Prioritizing Land and Sea Conservation Investments to Protect Coral Reefs

Background: Coral reefs have exceptional biodiversity, support the livelihoods of millions of people, and are threatened by multiple human activities on land (e.g. farming) and in the sea (e.g. overfishing). Most conservation efforts occur at local scales and, when effective, can increase the resilience of coral reefs to global threats such as climate change (e.g. warming water and ocean acidification). Limited resources for conservation require that we efficiently prioritize where and how to best sustain coral reef ecosystems

Network analysis of sea turtle movements and connectivity: A tool for conservation prioritization

This is the final version. Available on open access from Wiley via the DOI in this recordData availability statement: The data that support the findings of this study are available in the Supplementary Material of this article and Zenodo (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5898578). Details for all animals included in this study are provided in Appendices S1 and S2. Data used to create the spatial networks are listed in the Appendices S3 and S4. The geospatial files for all networks are available on the Migratory Connectivity in the Ocean Project website (https://mico.eco) and Dryad (https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.j3tx95xg9). Additional data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.Aim Understanding the spatial ecology of animal movements is a critical element in conserving long-lived, highly mobile marine species. Analyzing networks developed from movements of six sea turtle species reveals marine connectivity and can help prioritize conservation efforts. Location Global. Methods We collated telemetry data from 1235 individuals and reviewed the literature to determine our dataset's representativeness. We used the telemetry data to develop spatial networks at different scales to examine areas, connections, and their geographic arrangement. We used graph theory metrics to compare networks across regions and species and to identify the role of important areas and connections. Results Relevant literature and citations for data used in this study had very little overlap. Network analysis showed that sampling effort influenced network structure, and the arrangement of areas and connections for most networks was complex. However, important areas and connections identified by graph theory metrics can be different than areas of high data density. For the global network, marine regions in the Mediterranean had high closeness, while links with high betweenness among marine regions in the South Atlantic were critical for maintaining connectivity. Comparisons among species-specific networks showed that functional connectivity was related to movement ecology, resulting in networks composed of different areas and links. Main conclusions Network analysis identified the structure and functional connectivity of the sea turtles in our sample at multiple scales. These network characteristics could help guide the coordination of management strategies for wide-ranging animals throughout their geographic extent. Most networks had complex structures that can contribute to greater robustness but may be more difficult to manage changes when compared to simpler forms. Area-based conservation measures would benefit sea turtle populations when directed toward areas with high closeness dominating network function. Promoting seascape connectivity of links with high betweenness would decrease network vulnerability.International Climate Initiative (IKI)German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU

Proteomic analysis of the action of the Mycobacterium ulcerans toxin mycolactone: targeting host cells cytoskeleton and collagen

Buruli ulcer (BU) is a neglected tropical disease caused by Mycobacterium ulcerans. The tissue damage characteristic of BU lesions is known to be driven by the secretion of the potent lipidic exotoxin mycolactone. However, the molecular action of mycolactone on host cell biology mediating cytopathogenesis is not fully understood. Here we applied two-dimensional electrophoresis (2-DE) to identify the mechanisms of mycolactone's cellular action in the L929 mouse fibroblast proteome. This revealed 20 changed spots corresponding to 18 proteins which were clustered mainly into cytoskeleton-related proteins (Dync1i2, Cfl1, Crmp2, Actg1, Stmn1) and collagen biosynthesis enzymes (Plod1, Plod3, P4ha1). In line with cytoskeleton conformational disarrangements that are observed by immunofluorescence, we found several regulators and constituents of both actin- and tubulin-cytoskeleton affected upon exposure to the toxin, providing a novel molecular basis for the effect of mycolactone. Consistent with these cytoskeleton-related alterations, accumulation of autophagosomes as well as an increased protein ubiquitination were observed in mycolactone-treated cells. In vivo analyses in