Workplace social capital and co-occurrence of lifestyle risk factors: the Finnish Public Sector Study

Objective: The aim of this prospective study was to examine the link between individual and ecological workplace social capital and the co-occurrence of adverse lifestyle risk factors such as smoking, heavy drinking, physical inactivity and overweight.

Socioeconomic position, co-occurrence of behavior-related risk factors, and coronary heart disease: the Finnish public sector study

Objectives. We examined the associations between socioeconomic position, co-occurrence of behavior-related risk factors, and the effect of these factors on the relative and absolute socioeconomic gradients in coronary heart disease.

Effort-reward imbalance at work and the co-occurrence of lifestyle risk factors: cross-sectional survey in a sample of 36,127 public sector employees

Background: In occupational life, a mismatch between high expenditure of effort and receiving few rewards may promote the co-occurrence of lifestyle risk factors, however, there is insufficient evidence to support or refute this hypothesis. The aim of this study is to examine the extent to which the dimensions of the Effort-Reward Imbalance (ERI) model - effort, rewards and ERI - are associated with the co-occurrence of lifestyle risk factors.

Job strain and adverse health behaviors: The Finnish public sector study

Objective: The objective of this study was to explore the association between job strain and the co-occurrence of adverse health behaviors, smoking; heavy drinking; obesity, and physical inactivity. Methods. The authors studied cross-sectional data of 34,058 female and 8154 male public sector employees. Results: Multinomial logistic regression models adjusted for sex, age, basic education, marital status, and type of job contract showed that high job strain and passive jobs were associated with 1.3 to 1.4 times higher odds of having >= 3 (vs 0) adverse health behaviors. Among men, low job control was associated with a 1.3 fold likelihood and amon women active jobs were associated with a 1.2 fold likelihood of having >= 3 (vs 0) adverse behaviors. High demands were associated with a higher likelihood of co-occurrence of one to two (vs 0) adverse behav irs among women. Conclusions. b strain conditions may be associated with the co-occurrence of adverse health behaviors that contribute to preventable chronic diseases. Clinical Significance. Adversejob conditions may increase the likelihood of co-occurring health risk behaviors. Reducing work stress by increasingl ob control and decreasing psychologic demands might help efforts to promote healthy 1 festyles.

A review of biomass co-firing in North America

Biomass fuels have long been accepted as useful renewable energy sources, especially in mitigating greenhouse gases (GHG), nitrogen oxides, and sulfur oxide emissions. Biomass fuel is carbon neutral and is usually low in both nitrogen and sulfur. For the past decade, various forms of biomass fuels have been co-combusted in existing coal-fired boilers and gas-fired power plants. Biomass is used as a supplemental fuel to substitute for up to 10% of the base fuel in most full commercial operations. There are several successful co-firing projects in many parts of the world, particularly in Europe and North America. However, despite remarkable commercial success in Europe, most of the biomass co-firing in North America is limited to demonstration levels. This review takes a detailed look at several aspects of biomass co-firing with a direct focus on North America. It also explores the benefits, such as the reduction of GHG emissions and its implications. This paper shows the results of our studies of the biomass resources available in North America that can be used in coal-fired boilers, their availability and transportation to the power plant, available co-firing levels and technologies, and various technological and environmental issues associated with biomass co-firing. Finally, the paper proffers solutions to help utility companies explore biomass co-firing as a transitional option towards a completely carbon-free power sector in North America.

Institutional Hybridity in Public Sector Reform: Replacement, Blending, or Layering of Administrative Paradigms

Despite an abundance of studies on hybridization and hybrid forms of organizing, scholarly work has failed to distinguish consistently between specific types of hybridity. As a consequence, the analytical category has become blurred and lacks conceptual clarity. Our paper discusses hybridity as the simultaneous appearance of institutional logics in organizational contexts, and differentiates the parallel co-existence of logics from transitional combinations (eventually leading to the replacement of a logic) and more robust combinations in the form of layering and blending. While blending refers to hybridity as an ‘amalgamate’ with original components that are no longer discernible, the notion of layering conceptualizes hybridity in a way that the various elements, or clusters thereof, are added on top of, or alongside, each other, similar to sediment layers in geology. We illustrate and substantiate such conceptual differentiation with an empirical study of the dynamics of public sector reform. In more detail, we examine the parliamentary discourse around two major reforms of the Austrian Federal Budget Law in 1986 and in 2007/2009 in order to trace administrative (reform) paradigms. Each of the three identified paradigms manifests a specific field-level logic with implications for the state and its administration: bureaucracy in Weberian-style Public Administration, market-capitalism in New Public Management, and democracy in New Public Governance. We find no indication of a parallel co-existence or transitional combination of logics, but hybridity in the form of robust combinations. We explore how new ideas fundamentally build on – and are made resonant with – the central bureaucratic logic in a way that suggests layering rather than blending. The conceptual findings presented in our article have implications for the literature on institutional analysis and institutional hybridity.

From brown envelopes to community benefits: the co-option of planning gain agreements under deepening neoliberalism

The provision of physical and social infrastructure in the form of roads, green spaces and community facilities has traditionally been provided for by the state through the general taxation system. However, as the state has been transformed along more neoliberal lines, the private sector is increasingly relied upon to deliver public goods and services. Planning gain agreements have flourished within this context by offering another vehicle through which local facilities are privately funded. Whilst these agreements reflect the broader dynamics of neoliberalism, they are commonly viewed as a tool which can be employed to challenge these very dynamics by empowering local communities to secure more just planning outcomes. This paper counters such claims. Based on evidence gathered from 80 interviews with planners, councillors, developers and community groups in Ireland, the paper demonstrates how planning gain agreements have been strategically redeployed by the holders of political and economic power to serve their own ends. In seeking to understand why and how this has occurred, specific consideration is given to the changing power dynamics between the state and private capital under neoliberalism. The paper highlights how institutional arrangements have enabled developers to infiltrate the political sphere in more subtle and implicit ways than ever before. We conclude by arguing that planning gain must be understood as a mechanism which has been manipulated in ways which essentially work to preserve and enhance, rather than redress, existing power imbalances in the planning system by facilitating large scale transfers of wealth upwards in society.