In light of growing concerns about sustainable development, international sustainability standards are prevalent and are replicated by local governments to form country-specific sustainability standards. A consensus has been reached that local sustainability standards can be considered to underperform in view of their limited adoption. Supplementing the current literature, this study hypothesizes additional explanations of this phenomenon through a review of both the GlobalGAP (international) and Malaysian Good Agricultural Practices (MyGAP) standards. Through content analysis, the findings indicate that MyGAP provides a weak institutional framework and market opportunity structure. In addition, since it lacks transparency and accountability, its credibility is questionable. Although it is not clear whether such a credibility issue has a direct impact on the local market, sustainable produce is neither differentiated nor rewarded through premiums. The GlobalGAP standard was found to be an exemplar, and potential improvements are suggested to help support local sustainability standards.

No abstract

Theranostics involves finding the biomarkers of a disease, fighting them through site specific drug delivery and following them for prognosis of the disease. Microneedle array technology has been used for drug delivery and extended for continuous monitoring of analytes present in the skin compartment. We envisage the use of microneedle arrays for future theranostic applications. The potential of combining microneedle array‐based drug delivery and diagnostics as part of closed‐loop control system for the management of diseases and delivery of precision drugs in individual patients is reported in this paper.

The ability to enhance environmental performance has emerged as a pivotal corporate strategy for businesses in Malaysia. While the ISO 14001:2015 has been promoted extensively by the Malaysian Department of Standards, its adoption remains low and at a slow pace. There is scarce research to demonstrate the linkage between environmental knowledge, the implementation of life cycle management tools and environmental performance. Therefore, the first aim of this study is to assess the different knowledge levels of respondents on ISO 14001:2015 and four assessment methodologies (i.e., Life Cycle Assessment, Carbon Footprint, Water Footprint, and Material Flow Cycle Accounting). The second aim is to determine whether these knowledge bases contribute to the firms’ environmental performance. A total of 157 ISO-certified firm owners responded to the self-administered questionnaires. A One-Way ANOVA test revealed a difference in knowledge levels, with Life Cycle Assessment having the highest score and Material Flow Cycle Accounting having the lowest. Multiple regression revealed ISO 14001, Material Flow Cycle Accounting, and Carbon Footprint knowledge to contribute to environmental performance significantly. Counterintuitively, Life Cycle Assessment and Water Footprint exerted no significance on environmental performance. Policy implications include information dissemination and training by governmental officials for firm owners and exposure to life cycle management tools.

No abstract