Search results

Youth and young adults with emotional and/or behavioral difficulties (EBD) face particularly difficult challenges in their efforts to fit into adult roles and functions. The purpose of this chapter is to assist providers, educators, and administrators from the mental health, education, child welfare, justice/corrections, and adult service system sectors understand (a) a practice for improving the progress and outcomes for young people in transition, and (b) how this practice model is implemented in communities to impact the lives of youth in transition to adulthood. This is accomplished in two major parts in this chapter. The first part provides an overview of the Transition to Independence Process (TIP) model, a description of its status as an evidence-supported practice, and tools and strategies that support its implementation in communities and regions across North America. The TIP model is further illustrated through a description of how it is applied with a young person. The second part of the chapter provides an overview of implementation science, a description of how its strategies and tools can guide the implementation of an intervention or model; and an illustration of a large-scale TIP implementation initiative with collaboratives of agencies and schools. This chapter concludes with implications regarding the importance of having effective transition-to-adulthood models; and ensuring the implementation and sustainability of these to improve the progress and outcomes of youth and young adults with EBD.

Agri-biotech multinational enterprises (MNEs) are persisting to push genetically modified plant varieties (GMV) worldwide including emerging countries as a technological solution for sustainable development. However, in emerging countries, the structure and effectiveness of regulation and compliance measures to ensure human and environmental safety are much less developed. There are three types of concerns: the economic risks faced by farmers while using existing low-yielding conventional seed varieties, in the face of inadequate institutional mechanisms and safety nets, the long-term environmental risks, and finally, risks posed by other possible externalities. In an attempt to provide some insight on the aforementioned debate, this chapter focuses on a commercially successful GMV—namely genetically modified cotton, also referred to as Bt cotton. The literature on adoption of Bt cotton is first examined, and its findings are confronted with the reality of the introduction and diffusion of Bt cotton in India to derive inferences on how MNE and emerging countries’ governments can manage coexistence. Our findings indicate that in order to be successful, MNEs have to establish the sociopolitical legitimacy of GMV through investment in outreach with regulatory authorities, government departments dealing with the environmental and bio safety, farmer groups, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). MNEs also have to keep in mind that pricing and high technology fee can become an impediment for the legitimization of technology. Finally, MNEs can partner with NGOs to educate and accompany farmers to maximize their livelihood, while preserving the ecological sustainability of their farm lands.

We provide seven steps to integrating sustainability into strategy and operations. The process is designed to enable business leaders to reframe sustainability as a source of value creation using a life cycle collaborative approach to innovation instead of piecemeal change led by small groups of experts. Furthermore, the approach builds on the strengths of whole business systems rather than attempting to fix the weaknesses of individual actors as is typical of many strategy execution efforts. The chapter begins with a survey of perceptions about the meaning of sustainability and corporate social responsibility (CSR). The survey shows both significant confusion about the concepts themselves, and an opportunity for first movers to differentiate themselves by adopting an approach to sustainability based on innovation and business value. The seven steps are then presented using a strength-based whole system approach to compress the time and resources required to achieve the desired results.

To examine how clinicians navigate providing treatment to Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) in the context of the DSM 5, deinstitutionalization, and the biomedical model.

We conducted 39 interviews with mental health providers in the United States in a two-year period preceding and following the release of the DSM 5. Using Constructivist Grounded Theory, we analyzed the data for themes that emerged.

Clinicians faced pressures from insurance companies, the DSM categories, and their professional training to focus on biomedical treatments. These treatments, which emphasized pharmaceuticals and short courses of care, were ill-suited to BPD, which has a strong evidence base recommending long-term therapeutic interventions. We term this contradiction a “biomedical mismatch” and use Gidden’s concept of structuration to better understand how clinicians navigate the system of care. Providers ranged in their responses to the mismatch: some championed biomedicine, others were complicit, and a final group behaved as activists, challenging the paradigm. The sum of the strategies had downstream effects which included crisis reinstitutionalization and a discourse of untreatability. Ultimately, we discuss how social factors such as gender bias, stigma, and trauma are insufficiently represented in the biomedical model of care for BPD.

BPD fits poorly within the biomedical underpinnings of the current system. Accordingly, it illuminates the structuration of health care and where the rules of care break down. More precisely, deinstitutionalization was designed to remove patients from long courses of inpatient care. Many patients with BPD have failed to experience this outcome, with some patients now cycling through long courses of short-term crisis reinstitutionalization instead of having effective outpatient care over long periods. This unintended consequence of deinstitutionalization calls for a more biopsychosocial response to BPD.

After having drawn lessons from the recent COVID-19 pandemic for retailers in the previous chapters, in this last chapter we provide an outline on retailing over a longer time horizon. We start with projections of how the phygitalization trend in retailing will further evolve and what role data plays as a basis for a competitive advantage – on the condition of smart and ethical use. Besides looking at customers (downstream), we address the upstream in the value delivery network, focusing on how to succeed in balancing between efficiency and sustainability in the retail supply chain. Retailers face huge challenges. This chapter contributes to setting the scene for retailers to thrive in the brand-new post-pandemic aftermath.