ESG investing and the financial performance: a panel data analysis of developed REIT markets.

This study investigates the empirical link between the social and financial performance of the Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) by utilizing the PVAR-Granger causality model and a fixed-effects panel data model with a rich dataset comprising 234 ESG-rated REITs across five developed economies from 2003 to 2019. The results suggest that investors pay attention to individual E/S/G metrics and price each component of ESG investing differently, with E-investing and S-investing practices being the significant financial performance factors of REITs. This study is the first attempt to test the social impact and risk mitigation hypotheses of the stakeholder theory of the corporation and the neoclassic trade-off argument to explore the association between corporate social responsibility and the market valuation of REITs. The full sample results strongly support the trade-off hypothesis, indicating that REITs' environmental policies involve high financial costs that may drain off capital and lead to decreasing market returns. On the contrary, investors have attached a higher value to S-investing performance, especially in the post-GFC period from 2011 to 2019. A positive premium for S-investing supports the stakeholder theory as the social impact could be monetarized into a higher return and a lower systematic risk and give rise to a competitive advantage.

Spatial spillover effects of capital factor agglomeration on the urban industrial structure upgrading in China: Based on panel data of 284 prefecture-level cities.

The spatial agglomeration of capital factors has become an important force affecting regional economic development and industrial structure. Investigating the spatial relationship of capital factor agglomeration is a key way to accelerate the upgrading of urban industrial structure and realize sustainable development. Based on the panel data of 284 cities in China from 2008 to 2017, we use the theoretical framework of spatial econometrics and estimate the spatial effects of capital factor agglomeration on the upgrading of urban industrial structure. Both the global Moran index and the local Moran scatter chart present that the agglomeration of capital factors and the upgrading index of urban industrial structure shows the characteristics of spatial agglomeration. The results reveal that the agglomeration of capital factors can significantly promote the upgrading of the industrial structure of local and surrounding cities. Still, the spatial spillover effect is not significant. We then explore the possible factors that limit the spatial spillover effects of capital agglomeration. Using the results of the paper, we provide policy suggestions for strengthening urban industrial construction and optimizing the urban governance model.

US Governmental Spending for Disaster-Related Research, 2011-2016: Characterizing the State of Science Funding Across 5 Professional Disciplines.

OBJECTIVE: Disaster-related research funding in the United States has not been described. This study characterizes Federal funding for disaster-related research for 5 professional disciplines: medicine, public health, social science, engineering, emergency management. METHODS: An online key word search was performed using the website, www.USAspending.gov, to identify federal awards, grants, and contracts during 2011-2016. A panel of experts then reviewed each entry for inclusion. RESULTS: The search identified 9145 entries, of which 262 (3%) met inclusion criteria. Over 6 years, the Federal Government awarded US $69 325 130 for all disaster-related research. Total funding levels quadrupled in the first 3 years and then halved in the last 3 years. Half of the funding was for engineering, 3 times higher than social sciences and emergency management and 5 times higher than public health and medicine. Ten (11%) institutions received 52% of all funding. The search returned entries for only 12 of the 35 pre-identified disaster-related capabilities; 6 of 12 capabilities appear to have received no funding for at least 2 years. CONCLUSION: US federal funding for disaster-related research is limited and highly variable during 2011-2016. There are no clear reasons for apportionment. There appears to be an absence of prioritization. There does not appear to be a strategy for alignment of research with national disaster policies.

"Creative Financing": Funding Evidence-Based Interventions in Human Service Systems.

Implementation and sustainment of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) is influenced by outer (e.g., broader environments in which organizations operate) and inner (e.g., organizations, their administrators, and staff) contexts. One important outer-context element that shapes the inner context is funding, which is complex and unpredictable. There is a dearth of knowledge on how funding arrangements affect sustainment of EBIs in human service systems and the organizations delivering them, including child welfare and behavioral health agencies. This study uses qualitative interview and focus group data with stakeholders at the system, organizational, and provider levels from 11 human service systems in two states to examine how stakeholders strategically negotiate diverse and shifting funding arrangements over time. Study findings indicate that, while diverse funding streams may contribute to flexibility of organizations and possible transformations in the human service delivery environment, a dedicated funding source for EBIs is crucial to their successful implementation and sustainment.

Recommendations to Sustain the Academic Mission Ecosystem at U.S. Medical Schools.

