Environmental, health and safety cost benefit analysis in the United States chemical industry

The purpose of this research project is to determine whether there is a cost/benefit to allocating financial and other company-related resources to improve environmental, health and safety performance beyond that which is required by law. The issue of whether a company benefits from spending dollars to achieve environmental, health and safety performance beyond legal compliance is an important issue to the chemical manufacturing industry in the United States because of the voluminous and complex legal requirements impacting environmental, health and safety expenditures. The cost/benefit issue has practical significance because many U.S. chemical manufacturing companies base their environmental, health and safety management strategies on just achieving and maintaining compliance with legal requirements when in reality this strategy may actually be a higher cost way of managing environmental, health and safety practices. This difference in environmental, health and safety management strategy is being investigated to determine if managing environmental, health and safety to achieve performance beyond that which is required by law results in a greater benefit to companies in the U.S. chemical manufacturing sector.

The impact of 1995--1996 health sector reforms in the effectiveness of malaria control program in the state of Orissa, India

Malaria poses a significant public health problem worldwide. The World Health Organization indicates that approximately 40% of the world's population and almost 85% of the population from the South–East Asian region is at risk of contracting malaria. India being the most populous country in the region, contributes the highest number of malaria cases and deaths attributed to malaria. Orissa is the state that has the highest number of malaria cases and deaths attributable to malaria. A secondary data analysis was carried out to evaluate the effectiveness of the World bank-assisted Malaria Action Program in the state of Orissa under the health sector reforms of 1995-96. The secondary analysis utilized the government of India's National Anti Malaria Management Information System's (NAMMIS) surveillance data and the National Family Health Survey (NFHS–I and NFHS–II) datasets to compare the malaria mortality and morbidity in the state between 1992-93 and 1998-99. Results revealed no effect of the intervention and indicated an increase of 2.18 times in malaria mortality between 1992-1999 and an increase of 1.53 times in malaria morbidity between 1992-93 and 1998-99 in the state. The difference in the age-adjusted malaria morbidity in the state between the time periods of 1992-93 and 1998-99 proved to be highly significant (t = 4.29 df=16, p<. 0005) whereas the difference between the increase of age-adjusted malaria morbidity during 1992-93 and 1998-99 between Orissa (with intervention) and Bihar (no intervention) proved to be non significant (t=.0471 df=16, p<.50). Factors such as underutilization of World Bank funds for the malaria control program, inadequate health care infrastructure, structural adjustment problems, poor management, poor financial management, parasite resistance to anti-malarial drugs, inadequate supply of drugs and staff shortages may have contributed to the failure of the program in the state.^

Campaign contributions to congressional candidates by the healthcare sector from 1990 to 2008

Stakeholder groups with special interests as donors to finance congressional campaigns have been a controversial issue in the United Sates. While previous studies concentrated on whether a connection existed between the campaign contributions provided by stakeholder groups and the voting behavior of congressional members, there is little evidence to show the trend of allocation of their campaign contributions to their favorite candidates during the elections. This issue has become increasingly important in the health sector since the health care reform bill was passed in early 2010.^ This study examined the long-term trend of campaign contributions offered by various top healthcare stakeholder groups to particular political parties (i.e. Democrat and Republican). The main focus of this paper was to observe and describe the financial donations provided by these healthcare stakeholder groups in the congressional election cycles from 1990 to 2008 in order to obtain an overview of their patterns of campaign contributions. Their contributing behaviors were characterized based on the campaign finance data collected by the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP). Specifically, I answered the questions: (1) to which political party did specific healthcare stakeholder groups give money and (2) what was the pattern of their campaign contributions from 1990 to 2008?^ The findings of my study revealed that the healthcare stakeholder groups had different political party preferences and partisanship orientations regarding the Democratic or Republican Party. These differences were obvious throughout the election cycles from 1990 to 2008 and their distinct patterns of financial contribution were evident across industries in the health sector as well. Among all the healthcare stakeholder groups in this study, physicians were the top contributors in the congressional election. The pharmaceutical industry was the only group where the majority of contribution funds were allocated to Republicans in every election period studied. This study found that no interest group has succeeded in electing the preferred congressional candidate by giving the majority of its financial support to the winning party in every election. Chiropractors, hospitals/nursing homes, and health services/HMOs performed better than other healthcare stakeholder groups by supporting the electoral winner 8 out of 9 election cycles.^

Referral patterns in optometry: Use of secondary consultation/comanagement centers by optometrists

Privately practicing health care practitioners, such as physicians, dentists, and optometrists are facing increasing competitive pressures as the health care industry undergoes significant structural change. The eye care field has been affected by this change and one result has been the establishment of consultation/comanagement centers for optometrists. These centers, staffed primarily by an ophthalmologist, serve community optometrists as a secondary ophthalmic care center and are altering the traditional optometric - ophthalmologic referral system.^ This study was designed to examine the response of optometrists to the formation of a center by measuring the amount and type of optometric participation in a center and identifying factors affecting participation. A predictive model was specified to determine the probability of center use by practitioners.^ The results showed that the establishment of a center in a community did not result in its usage by all practitioners though there were specific practice (organizational) and practitioners (decision-maker) variables that could be used to predict use. Three practice variables and four practitioner variables were found to be important in influencing center use. ^