a BU mouse model revealed mycolactone-dependent structural changes in collagen upon infection with M. ulcerans, associated with the reduction of dermal collagen content, which is in line with our proteomic finding of mycolactone-induced down-regulation of several collagen biosynthesis enzymes. Our results unveil the mechanisms of mycolactone-induced molecular cytopathogenesis on exposed host cells, with the toxin compromising cell structure and homeostasis by inducing cytoskeleton alterations, as well as disrupting tissue structure, by impairing the extracellular matrix biosynthesis.The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Community's Seventh Framework Program (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement Nu 241500 (BuruliVac), from Fundacao Calouste Gulbenkian and from Projeto Estrategico - LA 26 - 2013-2014 (PEst-C/SAU/LA0026/2013). JBG, TGM and AGF had a personal grant from the Portuguese Science and Technology Foundation (FCT) (SFRH/BD/33573/2009, SFRH/BD/41598/2007 and SFRH/BPD/68547/2010, respectively). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript

Wellbeing indicators affecting female entrepreneurship in OECD countries

[EN] The objective of this research is to know which wellbeing indicators, such as work-life balance, educational level, income or job security, are related to the rate of female entrepreneurship in 29 OECD countries. In addition, these countries have been classified according to the motivation of the entrepreneur either by necessity or by opportunity. The empiric study is focused on 29 OECD countries covering the different geographic areas (Western Europe, Central and Eastern Europe, Middle East, etc.) Due to the fact that the sample is relatively small, it is essential to use a selective approach when selecting the causal conditions. To this end, fsQCA is the most appropriate methodology for such a small data set. A total of 5 variables have been used: an independent variable (female TEA ratio), and four dependent variables (work life balance, educational level, sustainable household income and job security). Data measuring female TEA ratio have been obtained from Global Entrepreneur Monitor (GEM in Global report, 2015) data base, while data measuring wellbeing dimensions were taken from the Better Life Index (OECD in How¿s life? Measuring wellbeing, 2015. http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org). The results of this piece of research show that countries with high sustainable household income together with high level of education achieves high female entrepreneurship ratio with both, a good work-life balance (despite of a high unemployment probability), or a high labour-personal imbalance (in this latter, with a low probability of unemployment).This work has been funded by the R + D project for emerging research groups with reference (GVA) GV/2016/078.Ribes-Giner, G.; Moya Clemente, I.; Cervelló Royo, RE.; Perelló Marín, MR. (2019). Wellbeing indicators affecting female entrepreneurship in OECD countries. Quality & Quantity. 53(2):915-933. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-018-0796-4S915933532Ahl, H., Nelson, T.: How policy positions women entrepreneurs: a comparative analysis of state discourse in Sweden and the United States. J. Bus. Ventur. 30(2), 273–291 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2014.08.002Andersson, P.: Happiness and health: wellbeing among the self-employed. J. Socio-Econ. 37(1), 213–236 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2007.03.003Bardasi, E., Sabarwal, S., Terrell, K.: How do female entrepreneurs perform? Evidence from three developing regions. Small Bus. Econ. 37(4), 417–441 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-011-9374-zBergheim, S., Schneider, S., Giesel, B., Walter, N.: Measures of Wellbeing. There is More to it Than GDP. Deutsche Bank Research, Frankfurt (2006)Berglund, H.: Between cognition and discourse: phenomenology and the study of entrepreneurship. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 21(3), 472–488 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-12-2013-0210Bianchi, M., Parisi, V., Salvatore, R.: Female entrepreneurs: motivations and constraints. An Italian regional study. Int. J. Gend. Entrep. 8(3), 198–220 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1108/IJGE-08-2015-0029Bittencourt Marconatto, D.A., Barin-Cruz, L., Pozzebon, M., Poitras, J.E.: Developing sustainable business models within BOP contexts: mobilizing native capability to cope with government programs. J. Clean. Prod. 129, 735–748 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.038Boarini, R., Comola, M., Smith, C., Manchin, R., de Keulenaer, F.: What makes for a better life? The determinants of subjective well-being in OECD countries—evidence from the Gallup World Poll. OECD statistics working papers, 2012(3), 0_1 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1787/5k9b9ltjm937-enBoarini, R., D’Ercole, M.M.: Going beyond GDP: an OECD perspective. Fisc. Stud. 34(3), 289–314 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5890.2013.12007.xBradshaw, J., Hoelscher, P., Richardson, D. (eds.): Comparing child well-being in OECD countries: Concepts and methods. Innocenti working paper, IWP-2006-03. UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, Florence, Italy (2007)Brindley, C.: Barriers to women achieving their entrepreneurial potential. