Science topic
Science Policy - Science topic
Explore the latest questions and answers in Science Policy, and find Science Policy experts.
Questions related to Science Policy
Hello to everyone,
We are waiting for your articles on aging and long-term care. The review process for submitted manuscripts has been planned not to exceed six weeks.
The Journal of Aging and Long-Term Care (JALTC) is being established as an open access, quarterly peer reviewed journal that accepts articles in English.
Published articles can be accessed on the following website..
I once flew from SW China to Argentina – 5 flights each way – to attend an IPCC lead authors’ meeting aimed, ultimately, at avoiding dangerous climate change. Did I make the wrong decision? Flying is a significant and growing contributor to the carbon dioxide emissions that are the main cause of global climate change, and has additional impacts on climate through the contrails (the line-shaped clouds behind a high-flying aircraft), and on general air pollution from the nitrogen oxides, particulates, and other chemicals emitted. On the other hand, international conferences may help generate the science, policies, and actions needed to mitigate climate change and reduce pollution. Do the benefits outweigh the costs, both for individual scientists like me, and for each conference as a whole? If you fly to conferences, or organize conferences that other people fly to, how do you justify these actions? Do you sometimes skip a conference primarily because of the negative impact on the environment?
Few years ago, I volunteered an answer in this article: https://arxiv.org/abs/1510.08320
But the perception of importance is subjective and varies with time and topic. So, what is YOUR answer?
I see that the call for papers deadline has passed, but it was only today that I received this notification. Is there still time to submit? (asked on 5-5-2017)
I'm specifically looking for new data and/or ongoing studies regarding this issue. Also, for anyone interested in science policy / animal protection issues, please feel free to connect with me.
There are many daunting issues faced by policy-makers in their bid to select between alternative policy options, which are meant to enhance social change. While on the one hand policy elites may be genuinely willling to bring about 'good' change, they could also be demonised by their own personal interest, 'politics as usual', and 'crisis situation' to formulate policies to their own advantage. They also, in some cases, do not trust researchers to tell them what they want to hear! Scientists, on the other hand, are bedeviled by their own shorcomings as well. These include what I refer to as the 'silo effect', excessive fixation on career advancement and personal gains, poor quality of research, inability to simplify research information, which users could relate with, etc. The questions of how to resolve these challenges, therefore, remain.
This workshop will examine how academics engage in pedagogy and the practice of teaching controversial issues, from gender and minority identity and inclusion to genetically modified foods, biofuels, synthetic meat, and nanotechnology. We will bring these and other contentious issues into the discussion to illustrate possible value incongruences within the classroom, in local communities, and among development practitioners, activists, policymakers, applied scholars, and scientists.
Examples of pedagogical questions this workshop aims to answer are as follows:
1. Available research suggests that academics are conscious to provide a balanced examination of controversial issues without necessarily disclosing their own preferred position. Is this the right pedagogical approach to teaching critical thinking and analytical skills? Does this practice limit the academic freedom to engage in public policy advocacy on controversial issues?
2. What pedagogical and curriculum development supports are available (or should be developed) for effectively engaging in controversial issues in the classroom and beyond?
By the end of this session, you will be able to:
· Discuss appropriate pedagogical approaches to engage in controversial issues in the classroom and beyond
· Identify resources and gaps in teaching support services to effectively engage in controversial issues
· Identify appropriate pedagogical approaches to handle controversial issues in the classroom and beyond
· Understand the current state of pedagogical and curriculum development supports available at various Canadian universities
I appreciate your citing my work on timemscales, reference frames, and coordinate systems. What application is your work intended to benefit? Mine is astrodynamics and orbital mechanics. There are many sources of imprecision in estimates of the future state of a satellite.
I am looking for emerging environmental issues, not widely known about now, which could have substantial big impacts (positive or negative) on wildlife or nature. This is for an annual horizon scan. Please respond here, or directly to me (lynn.dicks@uea.ac.uk) with your ideas, in the next two weeks - deadline 19 June. If your issue is selected in the final published paper, you will be acknowledged by name, if you wish to be.
