The global competitiveness of regions

The aim of this book is to consider theoretically the notion of the global competitiveness of regions, as well as giving attention as to how such competitiveness may be empirically measured. With this in mind, the book has three specific objectives: first, to place the concept of regional competitiveness within the context of regional economic development theory; second, to present a rationale and method for quantifying the global competitiveness of regions; and, third, to undertake the most geographically widespread analysis of regional competitiveness differences across the globe. With regard to the third goal, the analysis incorporates more than 500 regions across Europe, North and South America, Asia-Pacific, the Middle East, and the so-called BRIC economies of Brazil, Russia, India, and China. The importance of the concept of competitiveness has increased rapidly in recent years, with the issues surrounding it becoming, at the same time, more empirically refined and theoretically complex. The focus on regions reflects the growing consensus that they are the primary spatial units that compete to attract investment, and it is at the regional level that knowledge is circulated and transferred, resulting in agglomerations, or clusters, of industrial and service sector enterprises. This growing acknowledgement of the region’s role as a key spatial unit of organisation has led to attention turning to competitiveness at a more regional level. The book explores the results of the World Competitiveness Index of Regions (WCIR), covering the rankings and results of the 2014 edition. The WCIR provides a tool for analysing the development of a range of regional economies across the globe. It enables an illustration of the changing patterns of regional competitiveness on the international stage to be generated. In fundamental terms, the WCIR aims to produce an integrated and overall benchmark of the knowledge capacity, capability, and sustainability of each region, and the extent to which this knowledge is translated into economic value and transferred into the wealth of the citizens of each region.

A patient's perspective:the impact of adverse drug reactions on patients and their views on reporting

What is known and objective: Adverse drug reactions to prescribed medication are relatively common events. However, the impact such reactions have on patients and their attitude to reporting such events have only been poorly explored. Previous studies relying on self-reporting patients indicate that altruism is an important factor. In the United Kingdom, patient reporting started in 2005; though, numbers of serious reports remain low. Method: A purposive sample of fifteen patients who had been admitted to an inner city hospital with an adverse drug reaction were interviewed using a semi-structured questionnaire. Patients were asked to relate in their own words their experience of an adverse drug reaction. Patient's reactions to the information leaflet, adherence to treatment and use of other sources of information on medication were assessed. Interviews were recorded, and a thematic analysis of patients'responses was performed. Results and discussion: Analysis of the patient interviews demonstrated the reality of being admitted to hospital is often a frightening process with a significant emotional cost. Anger, isolation, resentment and blame were common factors, particularly when medicines had been prescribed for acute conditions. For patients with chronic conditions, a more phlegmatic approach was seen especially with conditions with a strong support networks. Patients felt that communication and information should have been more readily available from the health care professional who prescribed the medication, although few had read the patient information leaflet. Only a minority of patients linked the medication they had taken to the adverse event, although some had received false reassurance that the drug was not related to their illness creating additional barriers. In contrast to previous studies, many patients felt that adverse drug reporting was not their concern, particularly as they obtained little direct benefit from it. The majority of patients were unaware of the Yellow Card Scheme in the UK for patient reporting. Even when explained, the scheme was felt too cold and impersonal and not a patient's 'job'. What is new and conclusion: Patients having a severe adverse drug reaction following an acute illness felt negative emotions towards their health care provider. Those with a chronic condition rationalized the event and coped better with its impact. Neither group felt that reporting the adverse reaction was their responsibility. Encouraging patients to report remains important but expecting patients to report solely for altruistic purposes may be unrealistic. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

