Filtering by
- All Subjects: Sustainability
- All Subjects: Resilience
In a healthcare system already struggling with burnout among its professionals, the COVID-19 pandemic presented a barrage of personal and occupational strife to US healthcare workers. Structural and everyday discrimination contributed to the health inequities of people of color in the US, exacerbated by COVID-19-related racism and xenophobia. There is little research regarding the effects of COVID-19 and related and/or concurring discrimination upon minority nursing staff, despite their importance in supporting the diverse American patient population with culturally competent, tireless care amid the pandemic. This cross-sectional survey study aimed to examine 1) the relationships between discrimination, social support, resilience, and quality of life among minority nursing staff in the US during COVID-19, and 2) the differences of discrimination, social support resilience, and quality of life among minority nursing staff between different racial/ethnic groups during COVID-19. The sample (n = 514) included Black/African American (n = 161, 31.4%), Latinx/Hispanic (n = 131, 25.5%), Asian (n = 87, 17%), Native American/Alaskan Native (n = 69, 13.5%), and Pacific Islander (n = 65, 12.7%) nursing staff from 47 US states. The multiple regression results showed that witnessing discrimination was associated with a lower quality of life score, while higher social support and resilience scores were associated with higher quality of life scores across all racial groups. Furthermore, while participants from all racial groups witnessed and experienced discrimination, Hispanic/Latinx nursing staff experienced discrimination most commonly, alongside having lowest quality of life and highest resilience scores. Native American/Alaskan Native nursing staff had similarly high discrimination and low quality of life, although low resilience scores. Our findings suggest that minority nursing staff who have higher COVID-19 morbidity and mortality rates (Hispanic/Latinx, Native American/Alaskan Native) were left more vulnerable to negative effects from discrimination. Hispanic/Latinx nursing staff reported a relatively higher resilience score than all other groups, potentially attributed to the positive effects of biculturality in the workplace, however, the low average quality of life score suggests a simultaneous erosion of well-being. Compared to all other groups, Native American and Alaskan Native nursing staff’s low resilience and quality of life scores suggest a potential compounding effect of historical trauma affecting their well-being, especially in contrast to Hispanic/Latinx nursing staff. This study has broader implications for research on the lasting effects of COVID-19 on minority healthcare workers’ and communities’ well-being, especially regarding Hispanic/Latinx and Native American/Alaskan Native nursing staff.
Three dilemmas plague governance of scientific research and technological
innovation: the dilemma of orientation, the dilemma of legitimacy, and the dilemma of control. The dilemma of orientation risks innovation heedless of long-term implications. The dilemma of legitimacy grapples with delegation of authority in democracies, often at the expense of broader public interest. The dilemma of control poses that the undesirable implications of new technologies are hard to grasp, yet once grasped, all too difficult to remedy. That humanity has innovated itself into the sustainability crisis is a prime manifestation of these dilemmas.
Responsible innovation (RI), with foci on anticipation, inclusion, reflection, coordination, and adaptation, aims to mitigate dilemmas of orientation, legitimacy, and control. The aspiration of RI is to bend the processes of technology development toward more just, sustainable, and societally desirable outcomes. Despite the potential for fruitful interaction across RI’s constitutive domains—sustainability science and social studies of science and technology—most sustainability scientists under-theorize the sociopolitical dimensions of technological systems and most science and technology scholars hesitate to take a normative, solutions-oriented stance. Efforts to advance RI, although notable, entail one-off projects that do not lend themselves to comparative analysis for learning.
In this dissertation, I offer an intervention research framework to aid systematic study of intentional programs of change to advance responsible innovation. Two empirical studies demonstrate the framework in application. An evaluation of Science Outside the Lab presents a program to help early-career scientists and engineers understand the complexities of science policy. An evaluation of a Community Engagement Workshop presents a program to help engineers better look beyond technology, listen to and learn from people, and empower communities. Each program is efficacious in helping scientists and engineers more thoughtfully engage with mediators of science and technology governance dilemmas: Science Outside the Lab in revealing the dilemmas of orientation and legitimacy; Community Engagement Workshop in offering reflexive and inclusive approaches to control. As part of a larger intervention research portfolio, these and other projects hold promise for aiding governance of science and technology through responsible innovation.
Quantum resilience makes two very important claims. First, resilience cannot be characterized without recognizing both the system and the valued function it provides. Second, resilience is not about disturbances, insults, threats, or perturbations. To avoid crippling infinities, characterization of resilience must be accomplishable without disturbances in mind. In light of this, quantum resilience defines resilience as the extent to which a system delivers its valued functions, and characterizes resilience as a function of system productivity and complexity. System productivity vis-à-vis specified “valued functions” involves (1) the quanta of the valued function delivered, and (2) the number of systems (within the greater system) which deliver it. System complexity is defined structurally and relationally and is a function of a variety of items including (1) system-of-systems hierarchical decomposition, (2) interfaces and connections between systems, and (3) inter-system dependencies.
Among the important features of quantum resilience is that it can be implemented in any system engineering tool that provides sufficient design and specification rigor (i.e., one that supports standards like the Lifecycle and Systems Modeling languages and frameworks like the DoD Architecture Framework). Further, this can be accomplished with minimal software development and has been demonstrated in three model-based system engineering tools, two of which are commercially available, well-respected, and widely used. This pragmatic approach assures transparency and consistency in characterization of resilience in any discipline.
My first study investigates how the presence of private infrastructure, such as groundwater pumps, affects the provision of shared infrastructure, such as shared tanks or surface reservoirs. I examine whether formal institutions, such as water pricing instruments, may prevent under-provision of the shared tanks. My findings suggest that in the absence of rules that coordinate tank maintenance, the presence of private pumps will have a detrimental effect on system productivity and equality. On the other hand, the combination of a fixed groundwater fee and a location-based maintenance fee for tank users can improve system productivity and equality.
The second study examines the effect of power asymmetries between farmers, caused by informal institutions such as caste, on the persistence of political institutions that govern infrastructure provision. I examined the effect of policy tools, such as non-farm wage employment and informational interventions, on the persistence of two types of political institutions: self-governed and nested. Results suggest that critical regime shifts in political institutions can be generated by either intervening in formal institutions, such as non-farm wage employment, or informal institutions, such as knowledge transmission or learning mechanisms.
The third study investigates how bureaucratic and political corruption affect public good provision. I examine how institutional and environmental factors affect the likelihood of corruption and infrastructure provision. I demonstrate that cracking down on corruption is only beneficial when infrastructure provision is poor. I also show that bureaucratic wages play an important role in curbing extralegal transactions and improving infrastructure provision.