Miscommunicating ideas: some key lessons for risk management.

This PhD submission consists of twelve articles and six reviews published over the period 1999 to 2007, together with a context statement that seeks to draw out the dominant themes, methodologies and results of my research. Essentially, I have examined the impact on the risk management of certain areas in science and security, of two significant trends that emerged and merged within contemporary society over the last 25 years. These are; processes of 'individuation' and of lde-politicisation'. Together, they have helped shape a new culture for policy-making and communication in most fields which, I suggest, has adverse consequences. 'Individuation' refers to the gradual breakdown of social bonds of solidarity and community which, while hardly new in capitalist society, accelerated in their reach and consequence over this period. Individuals isolated from strong social networks are ultimately weak. 'De-politicisation' refers to the loss of interest and participation in mainstream politics, which has also been widely noted and commented upon. This reached new heights (or lows) in the current period, and is distinct from the 'politicisation’ of both science and security. These themes are explored further elsewhere, but it is my contention that their convergence has led to the creation of a new culture of risk management and communication which I have sought to critique. My research, presented in the accompanying papers, has utilised a diverse set of methodological approaches, focusing primarily on the reinterpretation of existing data and analysis through a series of case-studies. Intelligence, in both the general sense and in the world of security, consists of a combination of information and interpretation. My purpose here has been to present an alternative framework for contemporary debates. My work has revealed the impact of these key processes and the new culture and identities - vulnerable victims and assertive advocates - that have been created by them. I have examined numerous manifestations and limitations of these. My articles confirm the rise of a culture more worried over possibilities than probabilities. The precautionary principle in science and pre-emptive action in relation to perceived security threats are examples of this. I conclude by noting that this has led to society being reorganised around risk. By miscommunicating risk - to connect with isolated individuals - politicians and officials will further exacerbate the trends identified above. By implication, I point to the possibility of an alternative - a debate about risks that maintains a sense of perspective and proportion, thereby rekindling the social bonds that generate confident individuals and purposeful politics

Scientists advise, ministers decide?:The role of scientific expertise in UK policymaking during the coronavirus pandemic

COVID-19 has been a transformational crisis, uprooting everyday lives and causing some of the most significant health, social, and economic challenges in recent memory. Similarly, coronavirus has also forced significant political change, refocusing attention on politics and policymaking structures during a time of crisis. This shift is exemplified by scientific advisers’ role at the forefront of governmental decision-making. Scientific advice has provided vital knowledge and insight into the government’s pandemic responses.However, the coronavirus pandemic has also highlighted the complex nature of combining science with politics, as well as the difficulties involved in distinguishing between expert advice and political or moral choices. Such complexity warrants a reconsideration of science’s impact on policymaking. Namely, from a long-term view, the growth of governmental experts started well before the coronavirus pandemic. Partly, this proliferation is driven by a desire to improve policymaking, given that there is a clear need to effectively consult, consider, and act on the advice of experts in all fields of government.Nevertheless, societal changes like a declining trust in government also mean that expert advice can increasingly be used as a tool to legitimate or depoliticise debates. Considering the complexity of fighting a global pandemic, this belies that advice must be effectively scrutinised within broader contextual or operational considerations – a government cannot simply ‘follow the science’. Coronavirus highlights the need for a renewed focus on the interplay of expertise and policymaking, considering who, why, and on what basis governments are advised – as well as what lessons they draw from it

ANSYS HFSS as a new numerical tool to study wave propagation inside anisotropic magnetized plasmas in the Ion Cylotron Range of Frequencies

The paper demonstrates the possibility to use ANSYS HFSS as a versatile simulating tool for antennas facing inhomogeneous anisotropic magnetized plasmas in the Ion Cyclotron Range of Frequencies (ICRF). The methodology used throughout the paper is first illustrated with a uniform plasma case. We then extend this method to 1D plasma density profiles where we perform a first benchmark against the ANTITER II code. The possibility to include more complex phenomena relevant to the ICRF field in future works like the lower hybrid resonance, the edge propagation of slow waves, sheaths and ponderomotive forces is also discussed. We finally present a 3D case for WEST and compare the radiation resistance calculated by the code to the experimental data. The main result of this paper - the implementation of a cold plasma medium in HFSS - is general and we hope it will also benefit to research fields besides controlled fusion.Comment: 15 pages, 14 figure