Search results

Despite rapid success in bringing SARS-CoV-2 vaccines to distribution by multiple pharmaceutical corporations, supply chain failures in production and distribution can plague pandemic recovery. This review analyzes and addresses gaps in modeling supply chain resilience in general and specifically for vaccines in order to guide researchers and practitioners alike to improve critical function of vaccine supply chains in the face of inevitable disruptions.

Systematic review of the literature on modeling supply chain resilience from 2007 to 2020 is analyzed in tandem with the vaccine supply chain manufacturing literature. These trends are then used to apply a novel matrix analysis to seven Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) annual filings of pharmaceutical corporations involved in COVID-19 vaccine manufacture and distribution.

Pharmaceutical corporations favor efficiency as they navigate regulatory, economic and other threats to their vaccine supply chains, neglecting resilience – absorption, adaptation and recovery from inevitable and unexpected disruptions. However, explicitly applying resilience analytics to the vaccine supply chain and further leveraging emerging network science tools found in the academic literature, such as artificial intelligence (AI), stress tests and digital twins, will help supply chain managers to better quantify efficiency/resilience tradeoffs across all associated networks/domains and support optimal system performance post disruption.

This is the first review addressing resilience analytics in vaccine supply chains and subsequent extension to operational management through novel matrix analyses of SEC Filings. The authors provide analyses and recommendations that facilitate resilience quantification capabilities for vaccine supply chain managers, regulatory agencies and corporate stakeholders and are especially relevant for pandemic response, including application to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

Social media has been widely adopted by politicians and political parties during elections and routine times and has been discussed before. However, research in the field has so far not addressed how a political leader's private or official social media account affects their message, language and style. The current study examined how Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu uses his private Facebook account, compared to his use of his official Facebook page “Prime Minister of Israel.”

In this study, the author identified the differences between these two digital entities using in-depth content analysis based on all posts (N = 1,484) published on the two pages over a 12-month period between 2018 and 2019.

The study’s findings indicate that Netanyahu regularly uses his personal page to address topics that are not represented on his official page, such as mentioning and attacking political rivals, presenting political agenda, and criticizing Israeli journalists and media organizations. Netanyahu's private Facebook account is also used to comment on personal events such as the criminal indictments he is facing and family affairs.

The findings highlight the need to investigate the different identities that politicians maintain on social media when they use personal or official accounts, sometimes on the same platform. The medium matters, yet the author also discovered that a leader's choice of account and its title are also important.

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-01-2021-0004.

At a time when governmental corruption seems rife and administrations grow ever more secretive, the whistleblower is a crucial resource in journalism’s attempts to make accountable those who wield power. Yet despite legislation that is meant to protect employees and officials who expose wrongdoing, a governmental “war on whistleblowers” has made the hazards faced by many whistleblowers increasingly grim. This chapter explores the role of the journalist/whistleblower collaboration in disclosing important, but sensitive, information involving national security. In discussing case studies of those who have braved the government’s anger, we examine not only the circumstances of these breaches, but also their political and legal repercussions.

Facebook “likes” are often used as a proxy of users’ attention and an affirmation of what is posted on Facebook (Gerodimos & Justinussen, 2015). To determine what factors predict “likes,” the authors analyzed Facebook posts made by the campaigns of Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and Donald Trump, the top three candidates from the 2016 US primary election. Several possible factors were considered, such as the types of posts, the use of pronouns and emotions, the inclusion of slogans and hashtags, references made to opponents, as well as candidate’s mentions on national television. The results of an ordinary least-squared regression analysis showed that the use of highly charged (positive or negative) emotions and personalized posts (first-person singular pronouns) increased “likes” across all three candidates’ Facebook pages, whereas visual posts (posts containing either videos or photos) and the use of past tenses were liked more often by Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders’ followers than by Trump’s followers. Television mentions boosted likes on Clinton and Sanders’ posts but had a negative effect on Trump’s. The study contributes to the growing literature on digitally networked participation (Theocharis, 2015) and supports the emerging notion of the new “hybrid media” system (Chadwick, 2013) for political communication. The study also raises questions as to the relevance of platforms such as Facebook to deliberative democratic processes since Facebook users are not necessarily engaging with the content in an organic way, but instead might be guided to specific content by the Facebook timeline algorithm and targeted ads.

