Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Find out how GSU is fighting fast fashion and promoting sustainability with students on campus
Sustainability Programs at Georgia Southern University recently teamed up with student organization Fashion Menagerie, a group of fashion merchandising and apparel design students, to fight fast fashion by hosting the first campus thrift store on the Statesboro Campus. Fast fashion is a textile trend where clothes are mass-produced to be quickly sold and thrown away. “Tons of textile waste gets dumped from people throwing away their clothes, even the ones that are lightly used, but more clothing is constantly being produced,” said Geneisa Ragin, president of Fashion Menagerie. “This thrift store can help our campus prevent that increase of waste and give students a sustainable way to donate and shop that can discourage fast fashion production.” Cami Sockow, Sustainability Programs coordinator, said in addition to being wasteful, fast fashion is often characterized by poor work conditions, such as underpayment, child labor, physical and verbal abuse, and working long hours. “The social costs of fast fashion are immensely under discussed,” Sockow said. “We largely leave out the social conversation when we discuss sustainability, but this is a great example of how many social costs ensue with our addiction to consumption. So while we pay a low economic cost, we need to start asking ourselves if it is worth the social and environmental ones.” Clothing donors received shopping credits at the thrift store for each item they donate. The thrift store also gave shopping credits for donations of nonperishable food items, hygiene products and cleaning supplies to the Eagle Essentials Food Pantry. On campus programs like this provide perspective and lived experiences from students and faculty – and if you are a journalist looking to know more about Georgia Southern’s Sustainability Programs – then let us help. Cami Sockow and Geneisa Ragin are available for interviews — simply reach out to Georgia Southern Director of Communications Jennifer Wise at jwise@georgiasouthern.edu to set and time and date.
Are big changes coming to financial accountability in Ontario as Laurentian loses its elite status?
As the higher education community anxiously awaits more news on just exactly how Laurentian University in Sudbury has essentially gone bankrupt, those who oversee universities and colleges in Ontario are also watching with interest. The chain of events that led to Laurentian having to file for creditor protection reveal a failure in governance. And it points to a wider set of reforms that are being contemplated within the public sector. A special investigator’s report on the Laurentian University insolvency is coming out soon, according to the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, Ross Romano. The province has warned it may introduce legislation granting it greater oversight of every university’s finances. Recently, Umar Saeed, a public sector accounting expert and a partner at Welch LLP, sat down with Newspoint360 to discuss in an in-depth interview how Ontario’s ability to control and govern the university sector is unlike other provinces, such as British Columbia. If new legislation is introduced that enhances the government’s ability to appoint Board members or control the financial and operating policies of Ontario universities, it will have broad implications for the entire university sector in Ontario: • New legislation may lead to consolidating all the universities (debts and deficits) into the Ontario government’s public accounts • Legislation would acknowledge an implicit promise by the Ontario government to backstop public sector debt (including the university sector) • Public universities may lose their perceived independence if they are “controlled” for accounting purposes The story of Laurentian University is fundamentally about poor governance. However, missing from this story is the backdrop and conditions that led to poor governance. There’s a lot at stake for Laurentian, it’s faculty and staff and the provincial university sector as a whole, and if you are a journalist looking to cover this topic, then let us help. Umar Saeed is a partner at Welch LLP in Ottawa and an expert in Public-Sector Accounting Standards. Umar is available to speak with media about this subject – simply click on his icon now to arrange an email today.
