AbstractThis paper aims at analyzing the connection among the corporate social responsibility (CSR), stakeholder engagement and universities, proposing the analysis of universities' financial reporting to draft their third mission and social impact. Particularly, our analysis is based on the sensitivity demonstrated by the Italian public universities in terms of transparency on issues of social responsibility with reference to the heritage assets' reporting and disclosure. We used a qualitative methodology, adopting the content analysis to collect data from the financial reporting of all Italian public universities. Our findings show as heritage assets represent the strategic area for the assessment of the third mission and social impact by the Italian universities even if the level of their disclosure seems low. Evidence of our paper is directed to support the academic community, practitioners, and policymakers proposing a new theoretical and practical advance of the CSR and stakeholders engagement' studies.
This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No 643134. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/published
Depuis vingt-cinq ans, le secteur public dans beaucoup de pays est touché par d'importantes réformes du nouveau management public (NMP), notamment en faveur de la comptabilité en partie double. Face à la diversité dans les systèmes d'information financière publique, une harmonisation est devenue nécessaire, ce qui s'est traduit par l'élaboration des normes comptables internationales pour le secteur public (IPSAS). Malgré leur importance, on sait peu de choses sur le processus d'adoption des IPSAS. Dans la présente étude, nous examinons la mesure dans laquelle la comptabilité en partie double basée sur les IPSAS (ou s'en inspirant) est adoptée par les gouvernements centraux/locaux dans le monde, et tentons d'identifier les facteurs ayant une influence sur leur niveau variable d'adoption. Sur le plan méthodologique, nous avons préparé un questionnaire destiné à obtenir des informations pertinentes de la part d'experts locaux, questionnaire que nous avons envoyé à un échantillon de pays dans le monde. Notre étude fait apparaître une évolution importante en faveur de la comptabilité en partie double, et plus particulièrement de la comptabilité en partie double basée sur les IPSAS, où l'on observe encore un certain niveau d'hésitation, essentiellement au sein des gouvernements centraux, notamment dans les pays où la comptabilité en partie double s'inspirant du secteur privé s'est développée. Remarques à l'intention des praticiens Les IPSAS sont devenues la référence internationale pour le développement des systèmes de comptabilité du secteur public partout dans le monde. C'est la raison pour laquelle les IPSAS méritent l'attention des décideurs dans le domaine comptable, de même que des praticiens et des chercheurs. Dans la présente étude, nous proposons une étude comparative du niveau d'adoption des IPSAS dans le monde, ainsi qu'une explication des facteurs à l'origine de la variation dans ces niveaux d'adoption. La présente étude révèle que le passage aux IPSAS nécessite une longue période de mise en œuvre, dans le cadre de laquelle la réglementation locale, basée sur la comptabilité d'entreprise, empêche les pays d'appliquer les normes internationales. Les observations explicatives aideront les réformateurs et les législateurs à concevoir et mettre au point les réformes en matière d'informations financières.
Over the past 25 years, significant New Public Management (NPM) reforms, particularly towards accrual accounting, have characterized the public sector in many countries. The diversity in public financial information systems created a need for harmonization, resulting in the elaboration of the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS). Despite their relevance, little is known on the adoption process of IPSAS. This study aims to examine to what extent IPSAS(-like) accrual accounting is adopted in central/local governments worldwide as well as to investigate which factors affect the differing level of their adoption. Methodologically, a specific questionnaire constructed to obtain relevant information from local experts was sent worldwide to a sample of countries. The study reveals an important move to accrual accounting, particularly to IPSAS accrual accounting, for which there still remains a level of reluctance mainly in central governments, especially in countries where businesslike accrual accounting has been developed. Points for practitioners IPSAS have become the international reference for the development of public sector accounting systems worldwide. For this reason, IPSAS deserve the attention of accounting policy-makers, practitioners and scholars. The current study offers a comparative study of the level of adopting IPSAS worldwide as well as an explanation of the reasons behind the differing levels of adoption. The present study reveals that the transition towards IPSAS necessitates a long period of implementation whereby existing local business accounting regulations hinder jurisdictions from implementing international standards. The explanatory findings provide input for reformers and legislators when designing and developing financial information reforms.
The performance of existing detailed chemical mechanisms with respect to moderate or intense low-oxygen dilution (MILD) combustion is not optimal. The use of optimization procedures can therefore be used to quantify and minimize the uncertainties in chemical mechanisms with respect to available experimental targets in these conditions. This work puts forth a methodology that improves the performance of chemical kinetics with respect to MILD combustion. The experimental data used in this paper are from a plug flow reactor, where the ignition delay time for methane and biomass pyrolysis products in MILD conditions was analyzed. The initial mechanism was then evaluated, and the reactions with the highest impact factors were used in the optimization process. The combination of parameters that gave the lowest error with respect to the experimental data was then determined, and the proposed mechanism performance was improved with respect to the experimental targets. ; This work has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under the Marie Sklodowska- Curie grant agreement No 643134. ; SCOPUS: ar.j ; info:eu-repo/semantics/published
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long-term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long- term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.
Background: Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods: This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings: Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16-30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77-0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50-0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80-0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54-0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation: Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long-term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services.
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted routine hospital services globally. This study estimated the total number of adult elective operations that would be cancelled worldwide during the 12 weeks of peak disruption due to COVID-19. Methods: A global expert response study was conducted to elicit projections for the proportion of elective surgery that would be cancelled or postponed during the 12 weeks of peak disruption. A Bayesian β-regression model was used to estimate 12-week cancellation rates for 190 countries. Elective surgical case-mix data, stratified by specialty and indication (surgery for cancer versus benign disease), were determined. This case mix was applied to country-level surgical volumes. The 12-week cancellation rates were then applied to these figures to calculate the total number of cancelled operations. Results: The best estimate was that 28 404 603 operations would be cancelled or postponed during the peak 12 weeks of disruption due to COVID-19 (2 367 050 operations per week). Most would be operations for benign disease (90·2 per cent, 25 638 922 of 28 404 603). The overall 12-week cancellation rate would be 72·3 per cent. Globally, 81·7 per cent of operations for benign conditions (25 638 922 of 31 378 062), 37·7 per cent of cancer operations (2 324 070 of 6 162 311) and 25·4 per cent of elective caesarean sections (441 611 of 1 735 483) would be cancelled or postponed. If countries increased their normal surgical volume by 20 per cent after the pandemic, it would take a median of 45 weeks to clear the backlog of operations resulting from COVID-19 disruption. Conclusion: A very large number of operations will be cancelled or postponed owing to disruption caused by COVID-19. Governments should mitigate against this major burden on patients by developing recovery plans and implementing strategies to restore surgical activity safely.