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. Emerald Group Publishing Limited (2005). Retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/13552550510590554Burke, A.E., Fitzroy, F.R., Nolan, M.A.: What makes a die-hard entrepreneur? Beyond the “employee or entrepreneur” dichotomy. Small Bus. Econ. 31(2), 93–115 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-007-9086-6Buttner, H.E., Moore, D.P.: Women’s organizational exodus to entrepreneurship: self-reported motivations and correlates with success. J. Small Bus. Manag. 35(1), 34–46 (1997). Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.comCarter, S.: The rewards of entrepreneurship: exploring the incomes, wealth, and economic wellbeing of entrepreneurial households. Entrep. Theory Pract. 35(1), 39–55 (2011)Castaño, M.-S., Méndez, M.-T., Galindo, M.Á.: The effect of social, cultural, and economic factors on entrepreneurship. J. Bus. Res. 68(7), 1496–1500 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.040Castellano, R., Musella, G., Punzo, G.: Structure of the labour market and wage inequality: evidence from European countries. Qual. Quant. 51(5), 2191–2218 (2017)Cervelló-Royo, R., Moya-Clemente, I., Ribes-Giner, G.: Microfinance Institutions (MFIs) in Latin America: Who should finance the entrepreneurial ventures of the less privileged? In: Peris-Ortiz, M., Sahut, J.-M. (eds.) New Challenges in Entrepreneurship and Finance, pp. 235–245. Springer, Cham (2015)Cervelló-Royo, R., Guijarro, F., Martinez-Gomez, V.: Social performance considered within the global performance of Microfinance Institutions: a new approach. Oper. Res. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-017-0360-3Chaaban, J., Irani, A., Khoury, A.: The composite global wellbeing index (CGWBI): a new multi-dimensional measure of human development. Soc. Indic. Res. 129(1), 465–487 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-1112-5Chapple, S.: Child wellbeing and sole-parent family structure in the OECD: an analysis. OECD. Social, employment, and migration working papers (82), 0_1 (2009)Christofides, L.N., Polycarpou, A., Vrachimis, K.: Gender wage gaps, “sticky floors” and “glass ceilings” in Europe. Labour Econ. 21, 86–102 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2013.01.003Cumming, D., Hou, W., Lee, E.: Sustainable and ethical entrepreneurship, corporate finance and governance, and institutional reform in China. J. Bus. Ethics 134(4), 505–508 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2381-7Cummins, R.A., Eckersley, R., Pallant, J., Van Vugt, J., Misajon, R.: Developing a national index of subjective wellbeing: the Australian Unity Wellbeing Index. Soc. Indic. Res. 64(2), 159–190 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024704320683De la Cruz Sánchez-Escobedo, M., Díaz-Casero, J.C., Díaz-Aunión, Á.M., Hernández-Mogollón, R.: Gender analysis of entrepreneurial intentions as a function of economic development across three groups of countries. Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 10(4), 747–765 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-014-0314-7Diener, E.: Subjective wellbeing. In: Diener, E. (ed.) The Sicence of Wellbeing, pp. 11–58. Springer, Dordrecht (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2350-6_2Dodge, R., Daly, A., Huyton, J., Sanders, L.: The challenge of defining wellbeing. Int. J. Wellbeing 2(3), 222–235 (2012). https://doi.org/10.5502/ijw.v2i3.4Fiss, P.C.: Building better casual theories: a fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research. Acad. Manag. J. 54(2), 393–420 (2011)Fleche, S., Smith, C., Sorsa, P.: Exploring determinants of subjective wellbeing in OECD countries (2011)Fleche, S., Smith, C., Sorsa, P.: Exploring determinants of subjective wellbeing in OECD countries evidence from the world value survey. Working papers, OECD Statistics (2012). https://doi.org/10.1787/5kg0k6zlcm5k-enFoley, A., Griffith, B.: Education, training and the promotion of high quality entrepreneurs in the Republic of Ireland. In: Scott, M.G., Rosa, P., Klandt, H. (eds.) Educating Entrepreneurs for Wealth Creation. Ashgate, Aldershot (1998)Garikipati, S.: Microcredit and women’s empowerment: through the lens of time-use data from rural India. Dev. Change 43(3), 719–750 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7660.2012.01780.xGEM (Global Entrepreneurship Monitor): Global report (2015)Harter, J.K., Schmidt, F.L., Keyes, C.L.M.: Wellbeing in the workplace and its relationship to business outcomes. A review of the Gallup studies. In: Keyes, C.L.M., Haidt, J. (eds.) Flourishing: The Positive Person and the Good Life, pp. 205–224. American Psychologi cal Association, Washington (2003)Henry, C., Foss, L., Ahl, H.: Gender and entrepreneurship research: a review of methodological approaches. Int. Small Bus. J. 34(3), 217–241 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242614549779Hessels, J., Van Gelderen, M., Thurik, R.: Entrepreneurial aspirations, motivations, and their drivers”. Small Bus. Econ. 31(3), 323–339 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-008-9134-xIezzi, D.F., Deriu, F.: Women active citizenship and wellbeing: the Italian case. Qual. Quant. 