Ask the Expert: Vaccine myths and scientific facts
Now that there are authorized and recommended COVID-19 vaccines, it is critical people receive accurate information. Peter Gulick, professor of medicine at the Michigan State University College of Osteopathic Medicine and infectious disease expert, reviews some myths about the vaccine and counters these with scientific facts. Myth: The COVID-19 vaccines were developed in a rush, so their effectiveness and safety can’t be trusted. Fact: Studies found that the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna are both about 95% effective compared to the influenza vaccine, which ranges from being 50% to 60% effective each year. The Johnson & Johnson vaccine is 85% effective at curbing serious or moderate illness. The most important statistic is that all three were 100% effective in stopping hospitalizations and death. As of March 9, 2021, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that 93.7 million people have been vaccinated and all safety data collected from these doses show no red flags. There have been about 5 cases of anaphylaxis, an allergic reaction, per 1 million but this is no different than allergic reactions from other vaccines. There are many reasons why the COVID-19 vaccines could be developed so quickly and here are a few: The COVID-19 vaccines from Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna were created with a messenger RNA technology that has been in development for years, so the companies could start the vaccine development process early in the pandemic. China isolated and shared genetic information about COVID-19 promptly so scientists could start working on vaccines. The vaccine developers didn’t skip any testing steps but conducted some of the steps on an overlapping schedule to gather data faster. The Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines were created using messenger RNA, or mRNA, which allows a faster approach than the traditional way that vaccines are made. Because COVID-19 is so contagious and widespread, it did not take long to see if the vaccine worked for the vaccinated study volunteers. Companies began making vaccines early in the process — even before FDA authorization — so some supplies were ready when authorization occurred. They develop COVID-19 vaccines so quickly also due to years of previous research on the SARS COV-1, a related virus. Myth: The messenger RNA technology used to make the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccine is brand new. Fact: The messenger RNA technology behind these two vaccines has been studied and in development for almost two decades. Interest has grown in these vaccines because they can be developed in a laboratory using readily available materials, making vaccine development faster. mRNA vaccines have been studied before for flu, Zika and rabies. Myth: You only need one dose of J&J vaccine so it’s more effective. Fact: Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine uses a different strategy — a weakened cold virus that is reprogrammed to include the code for the spike protein. Once inside the body, the viral genes trigger a similar response against the virus. All three vaccines are considered overall effective and 100% effective in preventing hospitalizations and death. Myth: Vaccine efficacy and effectiveness mean the same thing. Fact: Efficacy and effectiveness do not mean the same thing. “Efficacy” refers to the results for how well a drug or vaccine works based on testing while “effectiveness” refers to how well these products work in the real world, in a much larger group of people. Most people, however, use them interchangeably even though they have different scientific meanings. Myth: The vaccines aren’t effective against new strains of the virus. Fact: Currently, we know both the U.K. strain as well as the South African variant have increased transmissibility of 30% to 50% over the natural strain. As far as an increase in causing more serious disease, it is not known yet. We have over 600 U.K. variants in Michigan and one case of the South African variant, and I just heard of 47 cases of the U.K. variant in Grand Ledge. We (Michigan) are second in the nation in variants, but that's likely because we test for them more. The most important information is that the vaccines, in general, are 100% effective in prevention of hospitalization and death. So, it is felt they all offer some protection against variants to prevent serious disease. As far as the Johnson & Johnson, it was used with variants and has efficacy overall of 72% in U.S., 66% in Latin America and 57% in South Africa (where the main strain is the South African variant). All companies are looking at modifying (their products) (the mRNA) to cover variants and either give a booster or a multivalent vaccine to cover all variants. Myth: There are severe side effects of the COVID-19 vaccines. Fact: The COVID-19 vaccine can have side effects, but the vast majority go away quickly and aren’t serious. The vaccine developers report that some people experience pain where they were injected; body aches; headaches or fever, lasting for a day or two. This is good and are signs that the vaccine is working to stimulate your immune system. If symptoms persist beyond two days, you should call your doctor. Myth: Getting the COVID-19 vaccine gives you COVID-19. Fact: The vaccine