A Guide to SDG Interactions: from Science to Implementation

The report examines the interactions between the various goals and targets, determining to what extent they reinforce or conflict with each other. It provides a blueprint to help countries implement and achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Countries around the world are faced with a significant challenge: How can they reach the 17 SDGs – and 169 targets that sit underneath these goals – by 2030? The SDGs, which were adopted by the international community in 2015, cover a diverse range of issues including gender equity, sustainable cities, access to clean water, and good governance. It is a big, unwieldly, ambitious agenda that – if it is successfully implemented – could set the world on a course toward inclusive, sustainable development. The report proposes a seven-point scale to quantify these synergies and conflicts. The scale ranges from +3, which applies when one goal or target is very reinforcing of others, to -3, which applies when goals and targets conflict with each other. A score of 0 indicates neutral interaction. The report includes detailed analysis of four SDGs and their interactions with other goals: SDG2: Zero Hunger SDG3: Good Health and Well-being SDG7: Affordable and Clean Energy SDG14: Life below Wate

The African Open Science Platform: The Future of Science and Science for the Future

This document presents a draft strategy and makes the scientific case for the African Open Science Platform (AOSP). It is based on an expert group meeting held in Pretoria on 27-28 March 2018. Its purpose is to act as a framework for detailed, work on the creation of the Platform and as a basis for discussion at a stakeholder meeting to be held on 3-4 September 2018, which will lead to a definitive strategy for implementation from 2019. Expert group members at the March meeting were drawn from the following organisations: African Academy of Sciences (AAS), Academy of Science of South Africa (ASSAf), Committee on Data for Science and Technology (CODATA), International Council for Science (ICSU), National Research and Education Networks (NRENS), Research Data Alliance (RDA), South African Department of Science & Technology (DST) and National Research Foundation (NRF), Square Kilometre Array (SKA), UNESCO. The African Open Science Platform The Future of Science and Science for the Future 4 The African Open Science Platform. The Platform’s mission is to put African scientists at the cutting edge of contemporary, data-intensive science as a fundamental resource for a modern society. Its building blocks are: • a federated hardware, communications and software infrastructure, including policies and enabling practices, to support Open Science in the digital era; • a network of excellence in Open Science that supports scientists & other societal actors in accumulating and using modern data resources to maximise scientific, social and economic benefit. These objectives will be realised through seven related strands of activity: Strand 0: Register & portal for African & related international data collections & services. Strand 1: A federated network of computational facilities and services. Strand 2: Software tools & advice on policies & practices of research data management. Strand 3: A Data Science Institute at the cutting edge of data analytics and AI. Strand 4: Priority application programmes: e.g. cities, disease, biosphere, agriculture. Strand 5: A Network for Education & Skills in data & information. Strand 6: A Network for Open Science Access and Dialogue. The document also outlines the proposed governance, membership and management structure of the Platform, the approach to initial funding and the milestones in building up to the launch. The case for Open Science is based on the profound implications for society and for science, of the digital revolution and of the storm of data that it has unleashed and of the pervasive and novel means of communication that it has enabled. No state should fail to recognise this potential or to adapt their national intellectual infrastructure in exploiting benefits and minimising risks. Open Science is a vital enabler in maintaining the rigour and reliability of science; in creatively integrating diverse data resources to address complex modern challenges; in open innovation and in engaging with other societal actors as knowledge partners in tackling shared problems. It is fundamental to realisation of the Sustainable Development Goals. National science systems worldwide are struggling to adapt to this new paradigm. The alternatives are to do so or risk stagnating in a scientific backwater, isolated from creative streams of social, cultural and economic opportunity. Africa should adapt and capitalise on the opportunities, but in its own way, and as a leader not a follower, with broader, more societally-engaged priorities. It should seize the challenge with boldness and resolution

The African Open Science Platform: The Future of Science and Science for the Future

