The Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV) Cross-Trial Statistics Group gathered lessons learned from statisticians responsible for the design and analysis of the 11 ACTIV therapeutic master protocols to inform contemporary trial design as well as preparation for a future pandemic. The ACTIV master protocols were designed to rapidly assess what treatments might save lives, keep people out of the hospital, and help them feel better faster. Study teams initially worked without knowledge of the natural history of disease and thus without key information for design decisions. Moreover, the science of platform trial design was in its infancy. Here, we discuss the statistical design choices made and the adaptations forced by the changing pandemic context. Lessons around critical aspects of trial design are summarized, and recommendations are made for the organization of master protocols in the future.

The United States Government (USG) public-private partnership “Accelerating COVID-19 Treatment Interventions and Vaccines” (ACTIV) was launched to identify safe, effective therapeutics to treat patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and prevent hospitalization, progression of disease, and death. Eleven original master protocols were developed by ACTIV, and thirty-seven therapeutic agents entered evaluation for treatment benefit. Challenges encountered during trial implementation led to innovations enabling initiation and enrollment of over 26,000 participants in the trials. While only two ACTIV trials continue to enroll, the recommendations here reflect information from all the trials as of May 2023. We review clinical trial implementation challenges and corresponding lessons learned to inform future therapeutic clinical trials implemented in response to a public health emergency and the conduct of complex clinical trials during “peacetime,” as well.

This manuscript addresses a critical topic: navigating complexities of conducting clinical trials during a pandemic. Central to this discussion is engaging communities to ensure diverse participation. The manuscript elucidates deliberate strategies employed to recruit minority communities with poor social drivers of health for participation in COVID-19 trials. The paper adopts a descriptive approach, eschewing analysis of data-driven efficacy of these efforts, and instead provides a comprehensive account of strategies utilized. The Accelerate COVID-19 Treatment Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV) public–private partnership launched early in the COVID-19 pandemic to develop clinical trials to advance SARS-CoV-2 treatments. In this paper, ACTIV investigators share challenges in conducting research during an evolving pandemic and approaches selected to engage communities when traditional strategies were infeasible. Lessons from this experience include importance of community representatives’ involvement early in study design and implementation and integration of well-developed public outreach and communication strategies with trial launch. Centralization and coordination of outreach will allow for efficient use of resources and the sharing of best practices. Insights gleaned from the ACTIV program, as outlined in this paper, shed light on effective strategies for involving communities in treatment trials amidst rapidly evolving public health emergencies. This underscores critical importance of community engagement initiatives well in advance of the pandemic.

Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV) was an extraordinary example of a public-private partnership (PPP) that brought together over thirty organizations and hundreds of individuals to address one of the most pressing global health needs in recent decades. In particular, ACTIV provided a key avenue for testing numerous therapeutics for their potential benefit in treating the SARS-CoV-2 virus or the resulting symptoms of acute COVID-19 infection. Given the speed and scale at which ACTIV designed and implemented master protocols across global networks that it was simultaneously working to create, the PPP can provide valuable lessons for best practices and avoiding pitfalls the next time the world is faced with a global pandemic of a novel pathogen. This report provides a general overview of the ACTIV partnership to set the stage and context for the subsequent articles in this issue that will relay these lessons learned.

Livestock farming is currently highly questioned and is considered by society to be one of the main precursors of climate change and innumerable environmental impacts. This social concern has marked a trend in public policies in Europe, promoting strategies to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by controlling the carbon footprint of agri-food products. However, in certain regions, the perception of the main actors in the sector about the role that livestock farming plays in this fight against climate change and how new political trends point the way toward the sustainability of agrarian systems is still uncertain. In this study, the opinions of stakeholders of the agro-livestock sector on the role that extensive livestock farming plays in the current context of the fight against climate change and the demands for public policies to facilitate the adoption of mitigation practices were examined. A participatory research process through focus groups was used in this qualitative study. Specifically, five sessions were held at the beginning of 2022; the sessions were recorded, transcribed, and anonymized for further analysis. In these sessions, projective techniques were used, such as word association and sentence completion to understand stakeholders' perceptions of the role of extensive livestock farming in climate change. Brand mapping was conducted to determine the opinion on the profitability and GHG emissions of 10 livestock systems typical of the region and of eight quality labelling systems related to sustainability. Brainstorming was carried out to assess available practices for the adaptation of livestock farms and mitigation of climate change. Finally, there was an open debate regarding the demands for public aid for the implementation of mitigation practices. The word association technique identified concepts such as ‘Equilibrium’ in extensive livestock farming and concepts such as ‘Effects’, ‘Action’ and ‘Concern’ in climate change. For the term carbon footprint, the most mentioned concept was ‘ignorance’, and for common agricultural policy, the most mentioned term was ‘injustices’. The results of the brand mapping allowed us to determine the perception of the stakeholders regarding the profitability of the different extensive farm systems and on their GHG emissions, with the most extensive and traditional ones being perceived as the lowest emitters of gases but also the least profitable. For sustainable labels, stakeholders believed that labels contribute to profitability and lower GHG emissions. Strategies to adapt to climate change and reduce the impact of farms were focused on reforestation, grazing, and soil management, adjusting the livestock stocking rate and self-production of food on farms. The best mitigating practices proposed were the maintenance of the extensive livestock farming (4.69), improvement of accesses, livestock routes and roads (4.63), making and applying compost (4.50) and the simplified administrative procedures (5.00). In the prioritization of public aids, three categories were established based on the field of action: social/organizational measures (38 votes), economic measures (44 votes) and environmental measures (22 votes). The aid related to maintaining profitability and improving marketing, followed by aid to reduce bureaucracy and direct aid to extensive livestock farming, were identified as priorities. This study offers a detailed picture of how stakeholders in the agro-livestock sector see the role that extensive livestock farming plays in the fight against climate change. The best farm management practices and priority lines of public support that policy-makers can apply have been identified in this study and emanate directly from those who receive subsidies and make the decisions in their livestock farming to ensure their implementation more successful.