for COVID-19 cannot and will not give you COVID-19. The two authorized mRNA vaccines instruct your cells to reproduce a protein that is part of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, which helps your body recognize and fight the virus, if it comes along. The COVID-19 vaccine does not contain the SARS-Co-2 virus, so you cannot get COVID-19 from the vaccine. The Johnson & Johnson vaccine was developed using adenovirus vector technology and also will not give you COVID-19. It shows your immune system a weakened, common cold virus “disguised” as the coronavirus instead. Adenovirus vaccines have been around for about two decades, the same as mRNA vaccines. Johnson & Johnson developed a vaccine for Ebola using this technology. Myth: The vaccines are ineffective against the virus variants. Fact: More time is needed to study the vaccines’ effectiveness against the variants. Studies are now being conducted to determine if a booster dose is needed to protect against the variants or if modifications to the vaccines are needed. Myth: I already had COVID-19 and I have recovered, so I don't need to get the vaccine. Fact: There is not enough information currently available to say if or for how long after getting COVID-19 someone is protected from getting it again. This is called natural immunity. Early evidence suggests natural immunity from COVID-19 may not last very long, but more studies are needed to better understand this. The CDC recommends getting the COVID-19 vaccine, even if you’ve had COVID-19 previously. However, those that had COVID-19 should delay getting the vaccination until about 90 days from diagnosis. People should not get vaccinated if in quarantine after exposure or if they have COVID-19 symptoms. Myth: I won't need to wear a mask after I get the vaccine. Fact: It may take time for everyone who wants a COVID-19 vaccination to get one. Also, while the vaccine may prevent you from getting sick, more research is needed, but early indications show that while the vaccine is effective in reducing transmission, it is possible for a vaccinated person to spread the virus. Until more is understood about how well the vaccine works, continuing with precautions such as mask-wearing and physical distancing will be important. Myth: COVID-19 vaccines will alter my DNA. Fact: The COVID-19 vaccines will not alter any human genome and cannot make any changes to your DNA. The vaccines contain all the instructions necessary to teach your cells to make SARS-CoV-2's signature spike protein, release it out into the body, and your immune system gets a practice round at fighting off COVID-19. Myth: The COVID-19 vaccine can affect women’s fertility Fact: There is currently no evidence that antibodies formed from COVID-19 vaccination cause any problems with pregnancy, including the development of the placenta. In addition, there is no evidence suggesting that fertility problems are a side effect of any vaccine. People who are trying to become pregnant now or who plan to try in the future may receive the COVID-19 vaccine when it becomes available to them but it’s always prudent to consult with your doctor. Myth: The COVID-19 vaccine was developed to control the general population either through microchip tracking or "nanotransducers" in our brains. Fact: There is no vaccine microchip, and the vaccine cannot track people or gather personal information into a database. Myth: The vaccines were developed and produced using fetal tissue. Fact: The vaccines do not contain fetal cells nor were fetal cells used in the production the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. Johnson & Johnson used human cell lines or also known as cell cultures to grow the harmless adenovirus but did not use fetal tissue. These same cell lines have been used for other vaccines including hepatitis, chickenpox and rabies and have been around for years. Peter Gulick is an associate professor of medicine at Michigan State University, College of Osteopathic Medicine, and serves as adjunct faculty in the College of Human Medicine and the College of Nursing. Dr. Gulick is available to speak with media - simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today. Peter Gulick is an associate professor of medicine at Michigan State University, College of Osteopathic Medicine, and serves as adjunct faculty in the College of Human Medicine and the College of Nursing. Dr. Gulick is available to speak with media - simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.
Study of auto recalls shows carmakers delay announcements until they can 'hide in the herd'