48(2), 845–862 (2014)Jansson, T.: Housing choices and labor income risk. J. Urban Econ. 99, 107–119 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2016.12.006Johansen, V., Foss, L.: The effects of entrepreneurship education—does gender matter? Int. J. Entrep. Small Bus. 20(3), 255–271 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1504/IJESB.2013.056889Judge, W.Q., Hu, H.W., Gabrielsson, J., Talaulicar, T., Witt, M.A., Zattoni, A., Kibler, B.: Configurations of capacity for change in entrepreneurial threshold firms: imprinting and strategic choice perspectives. J. Manag. Stud. 52(4), 506–530 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12121Kautonen, T., Kibler, E., Minniti, M.: Late-career entrepreneurship, income and quality of life. J. Bus. Ventur. 32(3), 318–333 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2017.02.005Kephart, P., Schumacher, L.: Has the “glass ceiling” cracked? An exploration of women entrepreneurship. J. Leadersh. Organ. Stud. 12(1), 2–15 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1177/107179190501200102Kirkwood, J.: Motivational factors in a push–pull theory of entrepreneurship. Gend. Manag. Int. J. 24(5), 346–364 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1108/17542410910968805Kobeissi, N.: Gender factors and female entrepreneurship: International evidence and policy implications. J. Int. Entrep. 8, 1–35 (2010). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-010-0045-yKuckertz, A., Berger, E.S.C., Allmendinger, M.P.: What drives entrepreneurship? A configurational analysis of the determinants of entrepreneurship in innovation-driven economies. Die Betriebswirtschaft/Bus. Adm. Rev. 75(4), 273–288 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781107415324.004La Placa, V., McNaught, A., Knight, A.: Discourse on wellbeing in research and practice. Int. J. Wellbeing 3, 116–125 (2013). https://doi.org/10.5502/ijw.v3i1.7Langowitz, N., Minniti, M.: The entrepreneurial propensity of women. Entrep. Theory Pract. 31(3), 341–364 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2007.00177.xLee, S.S.Y.: Examining policy configurations as conditions for long-term unemployment and non-standard employment in OECD countries using fuzzy-set analysis. Qual. Quant. 47(6), 3521–3536 (2013)Leffler, E., Svedberg, G.: Enterprise learning: a challenge to education? Eur. Educ. Res. J. 4(3), 219–227 (2005)Levie, J., Autio, E.: A theoretical grounding and test of the GEM model. Small Bus. Econ. 31(3), 235–263 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-008-9136-8Maccagnan, A., Wren-Lewis, S., Brown, H., Taylor, T.: Wellbeing and society: towards quantification of the co-benefits of wellbeing. Soc. Indic. Res. 1–27 (2018)Mandl, C., Berger, E.S.C., Kuckertz, A.: Do you plead guilty? Exploring entrepreneurs’ sensemaking-behavior link after business failure. J. Bus. Ventur. Insights 5, 9–13 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbvi.2015.12.002Martin, B.C., McNally, J.J., Kay, M.J.: Examining the formation of human capital in entrepreneurship: a meta-analysis of entrepreneurship education outcomes. J. Bus. Ventur. 28(2), 211–224 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2012.03.002McClelland, E., Swail, J., Bell, J., Ibbotson, P.: Following the pathway of female entrepreneurs. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 11(2), 84–107 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1108/13552550510590527Millán, J.M., Hessels, J., Thurik, R., Aguado, R.: Determinants of job satisfaction: a European comparison of self-employed and paid employees. Small Bus. Econ. 40(3), 651–670 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-011-9380-1Minniti, M., Nardone, C.: Being in someone else’s shoes: the role of gender in nascent entrepreneurship. Small Bus. Econ. 28(2–3), 223–238 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-006-9017-yMishra, V., Nielsen, I., Smyth, R.: How does relative income and variations in short-run wellbeing affect wellbeing in the long run? Empirical evidence from China’s Korean minority. Soc. Indic. Res. 115(1), 67–91 (2014)Murias, P., Martinez, F., de Miguel, C.: An economic wellbeing index for the Spanish provinces: a data envelopment analysis approach. Soc. Indic. Res. 77(3), 395–417 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-005-2613-4Naudé, W., Amorós, J.E., Cisti, O.: Surfeiting, the appetite may sticken: entrepreneurship and happiness. Small Bus. Econ. 42(3), 523–540 (2014)Ng, T.W.H., Feldman, D.C.: Re-examining the relationship between age and voluntary turnover. J. Vocat. Behav. 