Understanding how leaders make foreign policy and national security decisions is of paramount importance for the policy community and academia. It is our assertion that decisions in these domains can be explained best by tracing the cognitive process leaders go through in formulating and arriving at their decisions, using the Applied Decision Analysis (ADA) method (Mintz, 2005; Mintz & DeRouen, 2010).

Consequently, this chapter summarizes the Applied Decision Analysis method which is utilized throughout the chapters comprising this volume. We then discuss the findings presented in this volume, while demonstrating the merit of both ADA and the poliheuristic theory of decision (Mintz, 2004), in the robust analyses of decisions made by Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Benjamin Netanyahu, Winston Churchill, Mao Zedong, Barack Obama, Saddam Hussein, Khaled Mashal, Muammar Gaddafi, Pieter Botha, and Frederik de Klerk. We conclude by providing a brief summary of the case studies which are included in this volume.

This study aims to extend the literature by exploring the degrees of integration of both fixed and adjustable mortgage rates and diverse riskless (Treasury) and risky (corporate) interest rates in the capital markets from January 1, 2010, until November 7, 2018. This period is uniquely characterized by a sharp conversion on January 20, 2017, from enhanced financial regulation during the Obama administration to major deregulatory ambitions during the first 22 months of the Trump administration.

The authors use the augmented Dickey and Fuller and the Phillips and Perron unit root tests to examine time series stationarity and the Johansen cointegration rank and the Stock-Watson common trends tests to inspect various cointegrations and regressions of time series pairs to explore different effects. The authors deploy these techniques over the entire time frame, as well as for distinct sub-periods of similar length.

The authors conclude that a deregulatory setting favors cointegration between mortgage and non-corporate capital markets. However, an enriched regulatory environment supports cointegration between mortgage and corporate capital markets. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer protection Act from July 21, 2010, created a unique though short-term effect on the relationships between Treasury and corporate bonds and fixed-rate mortgages.

The journey contributes to the overall understanding of the interactions among US financial markets. They are considered efficient, competitive and fully developed if their prices quickly adjust to economic changes and regulatory transformations.

The authors study the degrees of integration of various conventional and adjustable mortgage rates and different fixed and floating interest rates in the US capital markets from January 1, 2010, until November 7, 2018. This recent time frame has yet to be examined in the economic literature. This period is also characterized by a sharp transformation on January 20, 2017, from enhanced financial regulation during the Obama administration to major deregulatory drives during the first 22 months of the Trump administration.

During the 2020 election cycle, 2,276 super PACs spent over $2.1 billion in federal elections. This chapter argues that changes made to the US campaign finance system brought about by the Citizens United v. FEC (2010) and SpeechNow.org v. FEC (2010) cases have destabilized the American political system by fueling tensions between right-wing and left-wing populist factions and by contributing to congressional corruption. By moving away from the political corruption standard and toward the free speech standard in Citizens United, polarizing wealthy mega-donors and dark money sources have come to play a dominant role in congressional elections. These cases also helped to contribute to a two-tiered campaign finance regulatory structure that distinguishes between campaign contributions given directly to federal candidates and political money contributed to super PACs to support or oppose federal candidates. In the 2020 congressional elections, PACs and super PACS outspent both major party candidates combined in 35 House and Senate races. Super PACs are serving as “shadow parties” by targeting competitive races for the purpose of swaying partisan control of Congress. This study also shows that an exceedingly high percentage of super PAC money is spent on negative advertising that further divides rather than unifies the nation. This chapter also highlights the corrupting influence of congressional leadership PACs and examines how super PACs have enabled foreign and dark money sources to illegally influence congressional campaigns.