New Advances in Forming Functional Ceramics for Micro Devices

Micro electromechanical systems (MEMS) are finding uses in an increasing number of diverse applications. Currently the fabrication techniques used to produce such MEMS devices are primarily based on 2-D processing of thin films. The challenges faced by producing more complex structures (e.g. high aspect ratio, spans, and multi-material structures) require the development of new processing techniques. Potential solutions to these challenges based on low temperature processing of functional ceramics, selective chemical patterning, and micro-moulding are presented to show that it is possible to create complex functional ceramic structures which incorporate non-ceramic conducting and support structures. The capabilities of both techniques are compared and the relative advantages of each explored

Where do uncertainties reside within environmental risk assessments? Expert opinion on uncertainty distributions for pesticide risks to surface water organisms

A reliable characterisation of uncertainties can aid uncertainty identification during environmental risk assessments (ERAs). However, typologies can be implemented inconsistently, causing uncertainties to go unidentified. We present an approach based on nine structured elicitations, in which subject-matter experts, for pesticide risks to surface water organisms, validate and assess three dimensions of uncertainty: its level (the severity of uncertainty, ranging from determinism to ignorance); nature (whether the uncertainty is epistemic or aleatory); and location (the data source or area in which the uncertainty arises). Risk characterisation contains the highest median levels of uncertainty, associated with estimating, aggregating and evaluating the magnitude of risks. Regarding the locations in which uncertainty is manifest, data uncertainty is dominant in problem formulation, exposure assessment and effects assessment. The comprehensive description of uncertainty described will enable risk analysts to prioritise the required phases, groups of tasks, or individual tasks within a risk analysis according to the highest levels of uncertainty, the potential for uncertainty to be reduced or quantified, or the types of location-based uncertainty, thus aiding uncertainty prioritisation during environmental risk assessments. In turn, it is expected to inform investment in uncertainty reduction or targeted risk management action

Better by design: Business preferences for environmental regulatory reform

We present the preferences for environmental regulatory reform expressed by 30 UK businesses and industry bodies from 5 sectors. While five strongly preferred voluntary regulation, seven expressed doubts about its effectiveness, and 18 expressed no general preference between instrument types. Voluntary approaches were valued for flexibility and lower burdens, but direct regulation offered stability and a level playing field. Respondents sought regulatory frameworks that: are coherent; balance clarity, prescription and flexibility; are enabled by positive regulatory relationships; administratively efficient; targeted according to risk magnitude and character; evidence-based and that deliver long-term market stability for regulatees. Anticipated differences in performance between types of instrument can be undermined by poor implementation. Results underline the need for policy makers and regulators to tailor an effective mix of instruments for a given sector, and to overcome analytical, institutional and political barriers to greater coherence, to better coordinate existing instruments and tackle new environmental challenges as they emerge

Scientific commentary: Strategic analysis of environmental policy risks-heat maps, risk futures and the character of environmental harm

We summarise our recent efforts on the policy level risk appraisal of environmental risks. These have necessitated working closely with policy teams and a requirement to maintain crisp and accessible messages for policy audiences. Our comparative analysis uses heat maps, supplemented with risk narratives, and employs the multidimensional character of risks to inform debates on the management of current residual risk and future threats. The policy research and ensuing analysis raises core issues about how comparative risk analyses are used by policy audiences, their validation and future developments that are discussed in the commentary below

Confluence and contours: reflexive management of environmental risk

Government institutions have responsibilities to distribute risk management funds meaningfully and to be accountable for their choices. We took a macro-level sociological approach to understanding the role of government in managing environmental risks, and insights from micro-level psychology to examine individual-level risk-related perceptions and beliefs. Survey data from 2,068 U.K. citizens showed that lay people's funding preferences were associated positively with beliefs about responsibility and trust, yet associations with perception varied depending on risk type. Moreover, there were risk-specific differences in the funding preferences of the lay sample and 29 policymakers. A laboratory-based study of 109 participants examined funding allocation in more detail through iterative presentation of expert information. Quantitative and qualitative data revealed a meso-level framework comprising three types of decisionmakers who varied in their willingness to change funding allocation preferences following expert information: adaptors, responders, and resistors. This research highlights the relevance of integrated theoretical approaches to understanding the policy process, and the benefits of reflexive dialogue to managing environmental risks.Department of Environment Food and Rural Affairs, EPSRC, NERC, ESR

Effective risk governance for environmental policy making: a knowledge management perspective

Effective risk management within environmental policy making requires knowledge on natural, economic and social systems to be integrated; knowledge characterised by complexity, uncertainty and ambiguity. We describe a case study in a (UK) central government department exploring how risk governance supports and hinders this challenging integration of knowledge. Forty-five semi-structured interviews were completed over a two year period. We found that lateral knowledge transfer between teams working on different policy areas was widely viewed as a key source of knowledge. However, the process of lateral knowledge transfer was predominantly informal and unsupported by risk governance structures. We argue this made decision quality vulnerable to a loss of knowledge through staff turnover, and time and resource pressures. Our conclusion is that the predominant form of risk governance framework, with its focus on centralised decision-making and vertical knowledge transfer is insufficient to support risk-based, environmental policy making. We discuss how risk governance can better support environmental policy makers through systematic knowledge management practices

