Less-Lethal Weapons, including electric Tasers, velocity-reduction bullet-capture projectiles, rubber bullets, beanbag rounds, and other less-lethal projectiles used in police departments, federal and local law enforcement agencies, and military policing operations, as well as for private use, are topics of significant debate in recent years. These weapons can reduce collateral damage, reputational risk, and legal exposure while preventing wrongful and unnecessary deaths caused by conventional bullet wounds. Yet, opponents have highlighted concerns regarding the safety and effectiveness of these weapons, as well as their potential to cause injury or even death. While the primary duty of law enforcement officials is to preserve order and execute the law while protecting individual rights, they ultimately achieve these goals by exercising their coercive authority. Society expects police officers to rely on their professional training and judgment when using physical force to defend citizens and themselves or to apprehend criminal suspects. Because police officers must occasionally participate in physical acts of coercion, it is unavoidable that some of these interactions may result in bodily injuries to individuals, including the officers themselves. These injuries have real costs, such as medical treatment, lost wages, municipal liability, court claims and settlements, riots, and legal or even criminal exposure, as well as less-tangible collateral costs, such as the erosion of police legitimacy and public trust, which are more difficult to quantify but arguably more influential in shaping long-term public perceptions than personal injuries alone. Less lethal technology eliminates some of the concerns raised by lethal weaponry. This study reviews the advantages and disadvantages of these less-lethal weapon technologies versus traditional firearms for use by the police force, federal agencies, and military police while also performing advanced analytics to model the valuation and return on investment for a law enforcement organization implementing such technologies.

The manufacturing sector must incorporate digitalization and greening as crucial strategies to attain high level of development in the context of the digital economy, given its significant role in quality of environment. Most of existing studies explore net effect of a single or several factors on the digitalization or greening in the manufacturing industry. Limited investigation has been done to integrate various factors impacting the connection and synchronized advancement of digitalization and greening within the manufacturing. Factors affecting the synergy of digitalization and green change within manufacturing are recognized in this article, and a theoretical framework is established to analyze. FsQCA tool is also put into use to survey configurational cases, which contains synergy degree of green digitalization from 30 provinces’ manufacturing in China. Results show that: (1) Between 2007 and 2020, the development level of digital-green integration in the manufacturing industry shows an upward trend. There are three types of collaborative modes, namely, "industrial robot driven" "market development driven" and "market development driven - industrial robot driven", with each mode consisting of at least one to four equivalent pathways. (2) The marketization level and application of industrial robots are the important external and internal pulling forces that drive the synergy degree of digitalization and green change within manufacturing industry, respectively.(3) The influencing factors of the collaborative mode choice of digital-green development within manufacturing industry are complementary, among which, the degree of marketization is similar to the role of industrial robots in the configuration, which are capable to weaken the negative impact from insufficient government R&D investment support under specific conditions; (4) The non-high collaborative state of digital green in manufacturing industry is mainly due to the low level of marketization, openness, and economic development, as well as the low application rate of industrial robots and software products. This study enriches the theoretical understanding on digitalization and green change of manufacturing industry. Meanwhile, it also provides insights to advance the integrated and synergistic advancement of digital green transformation in manufacturing practice.

The clean energy revolution is a global concern. Cross-border collaboration is crucial for sharing knowledge, pooling resources, and tackling complex challenges on a global scale. International partnerships can accelerate innovation by drawing on diverse knowledge and experience from different regions. Access to capital is a key driver of innovation and entrepreneurship in clean energy. Institutional investors and financial institutions increasingly recognize the potential for high returns from the clean energy sector. This research aimed to understand whether "dirty" energies, such as the Brent Crude Spot, WTI, FTSE 350 Oil, Gas & Coal, EURO STOXX Oil & Gas, influence the formation of sustainable energy prices, namely Geothermal Index, Solar Energy Index, NASDAQ OMX Bio Clean Fuels Index, Wind Energy Index, WilderHill Clean Energy Index, during the 2020 Covid-19 pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. When comparing the two sub-periods, the results show that the level of autocorrelation in price formation has increased, i.e., the mean rhoDCCA went from 32 to 45, the weak correlation coefficients without trend decreased from 30 to 19, and the anti-persistence has also decreased from 8 to 4. The strong rhoDCCA increased from 2 to 4; during the Tranquil period, the FTSE 350 / EURO STOXX Oil index pairs had a rhoDCCA of 0.76. While in the Stress subperiod, the NASDAQ OMX Bio / Solar Energy pairs had a slope of 0.70, and the FTSE 350 / EURO STOXX Oil indices had a rhoDCCA of 0.91. Evidence shows a notable dissociation between fossil energy prices and sustainable energy sources. This dissociation is characterized by various degrees of influence between fossil energy prices and sustainable energy indices, from low to moderate. This dissociation between fossil energy prices and sustainable energy prices suggests that investments in sustainable energy can offer diversification opportunities.