Human Trafficking by the Numbers: The Initial Benchmark of Prevalence and Economic Impact for Texas

Prevalence HighlightsCurrently, there are approximately 79,000 minor and youth victims of sex trafficking in Texas.Currently, there are approximately 234,000 workers who are victims of labor trafficking in Texas.Currently, there arean estimated 313,000 victims of human trafficking in Texas.Cost HighlightsMinor and youth sex trafficking costs the state of Texas approximately $6.6 billion. Traffickers exploit approximately$600 million from victims of labor trafficking in Texas.BackgroundThough human trafficking is widespread in geographically large states with large urban centers like Texas, the true scope of this hidden crime is largely unconfirmed as data on human trafficking are difficult to ascertain. Existing data gathered in anti-trafficking efforts focus almost exclusively on identified victims, shedding light on only a fraction of the problem. The first phase of the Statewide Human Trafficking Mapping Project of Texas focused on providing empiricallygrounded data as a benchmark about the extent of human trafficking across the state. The following three primary research questions guided our data collection efforts, which included queries of existing databases, interviews, focus groups, and web-based surveys.1.What is the prevalence of human trafficking in Texas?2.What is the economic impact of human trafficking in Texas?3.What is our understanding of human trafficking in Texas?MethodsThe findings in this report were derived using a multi-methods approach to quantify the prevalence and economic impact of human trafficking in Texas. Higher-than-average risk industry and community segments were chosen for sex and labor markets. We defined community segments asgroups of people considered to be at higher-than-average risk of trafficking because of risk indicators found in trafficking cases (e.g. homelessness). More specifically, rather than attempting to establish prevalence of trafficking among the 27.4 million people living in Texas, for the purposes of demonstrating our methodology, establishing some benchmarks on human trafficking prevalence and economic impact estimates, and providing a concrete example of our planned activities moving forward, victimization rates were applied to a select few community segments that are at higher-than-average risk of trafficking.The methodology has addressed the critical industry and community segments to accurately estimate prevalencewhile reducing overlap between the chosen segments

Coupling and robustness of intra-cortical vascular territories

Vascular domains have been described as being coupled to neuronal functional units enabling dynamic blood supply to the cerebral cyto-architecture. Recent experiments have shown that penetrating arterioles of the grey matter are the building blocks for such units. Nevertheless, vascular territories are still poorly known, as the collection and analysis of large three-dimensional micro-vascular networks are difficult. By using an exhaustive reconstruction of the micro-vascular network in an 18 mm 3 volume of marmoset cerebral cortex, we numerically computed the blood flow in each blood vessel. We thus defined arterial and venular territories and examined their overlap. A large part of the intracortical vascular network was found to be supplied by several arteries and drained by several venules. We quantified this multiple potential to compensate for deficiencies by introducing a new robustness parameter. Robustness proved to be positively correlated with cortical depth and a systematic investigation of coupling maps indicated local patterns of overlap between neighbouring arteries and neighbouring venules. However, arterio-venular coupling did not have a spatial pattern of overlap but showed locally preferential functional coupling, especially of one artery with two venules, supporting the notion of vascular units. We concluded that intra-cortical perfusion in the primate was characterised by both very narrow functional beds and a large capacity for compensatory redistribution, far beyond the nearest neighbour collaterals

Police Knowledge Exchange: Full Report 2018

[Executive Summary] This report was commissioned to explore the enablers and barriers to sharing within and between police forces and between police forces and partners, including the public. This was completed from an interdisciplinary review of international literature covering sharing, knowledge exchange, learning and organisational learning. The literature broke down into four main factors; who, why, what and how. An introduction to the literature is presented with ‘Who’ is sharing which considers both personal identity and different institutional issues. The ‘Why’ literature covers issues of cultural and community motivators and barriers. The ‘What’ segment reviews concepts of data, information and knowledge and related legislative issues. Finally, the ‘how’ section spans face to face sharing approaches to technologies that produce both enablers and barriers. A series of 42 in-depth interviews and focus groups were completed and combined with 47 survey responses . The aim of the interviews, focus groups and survey was to show perceptions and beliefs around knowledge sharing from a small sample across policing in order to complement the findings from the literature review. The survey was adapted from a standardised questionnaire (Biggs, 1987). The Biggs questionnaire focused on what motivated students to learn and how they approached their learning. Our adapted survey looked at what motivated police to share, and how they approached sharing. The responses showed a trend, across the police, towards a motivation for sharing to develop a deeper understanding of issues. However, the approaches and the strategies they used to share with others, which were primarily driven by achieving and surface approaches (to get promoted and get the job done). According to Biggs (1987) this could leave them discontented as they never progress to a deeper understanding of issues. Scaffolding sharing within the police through processes that are clearly defined, effective and valued could help to overcome these issues. Within the interviews and focus group findings a similar structured approach to sharing was adopted. Within the ‘who’ section some key aspects around personal relationships, reciprocity and reputation were identified. The ‘why’ the police share was one of the largest discussion points. Not only was there a deep motivation to solve key policing issues there was an approach of reciprocity. Police sharing was deeply motivated to support ‘good practice’ in the prevention and detection of crime. However, a sharing barrier was identified in the parity of value given to different types of knowledge for example between professional judgement and research evidence knowledge. Sharing was achieved when there were reciprocal benefits, in particular with personal networks or face to face sharing which was noted as ‘safe’. Again, this was inhibited by misunderstandings around the ‘risks’ of sharing, frequently attributed to data protection legislation; producing cautious reactions and as an avoidance tactic to save time and effort sharing. However, a divide was noted between technical users and those who avoided any online systems for sharing; often due to poorly designed systems and a lack of confidence in how to use systems. The police culture was identified as being risk-adverse, and competitive due to multiple factors, a lack of supported time to share, Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) reviews and promotion criteria. The result was perceived to be a poor cultural ability to learn from mistakes and a likelihood to repeat errors. A set of strategic recommendations are given and include the use of a sharing authorised professional practice for HMIC reviews, sharing networks and training. A further set of operational recommendations are given such as; sharing impact cases for evidence based practice, data sharing officers and evaluating mechanisms for sharing. This full report is supported by the Police Knowledge Exchange Summary Report 2018 which gives an overview of the findings and recommendations