74(3), 283–294 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2009.01.004O’Connor, A.: A conceptual framework for entrepreneurship education policy: meeting government and economic purposes. J. Bus. Ventur. 28(4), 546–563 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2012.07.003Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD): OECD guidelines on measuring subjective well-being (2013)Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development: How’s Life? Measuring Wellbeing (2015). http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org . Accessed 28 May 2017Orlova, L.V., Sakhabieva, G.A., Vasyaycheva, V.A., Pronina, N.N.: Impact of educational attainment on the development of female entrepreneurship in Kazakhstan. Indian J. Sci. Technol. (2016). https://doi.org/10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i11/89427Osberg, L., Sharpe, A.: An index of economic wellbeing for selected OECD countries. Rev. Income Wealth 5(3), 291–316 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-4991.00056Osberg, L., Sharpe, A.: New Estimates of the Index of Economic Wellbeing for Selected OECD Countries, 1980–2007. Centre for the Study of Living Standards, Ottawa (2009)Parasuraman, S., Purohit, Y.S., Godshalk, V.M., Beutell, N.J.: Work and family variables, entrepreneurial career success, and psychological wellbeing. J. Vocat. Behav. 48(3), 275–300 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1996.0025Parasuraman, S., & Simmers, C.A.: Type of employment, work–family conflict and well-being: a comparative study. J. Organ. Behav.: Int. J Ind., Occup. Organ. Psychol. Behav. 22(5), 551–568 (2001)Patrick, C., Stephens, H., Weinstein, A.: Where are all the self-employed women? Push and pull factors influencing female labor market decisions. Small Bus. Econ. 46(3), 365–390 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-015-9697-2Poggesi, S., Mari, M., De Vita, L.: What’s new in female entrepreneurship research? Answers from the literature. Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 12(3), 735–764 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-015-0364-5Ragin, C.: The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. University of California Press, Berkeley (1987)Ragin, C.C.: New directions in comparative research. In: Kohn, M.L. (ed.) Cross-National Research in Sociology, pp. 57–76. Sage, Newbury Park (1989)Ragin, C.C.: Fuzzy-Set Social Science. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (2000)Ragin, Charles C., Sonnett, J.: Between complexity and parsimony: limited diversity, counterfactual cases, and comparative analysis. In: Ragin, Charles C. (ed.) Redesigning Social Inquiry. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (2004)Ragin, C.C.: Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond, vol. 240. University of Chicago Pres, Chicago (2008)Rahman, S.A., Amran, A., Ahmad, N.H., Taghizadeh, S.K.: Enhancing the wellbeing of base of the pyramid entrepreneurs through business success: the role of private organizations. Soc. Indic. Res. 127(1), 195–216 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-0951-4Renee Baptiste, N.: Tightening the link between employee wellbeing at work and performance. Manag. Decis. 46(2), 284–309 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740810854168Rey-Martí, A., Tur Porcar, A., Mas-Tur, A.: Linking female entrepreneurs’ motivation to business survival. J. Bus. Res. 68(4), 810–814 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.11.033Reynolds, P.D., Bygrave, W.D., Autio, E., Cox, L.W., Hay, M.: Global entrepreneurship monitor, 2002 executive report. London (2002)Ribes-Giner, G., Moya-Clemente, I., Cervelló-Royo, R., Perello-Marin, M.R.: Domestic economic and social conditions empowering female entrepreneurship. J. Bus. Res. 89, 182–189 (2018)Ruth Eikhof, D., Summers, J., Carter, S., Eikhof, D.R., Summers, J., Carter, S.: Women doing their own thing: media representations of female entrepreneurship. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 19(5), 547–564 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-09-2011-0107Sampedro Gallego, R., Camarero Rioja, L.: Female entrepreneurs in rural Spain—the failed subject of development. Rev. Int. Sociol. 65(48), 121–146 (2007)Saridakis, G., Marlow, S., Storey, D.J.: Do different factors explain male and female self-employment rates? J. Bus. Ventur. 29(3), 345–362 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2013.04.004Shepherd, D.A., Douglas, E.J., Shanley, M.: New venture survival: ignorance, external shocks, and risk reduction strategies. J. Bus. Ventur. 15(5), 393–410 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(98)00008-1Shepherd, D., Haynie, J.M.: Birds of a feather don’t always flock together: identity management in entrepreneurship. J. Bus. Ventur. 