BLOOMINGTON, Ind. - Automotive recalls are occurring at record levels, but seem to be announced after inexplicable delays. A research study of 48 years of auto recalls announced in the United States finds carmakers frequently wait to make their announcements until after a competitor issues a recall - even if it is unrelated to similar defects. This suggests that recall announcements may not be triggered solely by individual firms' product quality defect awareness or concern for the public interest, but may also be influenced by competitor recalls, a phenomenon that no prior research had investigated. Researchers analyzed 3,117 auto recalls over a 48-year period -- from 1966 to 2013 -- using a model to investigate recall clustering and categorized recalls as leading or following within a cluster. They found that 73 percent of recalls occurred in clusters that lasted 34 days and had 7.6 following recalls on average. On average, a cluster formed after a 16-day gap in which no recalls were announced. They found 266 such clusters over the period studied. "The implication is that auto firms are either consciously or unconsciously delaying recall announcements until they are able to hide in the herd," said George Ball, assistant professor of operations and decision technologies and Weimer Faculty Fellow at the Indiana University Kelley School of Business. "By doing this, they experience a significantly reduced stock penalty from their recall." Ball is co-author of the study, "Hiding in the Herd: The Product Recall Clustering Phenomenon," recently published online in Manufacturing and Service Operations Management, along with faculty at the University of Illinois, the University of Notre Dame, the University of Minnesota and Michigan State University. Researchers found as much as a 67 percent stock market penalty difference between leading recalls, which initiate the cluster, and following recalls, who follow recalls and hide in the herd to experience a lower stock penalty. This indicates a "meaningful financial incentive for auto firms to cluster following recalls behind a leading recall announcement," researchers said. "This stock market penalty difference dissipates over time within a cluster. Additionally, across clusters, the stock market penalty faced by the leading recall amplifies as the time since the last cluster increases." The authors also found that firms with the highest quality reputation, in particular Toyota, triggered the most recall followers. "Even though Toyota announces some of the fewest recalls, when they do announce a recall, 31 percent of their recalls trigger a cluster and leads to many other following recalls," Ball said. "This number is between 5 and 9 percent for all other firms. This means that firms are likely to hide in the herd when the leading recall is announced by a firm with a stellar quality reputation such as Toyota. "A key recommendation of the study is for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to require auto firms to report the specific defect awareness date for each recall, and to make this defect awareness date a searchable and publicly available data field in the auto recall dataset NHTSA provides online," Ball added. "This defect awareness date is required and made available by other federal regulators that oversee recalls in the U.S., such as the Food and Drug Administration. Making this defect awareness date a transparent, searchable and publicly available data field may discourage firms from hiding in the herd and prompt them to make more timely and transparent recall decisions." Co-authors of the study were Ujjal Mukherjee, assistant professor of business administration at the Gies College of Business at the University of Illinois who was the lead author; Kaitlin Wowak, assistant professor of IT, analytics, and operations at the Mendoza College of Business at the University of Notre Dame; Karthik Natarajan, assistant professor of supply chain and operations at the Carlson School of Management at the University of Minnesota; and Jason Miller, associate professor of supply chain management at the Broad College of Business at Michigan State University.
Ask an Expert: What is COVID-19’s impact on the homelessness crisis?
The COVID-19 pandemic continues to impact the homeless community and homelessness crisis, including posing unique health risks to the homeless population and spurring a likely increase in homelessness due to job losses. “People experiencing homelessness are at enormous risk of exposure to the coronavirus, due to inability to self-isolate, as evidenced by outbreaks in congregate shelters,” says Marybeth Shinn, Cornelius Vanderbilt Chair and professor of human, organizational and community development at Vanderbilt Peabody College of education and human development. “With the cold weather coming, service providers are scrambling to provide food, shelter and outreach services safely, and to use rental assistance to get people into housing.” Shinn also explains that while eviction moratoriums imposed during the pandemic work to delay evictions, they do not prevent them. Arrears for rent, utilities and fees continue to accumulate when the moratorium ends, and landlords can continue to charge late fees for late payments. On the one hand, moratoriums will help keep many renters in their homes at a time when the alternatives, such as crowding in with friends and relatives or even becoming homeless, puts people’s health at risk. At the same time, landlords, especially small landlords, are also suffering. Landlords often have mortgages as well as other expenses to pay, relying on rental income to do so. In her new book with Abt Associates researcher Jill Khadduri, In the Midst of Plenty: Homelessness and What to Do About It, Shinn argues that homelessness is not a result of personal failure, but rather societal failure, as we have the knowledge and resources to end homelessness but lack the political will. As an immediate step during the pandemic, Shinn advises that Congress needs to enact relief for tenants and landlords, as well as reinstate weekly supplements to unemployment benefits to help people stay current on rent.