MARKET SEGMENTATION PRACTICES OF RETAIL CROP INPUT FIRMS

While market segmentation and the associated idea of target marketing are not new, there are questions about how the strategy of market segmentation and target marketing is being used in retail agribusiness firms. Previous research has demonstrated that distinct groups of farmers/customers exist (Alexander). However, retail crop input firms tend to be of modest size and are geographically bound. Both lack of resources and confinement to a specific geographic market present challenges for successful implementation of a market segmentation/target marketing strategy (Stolp). In this study, market segmentation/target marketing practices were explored in two types of crop input retailers: independently owned and operated firms (9 firms) and agricultural cooperatives (11 firms). A number of questions related to market segmentation/target marketing strategy were assessed via a web-based survey and telephone interviews. Referencing Best's seven-step framework, market segmentation is compared and contrasted by firm type; gaps in market segmentation strategy execution are identified; and challenges to implementing a market segmentation strategy are considered. Results show that market segmentation/target marketing was employed by 85% of the crop input retailers in the sample. Key gaps identified in market segmentation strategy execution include measuring market segment attractiveness; evaluating market segment profitability; developing a product-price positioning strategy for a tailored offering; expanding the positioning strategy to include promotional and sales elements of the marketing-mix; and evaluating the progress/success with each target market segment. Addressing these key gaps will aid industry professionals as they work to serve the needs of a continuously evolving farmer/customer base.market segmentation, target marketing, crop inputs, distribution channel, retailer

Genesis and pathogenesis of the 1918 pandemic H1N1 influenza A virus

The source, timing, and geographical origin of the 1918–1920 pandemic influenza A virus have remained tenaciously obscure for nearly a century, as have the reasons for its unusual severity among young adults. Here, we reconstruct the origins of the pandemic virus and the classic swine influenza and (postpandemic) seasonal H1N1 lineages using a host-specific molecular clock approach that is demonstrably more accurate than previous methods. Our results suggest that the 1918 pandemic virus originated shortly before 1918 when a human H1 virus, which we infer emerged before ∼1907, acquired avian N1 neuraminidase and internal protein genes. We find that the resulting pandemic virus jumped directly to swine but was likely displaced in humans by ∼1922 by a reassortant with an antigenically distinct H1 HA. Hence, although the swine lineage was a direct descendent of the pandemic virus, the post-1918 seasonal H1N1 lineage evidently was not, at least for HA. These findings help resolve several seemingly disparate observations from 20th century influenza epidemiology, seroarcheology, and immunology. The phylogenetic results, combined with these other lines of evidence, suggest that the highmortality in 1918 among adults aged ∼20 to ∼40 y may have been due primarily to their childhood exposure to a doubly heterosubtypic putative H3N8 virus, which we estimate circulated from ∼1889–1900. All other age groups (except immunologically naive infants) were likely partially protected by childhood exposure to N1 and/or H1-related antigens. Similar processes may underlie age-specific mortality differences between seasonal H1N1 vs. H3N2 and human H5N1 vs. H7N9 infections

Market Segmentation Practices of Retail Crop Input Firms

The farmers targeted by crop input retailers may be divided into distinct groups or segments, but retail crop input firms vary in their ability to implement strategies to serve individual segments. In this study, segmentation practices among cooperatives and independently owned crop input retailers were explored. Addressing gaps between Best’s seven-step market segmentation framework and retailer practices will help practitioners serve evolving farmer-customers.market segmentation, target marketing, crop inputs, distribution channel, retailer, Marketing, Q10, Q13,