The deadline on the last update of the special issue entitled "Recent issues and future directions on effective multi-tier supply chain management for sustainability" was 15th July. However, the information about it is not found anymore on the link provided. I kindly ask if the submission to this special issue is still available and if there are any changes concerning the deadline and the description of the special issue? Thanks in advance
Hi ,
I think that one of the reasons of why High Ranked Universities in computer science become more higher is the strong packages that were provided for research replications by them. This cause a tremendous of citations every week for their methods. Is that true?
Thank you very much
Best wishes,
Osman
My university has begun charging an arbitrary "maintenance fee" as a percent of unrestricted research accounts (e.g. reverse interest).
Are you aware of any other university that does this?
If so - do you have any recommendations on how faculty can save enough unrestricted funds for a large purchase (e.g. a PhD student-year or research equipment) without having it potentially undercut by an arbitrary fee hike in the future?
Could you please indicate the deadline for the submission? Thanks!
In 1999, at the World Conference on Science it was acknowledged that the social contract for science had been broken. That people do not consider that science breakthroughs or developments will always mean good things for them.
National Science and Technology Systems have taken notice because this "contract breach" means that people "want more for their money". In order to protect national science budgets, people must be able to link easily science achievements to their well being and the solution of societal problems. Transdisciplinary research, translational medicine and postnormal science are some of the most known efforts to bridge the gap. And new forms of collaboration (citizen science, crowfunding, participatory research) that provide increased access to resources and knowledge have emerged.
But the problem is that the new forms of collaboration mean developing new skills and capacities- on both sides. So scientists must devote increasing portions of their time just to get funding and resources, at a time when policy changes may imply the "death" or downturn of big and small lines of research. And it takes time to learn how to engage (and train) non scientists to collaborate with researchers (as in citizen science, crowfunding and participatory research), just when you may need it the most.
Society has developed ways to manage risk of losses, by distributing the risk among many. This form of risk management is called insurance and it helps people cover losses that they can´t afford on their own.
Is there a way that we scientists can collaborate with each other in order to prepare non scientists to collaborate with us to provide access to resources and funding in time of need (that, is to manage the risk of decreasing research budgets and positions)?
If there is a way, it probably involves social networks and sharing our resources (knowledge) with non scientists so that they decide to share theirs with us.
Do you think that a Social Insurance for Scientists is possible? Why? What would it take to make it happen? Do you think it would be worth to invest in it valuable researchers´ time? Please share your views on this proposal.
Alguien tendría información bibliográfica y linkografica acerca de las Universidades Medievales?
Se los agradecería mucho.
I want to know how many years I have to respect the 'white' constrains, i.e. Can I share the final paper when it was publisshed before 1997 (20 years ago)?
The same quation ... how long the journal can protect the difussion of a paper?
There are many policies regarding the national park and wildlife reserves. I want to know the literatures written on the implementation status of these related policies, rule and regulations.
I ask you if: are worth more the indicators of my jobs that have not even been examined by the national scientific commission: they are of significant scientific interest; those arguments and results are unique in the world, but the scientific journals that are political, found the excuse of lack of reviewers for not to publish them, and so they have no indicators; everything, so that no shouldn't having the comparison with my work that having to bury the outdated work them; thereby preventing me to teaching them.
Many people go to do phd in top universities in the world and publish A level conference and Journal papers. But once they finish PhDs and move back to their home countries they are not able to publish at A level anymore in 99% cases. Why is this?
i need to have the latest stats (figures) for the global pesticide use total and top ten countries for year 2015-16 with reference/s
any web link or paper will do
Currently I'm working on public participation on environment improvement especially improving water quality of river.
However, I realize that awareness is not enough to improve our environment quality and took generation to see the result.
We have lot of experts in research covered all kind of study areas but unable to deliver the message to public citizen.
So, here I'm looking for suggestion/opinion from all experts on :
1) What you would do to make public citizens aware about the importance of our environment?
2) What they can do to contribute? Considering various level of public participation (industries, community, educational institutions)
3) How you can deliver your study/research to the community? In what way?
Thank you.
(Specifically thinking of academic research in the health area)
Is it more important for funds and efforts to go to research that tackles the most necessary issues for the country, region and/or world or is it a higher priority to ensure researcher autonomy on the choice of their topic of investigation?
I think there are many pros and cons for each possibility, but I haven't been able to find out what the consensus is, if there is one or what are the arguments for or against any existing position.
