The research focuses on identifying the way in which Romanian universities managed to provide knowledge during the Coronavirus pandemic, when, in a very short time, universities had to adapt the educational process for exclusively online teaching and learning. In this regard, we analyzed students’ perception regarding online learning, their capacity to assimilate information, and the use of E-learning platforms. An online survey based on a semi-structured questionnaire was conducted. Data was collected from 762 students from two of the largest Romanian universities. The results of the research revealed that higher education institutions in Romania were not prepared for exclusively online learning. Thus, the advantages of online learning identified in other studies seem to diminish in value, while disadvantages become more prominent. The hierarchy of problems that arise in online learning changes in the context of the crisis caused by the pandemic. Technical issues are the most important, followed by teachers’ lack of technical skills and their teaching style improperly adapted to the online environment. However, the last place was assigned by students to the lack of interaction with teachers or poor communication with them. Based on these findings, research implications for universities and researchers are discussed.

This research focuses on teaching–learning behavior in the online environment under crisis conditions, such as those caused by COVID-19. Data were collected from 427 participants from Central and Eastern Europe and North and Central Asia. An integrative mixed method design was used, combining components of both qualitative and quantitative research. The research method used was the inquiry based on a semi-structured questionnaire, which combined closed items with open-ended and semi-structured interviews. The quantitative results revealed significant differences between professors and students regarding the self-reported adaptability level, creativity, need for help in online teaching–learning, and collaboration with colleagues for solving problems in the online teaching–learning medium. The opinions of professors do not differ from those of students regarding the advantages, disadvantages, vulnerable areas, and aspects of online education. Thematic analysis, used to analyze the qualitative data, emphasized the participants’ perceptions of online teaching–learning efficiency in crises. Based on the results, it was concluded that the aspects that need to become a priority in online education concern mainly the didactic quality of the learning experience.

The forest products industry is an important socioeconomic sector to many developing countries, both in terms of foreign exchange earnings and employment. In the case of Malaysia, the industry has been one of the fastest growing manufacturing sectors in the country, driven primarily by comparative advantages derived from factor inputs. However, with increasing competition from other cheaper producing nations particularly China and Vietnam, the Malaysian forest products industry is forced to transform and move along the value-chain through innovation and value-addition. Although the government has played a pivotal role in providing a broad policy framework to support value-adding and innovative activities, success on the ground has been limited. The creativity environment, which is plagued with by low-wage economy, coupled with limited network between research, market and industrial enterprises have stifled innovation within the industry. The lack of information and the poor quality human capital has also contributed to the limited innovation within the forest products industry in the country. Against this background, most innovation within the industry is confined to the realms of alternative raw materials, with minimal technological and design variations. Although extensive research and development activities are undertaken, the commercialization potential of the research outputs is limited due to being not market-driven. Inevitably, innovation in the forest products sector must be based on market-needs and must be driven through technological and design change in order to ensure long-term competitiveness.

Sustainable consumption refers to the choice, purchase, use, and disposal of goods so as to enable all people to meet their present and future objective needs. However, panic caused by the gradual onset of the pandemic had a considerable impact on the behavior of consumption and purchase of medication, and the question remains whether sustainable consumption still matters during a crisis or not. The present study aims to analyze whether the pandemic has influenced the behavior of medication use among residents of Brasov County amid panic caused by the virus and to determine the primary sources of information on methods of the prevention and treatment of health conditions. The study focusses on the differences between the two target groups, young people, and adults, considering three socio-demographic factors, such as age, gender, and background. The present research uses two methods of data collection: an interview with 5 doctors and a questionnaire with 543 respondents. This research draws attention to the fact that the behaviors of purchasing and consuming medication during the COVID-19 pandemic has changed due to the spreading of the new virus and the state of emergency, as well as with medication use becoming less sustainable. The results showed that adults were more engaged in the panic buying of medication compared to young people during the pandemic; however, in normal times, young people use more medication. Our study shows that females tend to consume more medicines than males. Moreover, they are more susceptible for seeking media guidance and following advice from the digital realm, because they avoid going to the doctor, especially during the COVID-19 period. Depending on the environment of residence, it was found that people in rural areas generally tend to consume more medication than those in urban areas. However, during the pandemic, the drug use of this category of population has decreased because they do not tend to self-medicate and avoid visiting the doctor because of the fear of becoming contaminated. The results of the research could help to establish measures in order to prevent the panic buying of self-medication and pharmaceuticals, both during pandemics and in normal times, because such behaviors can have negative effects on both health and the environment.

Background: The current pandemic has raised several ethical dilemmas, related to conducting real-time trials for new treatments or vaccines or with decisions such as accessibility to vaccines. Study Question: Should there be a prioritization of access to the vaccine based on ethical and objective criteria or should the access be done at random? Study Design: To determine the ethics and reality of rationing the accessibility to anti-COVID vaccine according to the official strategies. Data Sources: The study is based on the consultation of (1) scientific articles from international databases (Google Scholar, PubMed, ProQuest, and Clarivate), (2) public health documents, and (3) official information of various governments. Results: The analyzed documents revealed that a few similarities can be observed in European countries when it comes to the first categories of people who have received the vaccine: people living in care facilities and medical staff; it can also be seen that the vaccination plan was adopted by each country for the needs and characteristics of its population, the prioritization being done in 2–14 stages; some of them divided, in their turn, into subsequent substages. Most of the states subject to the analysis assigned the medical staff in the first stage, followed by those in the sectors ensuring the maintenance of essential services, afterward by the elderly or people with comorbidities, only later to expand to other social categories. Conclusions: Prioritization of vaccine administration is not only necessary, unavoidable, but also problematic both ethically and logistically, which should involve leaders in the field of public health, but also medical staff, regardless of their specialization. Prioritization of vaccination can not only have an impact on individual health (physical and emotional) but also on society from public health, economic, and sociocultural point of view.