, and individual corporate efforts may be hitting the point of diminishing returns. Voluntary action by the private sector is not a panacea-regulatory action by the public sector remains necessary. Such public sector progress will be more likely if it is supported by influential segments of the business community. Recent court rulings in the U.S. make it easy for companies to hide their political activities from the public, yet the indicators of CSR used by ratings agencies and socially responsible investment funds mostly ignore corporate political action. We argue that it is time for CSR metrics to be expanded to critically assess and evaluate firms based on the sustainability impacts of their public policy positions. To enable such assessments, firms need to become as transparent about their political activity as many have become about their CSR efforts, and CSR rating services and ethical investment funds need to demand such information from firms and include an assessment of corporate political activity in their ratings. † We thank the Albert and Elaine Borchard Foundation for their generous financial support.

International audience ; Corporate social responsibility has gone mainstream, and many companies have taken meaningful steps towards a more sustainable future. Yet global environmental indicators continue to worsen, and individual corporate efforts may be hitting the point of diminishing returns. Voluntary action by the private sector is not a panacea-regulatory action by the public sector remains necessary. Such public sector progress will be more likely if it is supported by influential segments of the business community. Recent court rulings in the U.S. make it easy for companies to hide their political activities from the public, yet the indicators of CSR used by ratings agencies and socially responsible investment funds mostly ignore corporate political action. We argue that it is time for CSR metrics to be expanded to critically assess and evaluate firms based on the sustainability impacts of their public policy positions. To enable such assessments, firms need to become as transparent about their political activity as many have become about their CSR efforts, and CSR rating services and ethical investment funds need to demand such information from firms and include an assessment of corporate political activity in their ratings. † We thank the Albert and Elaine Borchard Foundation for their generous financial support.