24(4), 316–337 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2007.10.005Shinnar, R.S., Hsu, D.K., Powell, B.C.: Self-efficacy, entrepreneurial intentions, and gender: assessing the impact of entrepreneurship education longitudinally. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 12(3), 561–570 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2014.09.005Shir, N.: Entrepreneurial Wellbeing: The Payoff Structure of Business Creation. Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm (2015)Thiem, A., Dusa, A.: QCA: a package for qualitative comparative analysis. R package version 2.0. R J. 5, 87–97 (2013). Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/QCA/index.htmlTorri, M.M.C., Martinez, A.: Women’s empowerment and micro-entrepreneurship in India: constructing a new development paradigm? Prog. Dev. Stud. 14(1), 31–48 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1177/1464993413504347Tur-Porcar, A., Mas-Tur, A., Belso, J.A.: Barriers to women entrepreneurship. Different methods, different results? Qual. Quant. 51(5), 2019–2034 (2017)Uy, M.A., Foo, M.Der, Song, Z.: Joint effects of prior start-up experience and coping strategies on entrepreneurs’ psychological wellbeing. J. Bus. Ventur. 28(5), 583–597 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2012.04.003Uy, M.A., Sun, S., Foo, M.Der: Affect spin, entrepreneurs’ wellbeing, and venture goal progress: the moderating role of goal orientation. J. Bus. Ventur. 32(4), 443–460 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2016.12.001Van der Sluis, J., Van Praag, M., Vijverberg, W.: Education and entrepreneurship selection and performance: a review of empirical literature. J. Econ. Surv. 22(5), 795–841 (2008)Verheul, I., Stel, A.Van, Thurik, R.: Explaining female and male entrepreneurship at the country level. Entrep. Reg. Dev. 18(2), 151–183 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1080/08985620500532053Witbooi, M., Ukpere, W.: Indigenous female entrepreneurship: analytical study on access to finance for women entrepreneurs in South Africa. Afr. J. Bus. Manag. 5(14), 5646–5657 (2011)Woodside, A.G., Bernal, P.M., Coduras, A.: The general theory of culture, entrepreneurship, innovation, and quality-of-life: comparing nurturing versus thwarting enterprise start-ups in BRIC, Denmark, Germany, and the United States. Ind. Mark. Manag. (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.11.00

Systematic review with meta-analysis of the epidemiological evidence relating smoking to COPD, chronic bronchitis and emphysema

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Smoking is a known cause of the outcomes COPD, chronic bronchitis (CB) and emphysema, but no previous systematic review exists. We summarize evidence for various smoking indices.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Based on MEDLINE searches and other sources we obtained papers published to 2006 describing epidemiological studies relating incidence or prevalence of these outcomes to smoking. Studies in children or adolescents, or in populations at high respiratory disease risk or with co-existing diseases were excluded. Study-specific data were extracted on design, exposures and outcomes considered, and confounder adjustment. For each outcome RRs/ORs and 95% CIs were extracted for ever, current and ex smoking and various dose response indices, and meta-analyses and meta-regressions conducted to determine how relationships were modified by various study and RR characteristics.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of 218 studies identified, 133 provide data for COPD, 101 for CB and 28 for emphysema. RR estimates are markedly heterogeneous. Based on random-effects meta-analyses of most-adjusted RR/ORs, estimates are elevated for ever smoking (COPD 2.89, CI 2.63-3.17, n = 129 RRs; CB 2.69, 2.50-2.90, n = 114; emphysema 4.51, 3.38-6.02, n = 28), current smoking (COPD 3.51, 3.08-3.99; CB 3.41, 3.13-3.72; emphysema 4.87, 2.83-8.41) and ex smoking (COPD 2.35, 2.11-2.63; CB 1.63, 1.50-1.78; emphysema 3.52, 2.51-4.94). For COPD, RRs are higher for males, for studies conducted in North America, for cigarette smoking rather than any product smoking, and where the unexposed base is never smoking any product, and are markedly lower when asthma is included in the COPD definition. Variations by sex, continent, smoking product and unexposed group are in the same direction for CB, but less clearly demonstrated. For all outcomes RRs are higher when based on mortality, and for COPD are markedly lower when based on lung function. For all outcomes, risk increases with amount smoked and pack-years. Limited data show risk decreases with increasing starting age for COPD and CB and with increasing quitting duration for COPD. No clear relationship is seen with duration of smoking.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The results confirm and quantify the causal relationships with smoking.</p