This document presents a draft strategy and makes the scientific case for the African Open Science Platform (AOSP). It is based on an expert group meeting held in Pretoria on 27-28 March 2018. Its purpose is to act as a framework for detailed, work on the creation of the Platform and as a basis for discussion at a stakeholder meeting to be held on 3-4 September 2018, which will lead to a definitive strategy for implementation from 2019. Expert group members at the March meeting were drawn from the following organisations: African Academy of Sciences (AAS), Academy of Science of South Africa (ASSAf), Committee on Data for Science and Technology (CODATA), International Council for Science (ICSU), National Research and Education Networks (NRENS), Research Data Alliance (RDA), South African Department of Science & Technology (DST) and National Research Foundation (NRF), Square Kilometre Array (SKA), UNESCO. The African Open Science Platform The Future of Science and Science for the Future 4 The African Open Science Platform. The Platform’s mission is to put African scientists at the cutting edge of contemporary, data-intensive science as a fundamental resource for a modern society. Its building blocks are: • a federated hardware, communications and software infrastructure, including policies and enabling practices, to support Open Science in the digital era; • a network of excellence in Open Science that supports scientists & other societal actors in accumulating and using modern data resources to maximise scientific, social and economic benefit. These objectives will be realised through seven related strands of activity: Strand 0: Register & portal for African & related international data collections & services. Strand 1: A federated network of computational facilities and services. Strand 2: Software tools & advice on policies & practices of research data management. Strand 3: A Data Science Institute at the cutting edge of data analytics and AI. Strand 4: Priority application programmes: e.g. cities, disease, biosphere, agriculture. Strand 5: A Network for Education & Skills in data & information. Strand 6: A Network for Open Science Access and Dialogue. The document also outlines the proposed governance, membership and management structure of the Platform, the approach to initial funding and the milestones in building up to the launch. The case for Open Science is based on the profound implications for society and for science, of the digital revolution and of the storm of data that it has unleashed and of the pervasive and novel means of communication that it has enabled. No state should fail to recognise this potential or to adapt their national intellectual infrastructure in exploiting benefits and minimising risks. Open Science is a vital enabler in maintaining the rigour and reliability of science; in creatively integrating diverse data resources to address complex modern challenges; in open innovation and in engaging with other societal actors as knowledge partners in tackling shared problems. It is fundamental to realisation of the Sustainable Development Goals. National science systems worldwide are struggling to adapt to this new paradigm. The alternatives are to do so or risk stagnating in a scientific backwater, isolated from creative streams of social, cultural and economic opportunity. Africa should adapt and capitalise on the opportunities, but in its own way, and as a leader not a follower, with broader, more societally-engaged priorities. It should seize the challenge with boldness and resolution

The African Open Science Platform: The Future of Science and Science for the Future

This document presents a draft strategy and makes the scientific case for the African Open Science Platform (AOSP). It is based on an expert group meeting held in Pretoria on 27-28 March 2018. Its purpose is to act as a framework for detailed, work on the creation of the Platform and as a basis for discussion at a stakeholder meeting to be held on 3-4 September 2018, which will lead to a definitive strategy for implementation from 2019. Expert group members at the March meeting were drawn from the following organisations: African Academy of Sciences (AAS), Academy of Science of South Africa (ASSAf), Committee on Data for Science and Technology (CODATA), International Council for Science (ICSU), National Research and Education Networks (NRENS), Research Data Alliance (RDA), South African Department of Science & Technology (DST) and National Research Foundation (NRF), Square Kilometre Array (SKA), UNESCO. The African Open Science Platform The Future of Science and Science for the Future 4 The African Open Science Platform. The Platform’s mission is to put African scientists at the cutting edge of contemporary, data-intensive science as a fundamental resource for a modern society. Its building blocks are: • a federated hardware, communications and software infrastructure, including policies and enabling practices, to support Open Science in the digital era; • a network of excellence in Open Science that supports scientists & other societal actors in accumulating and using modern data resources to maximise scientific, social and economic benefit. These objectives will be realised through seven related strands of activity: Strand 0: Register & portal for African & related international data collections & services. Strand 1: A federated network of computational facilities and services. Strand 2: Software tools & advice on policies & practices of research data management. Strand 3: A Data Science Institute at the cutting edge of data analytics and AI. Strand 4: Priority application programmes: e.g. cities, disease, biosphere, agriculture. Strand 5: A Network for Education & Skills in data & information. Strand 6: A Network for Open Science Access and Dialogue. The document also outlines the proposed governance, membership and management structure of the Platform, the approach to initial funding and the milestones in building up to the launch. The case for Open Science is based on the profound implications for society and for science, of the digital revolution and of the storm of data that it has unleashed and of the pervasive and novel means of communication that it has enabled. No state should fail to recognise this potential or to adapt their national intellectual infrastructure in exploiting benefits and minimising risks. Open Science is a vital enabler in maintaining the rigour and reliability of science; in creatively integrating diverse data resources to address complex modern challenges; in open innovation and in engaging with other societal actors as knowledge partners in tackling shared problems. It is fundamental to realisation of the Sustainable Development Goals. National science systems worldwide are struggling to adapt to this new paradigm. The alternatives are to do so or risk stagnating in a scientific backwater, isolated from creative streams of social, cultural and economic opportunity. Africa should adapt and capitalise on the opportunities, but in its own way, and as a leader not a follower, with broader, more societally-engaged priorities. It should seize the challenge with boldness and resolution

Do National and International Ethics Documents Accord With the Consent Substitute Model for Emergency Research?