Between fifteen and twenty-five million Americans took to the streets in the summer of 2020 to march, mourn, occupy highways, clash with police, and be together in grief and rage. Municipal and state police forces responded with a national campaign of excessive force. Demonstrators were clubbed, tear gassed, sprayed with chemical agents, kettled and trampled, illegally detained, and mutilated by “less-than-lethal” munitions. Internal police reviews and municipal leaders blamed the violence on insufficient training but the scale and intensity of repression suggest a more profound democratic crisis surrounding the criminalization of dissent.

The extension of organic fertilizers helps improve soil quality and reduces non-point source pollution caused by excessive use of fertilizers, however, whether the application of organic fertilizers (OFA) contributes to an increase in farmers' income is a matter of debate. This paper discussed how the application of soil-testing formulas and outsourcing services that some or all links of agricultural production to professional organizations moderate the income-increasing effect of OFA, and Multinomial Endogenous Switching Regression Model (MESR) is selected to do the empirical test. The results indicate that OFA with soil-testing formula and OFA with outsourcing service can effectively increase farmers' income, in specific, OFA with soil-testing formula increases the net monetary income of wheat growing on per hectare (ha) of land by 2150 Renminbi (RMB), and OFA with outsourcing service increases the net monetary income of wheat growing on per ha of land by 3950 RMB, however, OFA has no effectiveness on increasing farmers' income if neither soil-testing formulas nor outsourcing services is available. The influence mechanism of OFA to improve farmers' income is to increase crop yield, but OFA has no effectiveness on increasing the price of products. A systematic extension services including the extension of organic fertilizers, soil testing formulas and outsourcing services should be formed in the future.

Pineda's book is an original and imaginative reconstruction of activist strategy and political theory, upending the orthodox account of civil disobedience during the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Against liberal and democratic theorists who domesticate civil disobedience in the United States, with the aim of legitimizing the nation's constitutional democracy as “nearly just,” or in need of reform rather than revolution, Pineda argues that civil rights activists “theorized and deployed” civil disobedience as “decolonizing praxis” (16). She traces the decades-long history in which Black activists in the United States crafted their strategy of civil disobedience through embodied spaces, relationships, and practices of “imaginative transit” with revolutionaries in India, South Africa, and Ghana. These networks of transit enabled activists to diagnose segregation and colonialism as sites of a “shared, global condition” (59) of white supremacy, “operating with a common, reinforcing logic” of economic, political, and psychological domination (89). As a decolonizing praxis, civil disobedience combined an “inward-facing politics” of self-emancipation with an “outward-facing politics” (16) of disruption and disclosure—aimed not at reforming aberrations in constitutional democracy, but at “transforming the psychological, structural, and relational bases of white supremacy” (59).

The additionality of forest conservation interventions is frequently questioned. In particular, they are often considered to be located in places where forests are not threatened, which points to the existence of location biases. Revisiting this location bias concept, we conceptually distinguish potential and effective additionality and theoretically consider how the objectives of the implementer affect the siting choice of the forest conservation interventions and their additionality. Our theoretical intuition is that the choices of the implementers are influenced by the quality of institutions. Our results show that (1) the implementer's objective and local institutions may lead the implementer to select a site with low development potential and low forest threat, and (2) the selection of a site with low development potential, which is frequently presented as a location bias, does not necessarily preclude additionality.

Coffee drinking has been associated with benefits for various health outcomes, with many attributed to the most prevalent family of polyphenols within coffee, chlorogenic acids (CGA). Whilst reviews of the association between coffee and cognition exist, evidence exploring effects of coffee-specific CGA on cognition has yet to be systematically synthesised. The purpose was to systematically review the current literature investigating the relationship between CGA from coffee and cognitive performance. A further objective was to undertake a meta-analysis of relevant randomised controlled trials (RCT). Observational and intervention studies were included if they considered coffee-based CGA consumption in human participants and applied a standardised measure of cognition. Furthermore, intervention studies were required to define the CGA content and include a control group/placebo. Studies were excluded if they examined CGA alone as an extract or supplement. A search of Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect and PsycINFO resulted in including twenty-three papers, six of which were interventions. The evidence from the broader systematic review suggests that CGA from coffee may need to be consumed chronically over a sustained period to produce cognitive benefits. However, the meta-analysis of RCT showed no benefits of coffee CGA intake on cognitive function (d = 0.00, 95% CI −0.05, 0.05). Overall, this review included a limited number of studies, the sample sizes were small, and a wide range of cognitive measures have been utilised. This indicates that further, good-quality interventions and RCT are required to systematically explore the conditions under which coffee CGA may provide benefits for cognitive outcomes.

While a growing number of refugees is in need of humanitarian protection, most states are reluctant to admit them. For more than two decades, scholars have thought to understand this intricate challenge of international governance through the prism of collective action theory and the concept of refugee protection as an international public good. However, the specific benefits that states gain from refugee protection and that are assumed to constitute the public good remain surprisingly vague and under-specified. In this Reflection, we make three contributions to address this issue. First, we take stock of the literature and assess the evolution of the collective action theory in asylum governance. Second, we identify and conceptualize legitimacy, security, reputation, and development as four types of benefits that states derive from refugee protection. Third, we discuss the limitations of the dominant rational-choice approach and contend that the nature of refugee protection in the international realm is the product of international and domestic politics based on the contestation of interests and norms. These insights result in a series of recommendations for future research of refugee protection as a collective action problem.