Delivering organisational adaptation through legislative mechanisms: Evidence from the Adaptation Reporting Power (Climate Change Act 2008)

There is increasing recognition that organisations, particularly in key infrastructure sectors, are potentially vulnerable to climate change and extreme weather events, and require organisational responses to ensure they are resilient and adaptive. However, detailed evidence of how adaptation is facilitated, implemented and reported, particularly through legislative mechanisms is lacking. The United Kingdom Climate Change Act (2008), introduced the Adaptation Reporting Power, enabling the Government to direct so-called reporting authorities to report their climate change risks and adaptation plans. We describe the authors' unique role and experience supporting the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) during the Adaptation Reporting Power's first round. An evaluation framework, used to review the adaptation reports, is presented alongside evidence on how the process provides new insights into adaptation activities and triggered organisational change in 78% of reporting authorities, including the embedding of climate risk and adaptation issues. The role of legislative mechanisms and risk-based approaches in driving and delivering adaptation is discussed alongside future research needs, including the development of organisational maturity models to determine resilient and well adapting organisations. The Adaptation Reporting Power process provides a basis for similar initiatives in other countries, although a clear engagement strategy to ensure buy-in to the process and research on its long-term legacy, including the potential merits of voluntary approaches, is required

Where do uncertainties reside within environmental risk assessments? Testing UnISERA, a guide for uncertainty assessment

A means for identifying and prioritising the treatment of uncertainty (UnISERA) in environmental risk assessments (ERAs) is tested, using three risk domains where ERA is an established requirement and one in which ERA practice is emerging. UnISERA's development draws on 19 expert elicitations across genetically modified higher plants, particulate matter, and agricultural pesticide release and is stress tested here for engineered nanomaterials (ENM). We are concerned with the severity of uncertainty; its nature; and its location across four accepted stages of ERAs. Using an established uncertainty scale, the risk characterisation stage of ERA harbours the highest severity level of uncertainty, associated with estimating, aggregating and evaluating expressions of risk. Combined epistemic and aleatory uncertainty is the dominant nature of uncertainty. The dominant location of uncertainty is associated with data in problem formulation, exposure assessment and effects assessment. Testing UnISERA produced agreements of 55%, 90%, and 80% for the severity level, nature and location dimensions of uncertainty between the combined case studies and the ENM stress test. UnISERA enables environmental risk analysts to prioritise risk assessment phases, groups of tasks, or individual ERA tasks and it can direct them towards established methods for uncertainty treatment

Electrohydrodynamic jet printing of PZT thick film micro-scale structures

This paper reports the use of a printing technique, called electrohydrodynamic jet printing, for producing PZT thick film micro-scale structures without additional material removing processes. The PZT powder was ball-milled and the effect of milling time on the particle size was examined. This ball-milling process can significantly reduce the PZT particle size and help to prepare stable composite slurry suitable for the E-Jet printing. The PZT micro-scale structures with different features were produced. The PZT lines with different widths and separations were fabricated through the control of the E-Jet printing parameters. The widths of the PZT lines were varied from 80 μm to 200 μm and the separations were changed from 5 μm to 200 μm. In addition, PZT walled structures were obtained by multi-layer E-Jet printing. The E-Jet printed PZT thick films exhibited a relative permittivity (ɛr) of ∼233 and a piezoelectric constant (d33, f) of ∼66 pC N−1

Integrating horizon scanning and strategic risk prioritisation using a weight of evidence framework to inform policy decisions

Poor connection between data on emerging issues and credible policy decisions continues to challenge governments, and is only likely to grow as demands on time and resources increase. Here we summarise recent efforts to integrate horizon scanning and risk prioritisation approaches to better connect emerging issues to the political discourse on environmental and food-related issues. Our categorisation of insights including potential future risks and opportunities to inform policy discussions has emerged from a structured three-year programme of horizon scanning for a UK pan-governmental futures partnership led by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). Our efforts to integrate horizon scanning and risk prioritisation, utilising a qualitative weight of evidence framework, has created a systematic process for identifying all signals of potential future change with significant impact for the strategic mission and underlying values of policy actors. Our approach encourages an exploration of factors out of the control of organisations, recognising that resilience depends on the flexibility of management strategies and the preparedness to deal with a variety of unexpected outcomes. We discuss how this approach addresses key cultural and evaluative challenges that policy actors have had in embedding horizon scanning in evidence-based policy processes, and suggest further developments to build confidence in the use of horizon scanning for strategic planning