In 2010 Largent, Wendler and Emanuel proposed the ‘consent substitute model’ for emergency research with incapacitated participants. The model provides a means to enroll participants in emergency research without consent, if five conditions are met: (1) the research addresses the patients’ urgent medical needs (2) the risk‐benefit ratio is favorable (3) there are no known conflicts with patients’ values or interests (4) cumulative net risk is minimal and (5) consent is given as soon as possible. We review national and international ethics laws, regulations and guidelines to determine (a) whether they accord with the consent substitute model’s five conditions and (b) the level of congruence across these documents. We find that only one document meets all five conditions and that there is significant disparity among the documents, particularly between national and international ones. These differences may have stymied international collaboration in emergency research. We recommend that the two international documents used most, the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice and the World Medical Association’s Declaration of Helsinki, are revised to include more specific provisions on emergency medical research

The Impact of a Multiyear Systemic Reform Effort on Rural Elementary School Students' Science Achievement

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/96417/1/ssm12002.pd

Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats analysis of carbon footprint indicator and derived recommendations

ABSTRACT: Demand for a low carbon footprint may be a key factor in stimulating innovation, while prompting politicians to promote sustainable consumption. However, the variety of methodological approaches and techniques used to quantify life-cycle emissions prevents their successful and widespread implementation. This study aims to offer recommendations for researchers, policymakers and practitioners seeking to achieve a more consistent approach for carbon footprint analysis. This assessment is made on the basis of a comprehensive Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats or SWOT Analysis of the carbon footprint indicator. It is carried out bringing together the collective experience from the Carbonfeel Project following the Delphi technique principles. The results include the detailed SWOT Analysis from which specific recommendations to cope with the threats and the weaknesses are identified. In particular, results highlight the importance of the integrated approach to combine organizational and product carbon footprinting in order to achieve a more standardized and consistent approach. These recommendations can therefore serve to pave the way for the development of new, specific and highly-detailed guidelines

Assessing the potential of utilisation and storage strategies for post-combustion CO2 emissions reduction

The emissions reduction potential of three carbon dioxide handling strategies for post-combustion capture is considered. These are carbon capture and sequestration/storage (CCS), enhanced hydrocarbon recovery (EHR), and carbon dioxide utilization (CDU) to produce synthetic oil. This is performed using common and comparable boundary conditions including net CO2 sequestered based on equivalent boundary conditions. This is achieved using a “cradle to grave approach” where the final destination and fate of any product is considered. The input boundary is pure CO2 that has been produced using a post-combustion capture process as this is common between all processes. The output boundary is the emissions resulting from any product produced with the assumption that the majority of the oil will go to combustion processes. We also consider the “cradle to gate” approach where the ultimate fate of the oil is not considered as this is a boundary condition often applied to EHR processes. Results show that while CCS can make an impact on CO2 emissions, CDU will have a comparable effect whilst generating income while EHR will ultimately increase net emissions. The global capacity for CDU is also compared against CCS using data based on current and planned CCS projects. Analysis shows that current CDU represent a greater volume of capture than CCS processes and that this gap is likely to remain well beyond 2020 which is the limit of the CCS projects in the database

Strategic risk appraisal. Comparing expert- and literature-informed consequence assessments for environmental policy risks receiving national attention

Strategic risk appraisal (SRA) has been applied to compare diverse policy level risks to and from the environment in England and Wales. Its application has relied on expert-informed assessments of the potential consequences from residual risks that attract policy attention at the national scale. Here we compare consequence assessments, across environmental, economic and social impact categories that draw on ‘expert’- and ‘literature-based’ analyses of the evidence for 12 public risks appraised by Government. For environmental consequences there is reasonable agreement between the two sources of assessment, with expert-informed assessments providing a narrower dispersion of impact severity and with median values similar in scale to those produced by an analysis of the literature. The situation is more complex for economic consequences, with a greater spread in the median values, less consistency between the two assessment types and a shift toward higher severity values across the risk portfolio. For social consequences, the spread of severity values is greater still, with no consistent trend between the severities of impact expressed by the two types of assessment. For the latter, the findings suggest the need for a fuller representation of socioeconomic expertise in SRA and the workshops that inform SRA output