Digital futures: e-commerce and sustainable development.

This report comprises a critical commentary and appraisal of my DProf project "Digital Futures: e-commerce and sustainable development". It should be viewed alongside the evidence of achievement from the project. There are six items of evidence contained in the project folder alongside this report: i. A brochure produced for the project launch on 1 February 2000 2. "Mind over Matter" -a pamphlet by Charles Leadbeater published part-way through the project in September 2000 (Leadbeater. 2000) 3. "Dot-com ethics" -a pamphlet by James Wilsdon published part-way through the project in January 2001 (Wilsdon. 2001) 4. A brochure produced for the final project conference on 1 March 2001 5. A summary reportwhich draws out the cross-cutting conclusions and recommendations (Wilsdon & Miller. 2001) 6. "Digital Futures: living in a dot-com world"- a book containing the full research findings of the project (ed. Wilsdon. 2001) The overarching aim of the Digital Futures project was to investigate the complex web of issues surrounding e-commerce and sustainable development, and recommend ways in which government and business could maximise the sustainability benefits, and minimise the costs, of the emerging digital economy. The project drew together a consortium of government departments, companies, think-tanks and research organisations. Its formal activities ran from 1 October 1999 to i March 2001, and consisted of three main phases: Phase 1 (i October iQQQ- f1 January 2000) -A detailed scoping paper was prepared on the key issues relating to e-commercea nd sustainable development. -A consortium of think-tanks and research organisations was established to undertake research into the various aspects of the debate. -Fifteen corporate partners were recruited to support the project, and participate in the research process. -UK Government support and funding was obtained for Phases 2&3. Phase 2 (1 February- 15 September 2000) -Each of the eight research organisations was commissioned to produce a detailed paper on a particular theme. -Detailed research was carried out using a variety of methodological approaches (desk-based analysis, interviews, opinion polling etc.) -Project partners in government and business were actively involved in the research to ensure it reflected a diversity of views. Phase 3 (i6 September 2000 - 1 March 2001) -A series of workshops were held with project stakeholders, to discuss the research findings of Phase 2. -The eight research reports were edited into a book. -A summary report was written, drawing out the main conclusions and recommendations. -A one-day conference was held on 1 March 2001 for 200 decision-makers from government, business, academia and the voluntary sector. My role within the project was that of overall co-ordinator and editor of the book and summary report. I was also the lead researcher on one of the eight research themes. Whilst the project was underway, and in the year that has elapsed since its formal completion, I have been reflecting on the lessons learned. This report is a critical commentary based on that process of reflection. It consists of an introduction to the project, an outline of its aims, objectives and methodology, an account of the project's main activities, and full details of the project's results and conclusions. The main outcomes of the project were a book and summary report (see evidence of achievement), which offered the first comprehensive analysis of the relationship between e-commerce and sustainable development. The third significant outcome of the project was a one-day conference exploring these issues. The project also led to a range of follow-up research and practical activities, which are detailed in the final chapter. The final chapter also includes a reflection of the impact the project has had on my sphere of professional activity, and on myself as a researcher and practitioner

For science, Brexit isn't done yet

If there's one sentiment that papers over the cracks in a once-United Kingdom, it's bone-weariness over Brexit. Wherever one entered the debate back in 2016—on the side of the United Kingdom leaving or remaining in the European Union (EU)—most people simply want an end to the saga, which has spewed uncertainty and paralyzed decision-making for almost 4 years. A pre-Christmas campaign pledge to “get Brexit done” propelled Prime Minister Boris Johnson back into Downing Street with a Conservative dominance of the political landscape unseen since Margaret Thatcher's heyday. One week after its reelection, the government passed the Brexit withdrawal bill, and at midnight on 31 January, the United Kingdom departed. With the democratic die now cast, universities, scientific organizations, and individual researchers must figure out how to constructively engage with Europe. Is there a soft landing for science on the other side of the leap into the dark that has just been taken

Analysts, advocates and applicators : three discourse coalitions of UK evidence and policy

Background: Continued growth of the evidence and policy field has prompted calls to consolidate findings in pursuit of a more holistic understanding of theory and practice. Aims and objectives: The aim of this paper is to develop and explore an analytical typology that offers a way to consider the heterogeneity of different actors in UK evidence and policy. Methods: We draw upon a discourse coalitions approach to analyse a series of semi-structured interviews with a cross-section of professionals in the evidence and policy field. Findings: We describe an analytical typology that is composed of three discourse coalitions, each with their own framings of the problems of evidence and policy relations, the practices needed to address these, the organisation of people, and their priorities for future development. These are: the analytical coalition, which typically theorises evidence and policy relations in a way that matches empirical observations; the advocacy coalition, which typically normatively refines and prescribes particular evidence and policy relations; and the application coalition, which typically evaluates contextual conditions and enacts techniques to bring evidence into policy and practice. Discussion and conclusions: We discuss the potential of this analytical lens to inform recognised tensions in evidence and policy relations, and consider how greater awareness of the positioning of individuals within these coalitions may help to foster improved collaboration and consolidation in the field. Ultimately, we note that distinct priorities in the three coalitions signify different visions for progress within the field that need to be negotiated

The Challenges of Community Engagement

Lyons and Whelan provide a useful list of recommendations as to how community engagement on nanotechnology could be improved, which very few people working in community engagement could disagree with. However, as the conclusions of any study are dependent on the data obtained, if more data had been obtained and analysed then different conclusions might have been reached. Addressing the key issues in the paper and providing more data, also allows an opportunity to expand on current issues relating to community engagement on nanotechnology and the challenges it provides for practitioners

Imatinib in gastrointestinal stromal tumour: Northern Cancer Network experience

Imatinib treatment in metastatic or inoperable gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST) has shifted the paradigm of treatment of this disease. Successful clinical trials of imatinib led to rapid regulatory approval and, in England and Wales, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidance on use of this technology. NICE recommend detailed audit of their guidelines in clinical practice. This audit reflects that guidance and was designed to document the use of imatinib in routine clinical practice

Ethical governance is essential to building trust in robotics and artificial intelligence systems

© 2018 The Author(s) Published by the Royal Society. All rights reserved. This paper explores the question of ethical governance for robotics and artificial intelligence (AI) systems. We outline a roadmap-which links a number of elements, including ethics, standards, regulation, responsible research and innovation, and public engagement-as a framework to guide ethical governance in robotics and AI. We argue that ethical governance is essential to building public trust in robotics and AI, and conclude by proposing five pillars of good ethical governance. This article is part of the theme issue 'Governing artificial intelligence: ethical, legal, and technical opportunities and challenges'

Next-generation metrics: responsible metrics and evaluation for open science

This is the final report of the European Commission's Expert Group on Altmetrics, which undertook its work over the course of 2016. The report outlines a framework for next-generation metrics in the context of the EC's Open Science agenda and includes a series of recommendations for how responsible metrics can be built into the design and evaluation of the EU's Ninth Framework Programme (FP9)

Towards an analytical framework of science communication models

This chapter reviews the discussion in science communication circles of models for public communication of science and technology (PCST). It questions the claim that there has been a large-scale shift from a ‘deficit model’ of communication to a ‘dialogue model’, and it demonstrates the survival of the deficit model along with the ambiguities of that model. Similar discussions in related fields of communication, including the critique of dialogue, are briefly sketched. Outlining the complex circumstances governing approaches to PCST, the author argues that communications models often perceived to be opposed can, in fact, coexist when the choices are made explicit. To aid this process, the author proposes an analytical framework of communication models based on deficit, dialogue and participation, including variations on each