Japan Society Presents When Practice Becomes Form: Carpentry Tools from Japan
Installation view at the Takenaka Carpentry Tools Museum, Kobe, Japan. On the occasion of the 50th anniversary of Japan Society’s landmark building, the institution is pleased to present the new exhibition, When Practice Becomes Form: Carpentry Tools from Japan. The exhibition celebrates the spirit of architecture and craftsmanship through Japanese woodworking tools as well as architectural patterns and various models. The site-specific installation, conceived by the esteemed contemporary architect Sou Fujimoto in collaboration with Brooklyn-based Popular Architecture, reinterprets major themes from the exhibition and is in dialogue with the gallery’s spaces, highlighting an enduring connection between traditional Japanese wooden construction and modern architecture. Featuring hand tools and joinery techniques that have been used for hundreds of years to build Japan’s wooden architectural masterpieces (from temples and shrines to teahouses and bridges), the exhibition unpacks how the intangible qualities of craftsmanship, such as consummate experience, knowledge, and the honed skills of master carpenters, have been transformed into significant forms of architecture. A diverse array of tools—planes, chisels, saws—have played an important role in the development of architecture in Japan’s history, and this philosophy extends to Japan’s cultural heritage today. Integral to the process of making by master carpenters (tōryo) is their extensive knowledge of the local environment and of wood as a material. Using natural resources and learning from their predecessors’ practices, they construct buildings using a refined methodology. Their philosophy of sustainability—for example, joinery can be restored or repaired as needed by future craftspeople—has been handed down over generations. Themes emerging from the exhibition have been interpreted by the internationally acclaimed architect Sou Fujimoto. His firm, Sou Fujimoto Architects, is based in Paris and Tokyo, and has been selected as site design producer for the 2025 World Exposition in Osaka, Japan. Fujimoto has designed the Serpentine Gallery pavilion in London (2013) among other internationally recognized projects. For this exhibition, Fujimoto has worked with Popular Architecture to explore the coexistence of nature and architecture. “Japan Society has been a home of cultural exchange, and a meeting place of past and present. In this exhibition, traditional Japanese craftsmanship is revealed in a new light by the design of contemporary architect Sou Fujimoto, and it becomes a precious educational opportunity to learn from this history,” says Yukie Kamiya, Japan Society Gallery Director. The building of Japan Society’s headquarters, designed by the architect Junzo Yoshimura (1908–1997), a major figure in 20th century Japanese architecture, opened to the public in 1971, becoming New York City’s first permanent structure designed by a Japanese citizen. It will commemorate its 50th anniversary in 2021. The building resides on land donated by John D. Rockefeller 3rd (1906–1978), former President and Chairman of Japan Society, who sought to revitalize the organization’s activities after World War II. Rockefeller 3rd and Yoshimura first met in Japan in 1951, and their friendship for over two decades resulted in Japan Society’s current building in Manhattan. Since its opening, the building has continued to serve as the central platform for the interexchange of ideas, knowledge, and innovation between the U.S. and Japan within a global context. In 2011, the building was designated landmark status by the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission. When Practice Becomes Form: Carpentry Tools from Japan explores the connections between techniques, tools, and forms from traditional practices in Japanese carpentry and contemporary design perspectives. Paying homage to Japan Society’s building, where the arts and cultures of Japan and the United States intersect, this exhibition delves into the artistry and craftsmanship of architectural practice. Complementing the exhibition is a series of related public programs, including lectures, a hands-on workshop, and gallery tours. A digital publication illustrated and designed by Nathan Antolik further expands upon the exhibition. This exhibition is organized by Japan Society in collaboration with Takenaka Carpentry Tools Museum, Japan. The exhibition design is by Sou Fujimoto, in collaboration with Popular Architecture as local architect. About Sou Fujimoto Born in Hokkaido in 1971, Sou Fujimoto graduated from the Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering at Tokyo University and established Sou Fujimoto Architects in 2000. He has won several international competitions, including his recent 1st prize for the 2014 International Competition for the Second Folly of Montpellier, France ("L'Arbre Blanc"). In 2019, he was selected as the master architect for the Tsuda University Kodaira Campus Master Plan development. Among his notable projects are the annual summer pavilion for the Serpentine Gallery in London (2013)—the youngest architect to receive the commission; House NA in Tokyo (2012); Musashino Art University Museum & Library (2010); and House N (2008). In 2012, he was part of the Japanese team that won a Golden Lion award for Best National Participation at the Venice Architecture Biennale for their design of alternative housing concepts for homes destroyed by the 2011 tsunami. Most recently, he was selected as site producer for the 2025 World Exposition in Osaka, Japan. About Popular Architecture Brooklyn-based Popular Architecture combines simplicity with innovation across multiple scales ranging from master plans to buildings, interiors, and products. The firm is directed by Casey Mack, RA, LEED AP. After completing his M.Arch at Columbia, Mack worked with the Office for Metropolitan Architecture in Hong Kong and New York. He has taught urban design at the New York Institute of Technology and Passivhaus housing at Parsons School of Constructed Environments. Currently, with the support of the Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts, he is writing the book Digesting Metabolism: Artificial Land in Japan 1954-2202 (Hatje Cantz Verlag, 2021).