International session at the BCLA conference

Full text: It seems a long time ago now since we were at the BCLA conference. The excellent FIFA World Cup in Brazil kept us occupied over the summer as well as Formula 1, Wimbledon, Tour de France, Commonwealth Games and of course exam paper marking! The BCLA conference this year was held in Birmingham at the International Convention Centre which again proved to be a great venue. The number of attendees overall was up on previous years, and at a record high of 1500 people. Amongst the highlights at this year's annual conference was the live surgery link where Professor Sunil Shah demonstrated the differences in technique between traditional phacoemulsification cataract surgery and femtosecond assisted phacoemulsification cataract surgery. Dr. Raquel Gil Cazorla, a research optometrist at Aston University, assisted in the procedure including calibrating the femtosecond laser. Another highlight for me was the session that I chaired, which was the international session organised by IACLE (International Association of CL Educators). There was a talk by Mirjam van Tilborg about dry eye prevalence in the Netherlands and how it was managed by medical general practitioners (GPs) or optometrists. It was interesting to know that there are only 2 schools of optometry there and currently under 1000 registered optometrists there. It also seems that GPs were more likely to blame CL as the cause for dry eye whereas optometrists who had a fuller range of tests were better at solving the issue. The next part of the session included the presentation of 5 selected posters from around the world. The posters were also displayed in the main poster area but were selected to be presented here as they had international relevance. The posters were: 1. Motivators and Barriers for Contact Lens Recommendation and Wear by Nilesh Thite (India) 2. Contact lens hygiene among Saudi wearers by Dr. Ali Masmaly (Saudi) 3. Trends of contact lens prescribing and patterns of contact lens practice in Jordan by Dr. Mera Haddad (Jordan) 4. Contact Lens Behaviour in Greece by Dr. Dimitra Makrynioti (Greece) 5. How practitioners inform ametropes about the benefits of contact lenses and overcome the potential barriers: an Italian survey, by Dr. Fabrizio Zeri (Italy) It was interesting to learn about CL practice in different parts, for example the CL wearing population ration in Saudi Arabia is around 1:2 Male:Female (similar to other parts of the world) and although the sale of CL is restricted to registered practitioners there are many unregistered outlets, like clothing stores, that flout the rules. In Jordan some older practitioners will still advise patients to use tap water or even saliva! But thankfully the newer generation of practitioners have been educated not to advise this. In Greece one of the concerns was that some practitioners may advise patients to use disposable lenses for longer than they should and again it seems to be the practitioners with inadequate education that would do this. In India it was found that cost was one barrier to using contact lenses but also some practitioners felt that they shouldn’t offer CLs due to cost too. In Italy sensitive eyes and CL care and maintenance were the barriers to CL wear but the motivators were vision and comfort and aesthetics. Finally the international session ended with the IACLE travel award and educator awards presented by IACLE president Shehzad Naroo and BCLA President Andrew Yorke. The travel award went to Wang Ling, Jinling Institute of Technology, Nanjing, China. There were 3 regional Contact Lens Educator of the Year Awards sponsored by Coopervision and presented by Dr. J.C. Aragorn of Coopervision. 1. Asia Pacific Region – Dr. Rajeswari Mahadevan of Sankara Nethralaya Medical Research Foundation, Chennai, India 2. Americas Region – Dr. Sergio Garcia of University of La Salle, Bogotá and the University Santo Tomás, Bucaramanga, Colombia 3. Europe/Africa – Middle East Region: Dr. Eef van der Worp, affiliated with the University of Maastricht, the Netherlands The posters above were just a small selection of those displayed at this year's BCLA conference. If you missed the BCLA conference then you can see the abstracts for all posters and talks in a virtual issue of CLAE very soon. The poster competition was kindly sponsored by Elsevier. The poster winner this year was: Joan Gispets – Corneal and Anterior Chamber Parameters in Keratoconus The 3 runners up were: Debby Yeung – Scleral Lens Central Corneal Clearance Assessment with Biomicroscopy Sarah L. Smith – Subjective Grading of Lid Margin Staining Heiko Pult – Impact of Soft Contact Lenses on Lid Parallel Conjunctival Folds My final two highlights are a little more personal. Firstly, I was awarded Honorary Life Fellowship of the BCLA for my work with the Journal, and I would like to thank the BCLA, Elsevier, the editorial board of CLAE, the reviewers and the authors for their support of my role. My final highlight from the BCLA conference this year was the final presentation of the conference – the BCLA Gold Medal award. The recipient this year was Professor Philip Morgan with his talk ‘Changing the world with contact lenses’. Phil was the person who advised me to go to my first BCLA conference in 1994 (funnily he didn’t attend himself as he was busy getting married!) and now 20 years later he was being honoured with the accolade of being the BCLA Gold Medallist. The date of his BCLA medal addressed was shared with his father's birthday so a double celebration for Phil. Well done to outgoing BCLA President Andy Yorke and his team at the BCLA (including Nick Rumney, Cheryl Donnelly, Sarah Greenwood and Amir Khan) on an excellent conference. And finally welcome to new President Susan Bowers. Copyright © 2014 British Contact Lens Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The competitive advantage of nations:origins and journey

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide an understanding of the origins and journey of the fundamental ideas underpinning Michael Porter’s The Competitive Advantage of Nations as a means of assessing its influence. Design/methodology/approach – Drawing on a reflection of the book’s text and associated works by Porter, the paper shows how Porter’s thinking evolved from his earlier writings, as well as how his ideas went through further periods of development following the publication of The Competitive Advantage of Nations. Findings – The paper focuses on the emergence of Porter’s cluster theory and his growing acknowledgement of the role of innovation within processes of economic development. It shows how these concepts have provided a foundation for contemporary economic development practices. Also, the paper highlights how the fundamental concepts of Porter’s text have shifted from a unit of analysis focused on nations to one where subnational regions are the primary analytical unit. Originality/value – The paper concludes by suggesting that the nature of Porter’s conceptual insights is likely to ensure the long-term endurance of the fundamental lessons contained within The Competitive Advantage of Nations.