Academic medical center (AMC) faculty, administrators, and leaders have the critical tasks of teaching and training the next generation of health care providers and biomedical researchers, as well as generating new knowledge that improves the health of all. In the United States, medical schools and their affiliated hospitals train remarkably high-quality physicians and scientists, and the research conducted at these institutions results in advances in health. To that end, AMCs have become essential engines for driving better health in the United States and the rest of the world; they also have become essential engines driving the economies of their respective communities and regions. The education and research missions, however, require subsidization because tuition and extramural grant funding do not cover the costs of these endeavors. This subsidization largely has come from revenues generated by AMCs' clinical endeavors. The viability of this cross-subsidization, however, is increasingly threatened in the current clinical environment. The authors of this Perspective discuss these issues in depth and provide some concrete recommendations to address these challenges. They hope to stimulate discussion and, ultimately, ensure the financial viability of U.S. AMCs-a national resource of utmost importance. Recommendations to sustain research include creating strategic biomedical research plans, developing a defined and sustained model to support National Institutes of Health funding that keeps pace with inflation, and evolving funding mechanisms. Recommendations to sustain medical education include limiting student debt, creating more cost-effective curricula, and ensuring that clinical training opportunities that meet national standards are available to students.

Proposed Performance-Based Metrics for the Future Funding of Graduate Medical Education: Starting the Conversation.

Graduate medical education (GME) in the United States is financed by contributions from both federal and state entities that total over $15 billion annually. Within institutions, these funds are distributed with limited transparency to achieve ill-defined outcomes. To address this, the Institute of Medicine convened a committee on the governance and financing of GME to recommend finance reform that would promote a physician training system that meets society's current and future needs. The resulting report provided several recommendations regarding the oversight and mechanisms of GME funding, including implementation of performance-based GME payments, but did not provide specific details about the content and development of metrics for these payments. To initiate a national conversation about performance-based GME funding, the authors asked: What should GME be held accountable for in exchange for public funding? In answer to this question, the authors propose 17 potential performance-based metrics for GME funding that could inform future funding decisions. Eight of the metrics are described as exemplars to add context and to help readers obtain a deeper understanding of the inherent complexities of performance-based GME funding. The authors also describe considerations and precautions for metric implementation.

Model for prioritization of Graduate Medical Education funding at a university setting - Engagement of GME committee with the Clinical Enterprise.

BACKGROUND: Funding for graduate medical education (GME) is becoming scarce and is likely to worsen. There is a higher degree of accountability and return on investment demanded from public funds dedicated to GME. Academic centers (AC) partnered with clinical enterprises (CE) are finding it increasingly difficult to retain sustainable funding streams for GME activities. METHODS: To develop and implement a novel algorithmic funding model at one AC in symbiotic partnership with the CE for all 50 GME programs with nearly 500 residents. RESULTS: A new GME Finance and Workforce Committee was convened which was tasked with developing the novel algorithmic financial model to prioritize GME funding. Early outcomes measures that were monitored consisted of: satisfaction of all stakeholders and financial savings. CONCLUSIONS: The model was presented to all the stakeholders and was well received and approved. Early signs, demonstrated AC and CE satisfaction with the model, financial savings and increased efficiency. This GME funding model may serve as a template for other academic centers with tailored modifications to suit their local needs, demands and constraints.

Incentivising innovation in antibiotic drug discovery and development: progress, challenges and next steps.

Political momentum and funding for combatting antimicrobial resistance (AMR) continues to build. Numerous major international and national initiatives aimed at financially incentivising the research and development (R&D) of antibiotics have been implemented. However, it remains unclear how to effectively strengthen the current set of incentive programmes to further accelerate antibiotic innovation. Based on a literature review and expert input, this study first identifies and assesses the major international, European Union, US and UK antibiotic R&D funding programmes. These programmes are then evaluated across market and public health criteria necessary for comprehensively improving the antibiotic market. The current set of incentive programmes are an important initial step to improving the economic feasibility of antibiotic development. However, there appears to be a lack of global coordination across all initiatives, which risks duplicating efforts, leaving funding gaps in the value chain and overlooking important AMR goals. This study finds that incentive programmes are overly committed to early-stage push funding of basic science and preclinical research, while there is limited late-stage push funding of clinical development. Moreover, there are almost no pull incentives to facilitate transition of antibiotic products from early clinical phases to commercialisation, focus developer concentration on the highest priority antibiotics and attract large pharmaceutical companies to invest in the market. Finally, it seems that antibiotic sustainability and patient access requirements are poorly integrated into the array of incentive mechanisms.

A comprehensive analysis of brachytherapy clinical trials over the past 15 years.