Renowned educator and author Gloria Ladson-Billings to present Georgia Southern 2021 Fries Lecture
Gloria Ladson-Billings, Ph.D., renowned pedagogical theorist, teacher educator and author, will present the 2021 Norman Fries Distinguished Lecture, hosted by Georgia Southern University’s College of Education. In her lecture, “Culturally Responsive Pedagogy: Educating Past Pandemics,” Ladson-Billings will discuss how pandemics provide opportunities for revisioning and reimagining culturally relevant teaching practices. She suggests that instead of “getting back to normal,” it is time to get on to new and more equitable ways of educating all students and creating a more democratic society. Ladson-Billings is the former Kellner Family Distinguished Professor of Urban Education in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction and faculty affiliate in the Department of Educational Policy Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She also served as the 2005-06 president of the American Educational Research Association (AERA). Ladson-Billings’ research examines the pedagogical practices of teachers who are successful with Black students. She also investigates critical race theory applications to education. She is the author of critically acclaimed books The Dreamkeepers: Successful Teachers of African American Children and Crossing Over to Canaan: The Journey of New Teachers in Diverse Classrooms, as well as numerous journal articles and book chapters. About Ladson-Billings Former editor of the American Educational Research Journal and a member of several editorial boards, Ladson-Billings’ work has won multiple scholarly awards including the H.I. Romnes Faculty Fellowship, the National Academy of Education/Spencer Postdoctoral Fellowship and the Palmer O. Johnson Outstanding Research Award. She is a 2018 recipient of the AERA Distinguished Research Award and was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2018. About the Norman Fries Distinguished Lectureship series The annual Norman Fries Distinguished Lectureship series began in 2001. It is funded by an endowment in honor of Norman Fries, founder of Claxton Poultry. In his more than 50 years of business, Fries built the company from a one-man operation into one of the largest poultry production plants in the U.S. Past Fries lecturers include David Oreck of Oreck Vacuums, South African apartheid author and lecturer Mark Mathabane, NASA director James W. Kennedy, Pulitzer Prize-winning author and historian Gordon S. Wood, Nobel Prize laureate William D. Phillips, Ph.D., bestselling author Susan Orlean, concussion expert Dr. Russell Gore, and PricewaterhouseCoopers Network chief operating officer Carol Sawdye. The lecture will take place virtually via Zoom on Feb. 8 at 7 p.m. The event is free and open to the public. If you are a journalist looking to know more about the Norman Fries Distinguished Lectureship or would like to interview Gloria Ladson-Billings -- simply reach out to Georgia Southern Director of Communications Jennifer Wise at jwise@georgiasouthern.edu to set and time and date.
Last Friday, Georgia Southern officially opened its new Engineering and Research Building for students and researchers, a facility that will serve as the epicenter for engineering excellence and innovation in southeast Georgia. The building is designed to facilitate academic and institutional partnerships, inspire creative engineering and accelerate academic success for students in the College of Engineering and Computing. Through the instructional research labs and academic spaces that bridge theory and practice, students will be prepared to solve today’s challenges and to make tomorrow’s discoveries. “Today marks the culmination of years of forethought and investment from a number of state leaders, industry leaders and local advocates, who paved the way for us to be here,” said Georgia Southern President Kyle Marrero. “Leaders who, dating back to the 90s, could see the future of a growing industry, a state on the precipice of being a national leader in technology and innovation, and a critical need to develop talent in applied engineering across south Georgia.” The Engineering and Research Building’s sleek, contemporary environment defined by glass and natural light, soaring high-bay ceilings and modern, industrial feel is strengthened by new, industry-relevant equipment, instrumentation and technology that encourage active learning and sustainability. The highly efficient facility includes sustainable features that complements existing spaces on campus. The three-story building houses applied research spaces with a strong focus on manufacturing engineering, civil engineering, electrical and computer engineering, and mechanical engineering. The workspaces can be easily reconfigured for various uses, projects and applications and provide students with access to industry-grade equipment as well as expanded opportunities for undergraduate research. “The investment of the Engineering and Research Building solidifies Georgia Southern University’s commitment to students in providing a world-class education in the engineering field, while providing the space and resources necessary to facilitate such,” said student Kristifer Bell. “I am enthusiastic to continue my research work and look forward to the interdepartmental collaboration that will be encouraged through the housing of new student and faculty labs under one roof.” The full media release about this historic occasion is attached – and if you are a journalist looking to know more about this facility or Southern Georgia University -- simply reach out to Georgia Southern Director of Communications Jennifer Wise at jwise@georgiasouthern.edu to set and time and date.
Lockdown teleworking impacts productivity of women more than men
When the COVID-19 pandemic led countries all over the world to lock down their economies in early 2020, there was an unprecedented global shift to teleworking in white collar sectors. A trend that had been gathering traction was suddenly and exponentially accelerated and many of the world’s largest corporations, Google and Facebook among them, have announced plans allowing employees to work from home well into 2021 or indefinitely. Remote working not only appears to work, but it appears to have a number of advantages—savings in office maintenance costs and time spent commuting, not to mention enabling organizations to safeguard productivity when there’s a major shock or crisis. But is it all good news? Or good news for all? A new paper by Ruomeng Cui, assistant professor of information systems and operations management at Emory’s Goizueta Business School, reveals an important drop in the productivity of female academics around the world in the wake of the COVID-19 lockdowns. In fact, in the ten weeks following the initial lockdown in the United States, their productivity fell by a stunning 13.9 percent relative to that of male colleagues. And it’s likely to do with the disproportionate burden of responsibility for household needs and childcare that persistently falls on women, Cui said. “We know that gender inequality persists both in the workplace and at home, and we were curious to see how the lockdown scenario would attenuate or exacerbate the situation for women,” Cui said. Anecdotal evidence from her own field—academia—showed that in the weeks following the stay at home mandate in March, there was an upswing of around 20 to 30 percent of papers submitted to journals. However, the overwhelming majority of these were being authored by men. Intrigued, Cui teamed up with Goizueta doctoral student Hao Ding and Feng Zhu from Harvard Business School to conduct a systematic study of female academics’ productivity and output during this period. “We knew that the lockdown had disrupted life for everyone, including academics. With schools and kindergartens closed and people taking care of work and household obligations at home, we intuited that women would be affected more than men as they are disproportionately burdened with domestic and childcare duties,” Cui said. For female academics this would theoretically be particularly acute, as the critical thinking that goes into research calls for quiet, interruption-free environments. To put this to the test, Cui and her co-authors created a large data set covering all the new social science research papers produced by men and women, across 18 disciplines and submitted to SSRN, a research repository, between December 2018 to May 2019 and then from December 2019 to May 2020. From this set, they were able to extract information on titles, authors’ names, affiliations, and addresses to identify their countries and institutions, as well as faculty pages to distinguish between men and women. In total they collected just under 43,000 papers written by more than 76,000 authors in 25 countries. Looking at the data, Cui and her colleagues were able to compute the total number of papers produced by male and female academics each week and then compare the productivity of both before and after the start of the lockdown. Prior to the pandemic, the 2019 period showed no significant changes in productivity in either gender. But in the 10 weeks following the shock of lockdown, a clear gap emerges between men and women, with female academics’ productivity falling by just under 14 percent in comparison to their male colleagues. Interestingly the effect was more pronounced in top-ranked research universities. This is likely because top schools require faculty to publish research as the primary requisite for promotion, so men would be motivated to continue authoring papers before and after the lockdown. These findings lend solid, empirical clout to the notion that women do take a hit to productivity when care and work time are reorganized, Cui noted. “We see clearly that women are producing less work as a consequence of working from home. In the field of academia, that has huge implications as achieving a permanent position, or tenure, is generally linked to your research output,” she said. “So, there is a serious fairness issue there. If women are producing less because the burden of household responsibility is greater for them than for men, then you’re likely to see fewer female academics get tenure through no fault of their own.” Indeed, one of the other findings of the study shows that while productivity fell, the quality of female-authored research measured by downloads and citations did not. Then there’s the issue of teleworking and gender. With a significant proportion of the world’s white-collar organizations still working from home and unlikely to head back to the office any time soon—and as many schools and childcare facilities remain closed due to the pandemic—Cui is concerned that productivity as a measure of value and a marker of success might mean the odds are further stacked against women. And not just in academia. “We looked at universities in particular, but our findings can really be externalized to any other industry because the underlying issues here are universal. So, with remote working becoming normalized, I think there’s a real onus on organizations of every type to think about how to mitigate these unintended consequences,” she said. “There needs to be more thought about how we measure value or potential of employees.” Cui calls for organizations and institutions to consider these factors when they evaluate male and female workers in the present context and looking to the future. Among the kinds of proactive moves they might consider are to make training programs for male and female employees that explore fairness and encourage a more even distribution of responsibility in the home and for children. “There’s nothing to be gained in prioritizing productivity as a tool for evaluation and just giving women more time, say, to produce as much,” Cui warned. “You’re just left with the same scenario of women doing more than their fair share. Solving this issue is really much more about being aware of it, getting educated about it, and changing your mindset.” If you are a journalist looking to cover this research or speak with Professor Ciu about the subjects of telework and productivity, simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.