PURPOSE: Clinical trials (CTs) involving brachytherapy (BT) are crucial in establishing the role of BT in the evolving landscape of cancer treatment. An analysis of BT trials is warranted to understand the factors driving their success and the future direction of the field. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We queried the clinicaltrials.gov website using the search terms: Radiation Therapy, Brachytherapy, and associated terms. This yielded 10,417 CTs between 2000 and 2015. Trials not using BT were excluded; yielding 319 CTs. Characteristics of individual CTs were obtained. Least squared linear regression, χ2 analysis, and logistic regression were used to evaluate trial characteristics. RESULTS: The majority of the CTs were phase II (37%), involving interstitial BT (45%), and treating the prostate (36%). Nongovernmental institutions (NGIs) have funded the greatest number of CTs. New CTs involving radiotherapy of all types showed increase over time (p < 0.05), whereas no corresponding increase was seen in BT trials. New BT trials independently funded by industry have declined (p = 0.01). Collaboration between industry and NGIs was associated with greater likelihood of trial completion. Industry funding was associated with Phase IV trials, usage of surface BT, among others. NIH/government funding was associated with Phase I trials, intracavitary BT, trials focused on systemic therapy, among others. CONCLUSIONS: Trials examining radiotherapy have increased, whereas trials incorporating BT have remained unchanged. Collaboration between industry and NGIs was associated with a greater likelihood for successful trial completion. The role of BT can be better realized with greater incorporation into CTs.

Understanding public reactions to commercialization of biobanks and use of biobank resources.

Biobanks will be essential to facilitate the translation of genomic research into real improvements to healthcare. Biobanking is a long-term commitment, requiring public support as well as appropriate regulatory, social and ethical guidelines to realize this promise. There is a growing body of research that explores the necessary conditions to ensure public trust in biomedical research, particularly in the context of biobanking. Trust is, however, a complex relationship. More analysis of public perceptions, attitudes and reactions is required to understand the primary triggers that influence gain and loss of trust. Further, the outcomes of these analyses require detailed consideration to determine how to promote trustworthy institutions and practices. This article uses national survey data, combined with the results of a community consultation that took place in Tasmania, Australia in 2013, to analyze the specific issue of public reactions to commercialization of biobanks and their outputs. This research will enhance the ability of biobanks to respond preemptively to public concerns about commercialization by establishing and maintaining governance frameworks that are responsive to those concerns. The results reveal that it is possible to counter the 'natural prejudice' that many people have against commercialization through independent governance of biobank resources and transparency with regard to commercial involvement. Indeed, most participants agreed that they would rather have a biobank with commercial involvement than none at all. This analysis provides nuanced conclusions about public reactions towards commercialization and equips researchers and biobank operators with data on which to base policies and make governance decisions in order to tackle participant concerns respectfully and responsively.

A critical analysis of the review on antimicrobial resistance report and the infectious disease financing facility.

Over the past year, two major policy initiatives have been introduced focusing on stimulating antibiotic development for human consumption. The European Investment Bank has announced the development of the Infectious Disease Financing Facility (IDFF) and the British government commissioned the Review on Antimicrobial Resistance, led by Jim O'Neill. Each constitutes a major effort by the European community to address the evolving crisis of antimicrobial resistance. Though both have similar goals, the approaches are unique and worthy of consideration.This manuscript utilizes a previously published framework for evaluation of antibiotic incentive plans to clearly identify the strengths and weaknesses of each proposal. The merits of each proposal are evaluated in how they satisfy four key objectives: 1) Improve the overall net present value (NPV) for new antibiotic projects; 2) Enable greater participation of Small to Medium Sized Enterprises (SME); 3) Encourage participation by large pharmaceutical companies; 4) Facilitate cooperation and synergy across the antibiotic market. The IDFF seeks to make forgivable loans to corporations with promising compounds, while the O'Neill group proposes a more comprehensive framework of early stage funding, along with the creation of a stable global market.Ultimately, the proposals may prove complementary and if implemented together may form a more comprehensive plan to address an impending global crisis. Substantial progress will only be made on these efforts if action is taken at an international level, therefore we recommend consideration of these efforts at the upcoming G20 summit.

Banks Cater To Long Term Care.

Providers are looking for money to invest in their businesses both for the short and long term.

The payers perspective on MIH-CP programs. How to make a case for funding your project.

Here are some key points to consider when engaging in conversations with potential payers for EMS-based MIH-CP programs. The realignment of fiscal incentives within the healthcare system has created an environment that encourages providers and payers to work together to right-size utilization. Providers and payers are often unaware of the true value EMS agencies can bring to their patients through proactive and innovative patient navigation services. You need to tell them--or, better yet, show them. You may need to do a small demonstration project with a handful of patients to prove you can make a difference. In order to understand the new environment, you need to become well-versed in healthcare metrics, specifically as they relate to the partners to whom you'll be proposing. Be sure you know things like readmission rates and penalties, value-based purchasing penalties, HCAHPS scores, MSPB and other motivating factors you. can use to help build the business case for your audience. For many in EMS, crafting partnerships for. payment of services not related to ambulance transport is a new and scary thing. Hopefully the examples provided here from payers paying for MIH services have demonstrated that their perspective is not much different from ours. We are all trying to do the right things for our patients, improve their experience of care and reduce the cost of the healthcare system.