Exploring the direct link between drug abuse and the internet
Drug overdoses account for a staggering number of deaths in the United States. In 2017 alone, more than 70,000 U.S. citizens died from opioid overdoses, a number that eclipses the death toll due to traffic accidents, gun violence, or HIV in the same year. Among the academic community, media and national organizations such as the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), there is a growing consensus that the internet plays a key role in enabling access to illicit drugs in America. As far back as 2005, the DEA referred to the internet as an “open medicine cabinet; a help-yourself pill bazaar to help you feel good.” But until now, the jury has been out about whether online platforms actually drive substance abuse among internet users. Research by Anandhi Bharadwaj, vice dean for faculty and research and Roberto C. Goizueta Endowed Chair in Electronic Commerce, along with doctoral candidate Jiayi Liu 22PhD, casts compelling new light on this issue. Their paper, Drug Abuse and the Internet: Evidence from Craigslist, was published in March 2020. By using data from Craigslist, one of the largest online platforms for classified advertisements, the researchers found a significant uptick in drug abuse in areas where Craigslist had become active in the last decade or so. Launched in San Francisco in 1995, Craigslist is a location-specific site that has been spreading to different U.S. cities in a staggered fashion since 2000. As the site has grown, so too have the number of illicit, user behaviors that exist in tandem with the many positive services it offers. Among these are prostitution and the sale of controlled or illicit drugs. The internet: a pipeline for narcotics Historically the sale and purchase of illegal drugs has happened in physical spaces—streets and urban areas prone to certain boundaries and limitations, not to mention the risk of arrest or potential violence. The internet has changed the game in two key ways. First, there is the simple mechanism of buyer-seller matching. Dealers and buyers transact online, which is more straightforward, faster and cuts through many of the risks associated with physical interaction. Simply put, it’s easy to buy drugs online. Second, there is the issue of anonymity. Research has documented how human beings behave differently when we believe our identity is shielded from others. We are prone to take more risks under the cloak of anonymity. Working off these two premises, Bharadwaj and Liu hypothesized that the internet not only facilitates the sale and purchase of drugs—it must also proactively spur supply and demand. To put this to the test, they documented the U.S. cities and counties where Craigslist has become operational since 2000 and then analyzed three other key variables: total number of people admitted into drug treatment facilities in different counties between 1997 and 2008, county-level drug abuse violations, and number of deaths caused by overdose per county. Eager to understand how this new access to drugs online might also be impacting people at a demographic and socioeconomic level, the researchers merged this data with statistics on age, ethnicity and poverty from the U.S. Census Bureau. Additionally, the authors compiled information about income and unemployment, crime and arrests from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the FBI respectively. What they found was stunning. Not only is there a marked increase in drug-related treatments (14.9 percent), violations (5.7 percent) and deaths (6.0 percent) wherever Craigslist becomes operational in a city or county; the momentum of increasing drug abuse also continues to grow over time in that area. And that’s not all. Economic disadvantages—poverty, unemployment and lower standards of education—are typically associated with a higher risk of substance abuse. But the findings suggest that in fact it’s the wealthier, higher-educated groups—especially among whites, Asians, and women—that are more likely than others to engage in drug abuse once Craigslist starts operating in an area. In fact, they conclusively found an uptick in this kind of behavior where crime and drug abuse had been less prevalent previously. In other words, where drugs are becoming readily available online, there is a dramatic increase in new and first-time users. If you are interested in learning more or if you are a journalist looking to cover this research – then let our experts help. Professor Anandhi Bharadwaj is the Vice Dean for Faculty and Research and the Goizueta Endowed Chair in Electronic Commerce and Professor of Information Systems, Operations Management. To arrange an interview with – simply click on her icon today.