Are there any sources on this topic you could recomend?
This is a poll asking what is your preferred stats program for your data analyses. I've seen plenty of researchers using R, but is it because it's free?
Are training opportunities the main solution for the development of the field of neuroscience in poorer countries?
In 1929 Albert Einstein visited Havana and wrote in the golden book of the Havana Geographical Society that the only truly cosmopolitan society is the society of researchers. We know excellent examples from the past of researchers sharing information, papers, and even manuscripts with colleagues from other countries and supporting programs for scientists from less advanced countries. We know about the great initiative by Abdus Salam about the creation of a Scientific Center for researchers from the third world countries.
Is that spirit alive today?
When I see that I am not allowed to read many important papers and when I can publish only in open access journals, I feel doubtful about Einstein's assertion.
There is a renewed debate on how “real” the energy and resource crisis is in the world. Some say it is based on faulty science and politics and the reality looks different. It seems that we have enough renewable energy which helps use to handle our limited resources of raw materials when using intelligent concepts of reuse after lifetime of our products.
The EC-funded project INSPIRATION – http://www.inspiration-h2020.eu – is to formulate an end-user driven Strategic Research Agenda (SRA) for land-use, soil management and spatial planning and the related, impacted compartments of the Soil-Sediment-Water (SSW) system in order to meet current and future societal challenges.
In a series of bottom-up stakeholder engagement activities across EU nations the project gathers Research and Innovation (R&I) needs related to the INSPIRATION scope (land and SSW-system use and management), including topics such as:
- What are the strategic research topics?
- What are experiences regarding connecting science to policy/practice?
- What are national and transnational funding schemes to implement such Research?
To complement these activities, I would appreciate your view and contribution! What is your view on the research and innovation needs and opportunities? Do you have a vision on, and what is your insight in upcoming knowledge demands (short, middle and long-term)?
Collecting input from you is crucial for the project in order to help us describing the state-of-the-art as input into the European research agenda.
It would be very useful to identify priority in R&D policy support when considering less developed economies, as southern regions of Italy are.
It is not serious to imagine that every sector may claim for support. It is not serious that support regards every area of research and innovation. Phrased differently, a selection of R&D support is needed. How can this selection be implemented? How can priorities be decided? Should this be done in accordance with the expected results or according to the past effectiveness? Furthermore, is a policy coordination required? If it is, at which level? National? Regional?
Comments welcome.
I mean a formal assessment of research output, as in the UK and other countries. If you know of papers that talk about this, that would be useful too. Thanks in advance.
I observe that different political parties often use conflicting information/data to back up their position. Usually this data is information that would not stand up in a peer reviewed journal. Rarely do UK politicians refer to a scientific peer reviewed journal. Often the mainstream political party’s become the servants of public opinion and re-shape their policies to match the populist view.
When should we say that a researcher or a team of scientists make a "mistake”, and when are they committing an ”infringement“? Who has the power to determine this difference? The scientific community of peers? The judges of the courts of justice? Or the community of citizens, on the basis of their usefulness?
I'd use the example of a recent [alleged] error, which resulted in severe punishments to some seismologists convicted for committing "errors" [or "infringements"?], providing a wrong scientific judgment about the earthquake probability — in L'Aquila area, (2009) — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_L'Aquila_earthquake
Impacts may be on scientific knowledge, societal outcomes, workforce outcomes, economic growth, etc.
Print media has been virtually overtaken by instantaneous dissemination via internet. Advertisements are providing research-work with free access to scientific publications. And yet, many high impact journals sell access to individual users on hefty payment. What future holds in store for end-user?
This is the description of the round table at the upcoming ECPR general conference in Bordeaux, between 9:00 and 10:40 on Thursday 5 September, room P9:
"Academic journals are an important infrastructure for a scholarly discipline like political science. Professional editing and reviewing are instrumental to achieve high-quality products. Moreover, it has become common to scientometrists, research managers and policy makers to use journal output and article citation for their analysis and decision-making. One early, and particularly prominent variable in this game has been the "impact factor" (IF). With the "San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment", the scientific community recently attempted to critically counter the tendency to misuse the IF, as well as other metrics. In this round table, the usage of the IF among leading political science journals will be discussed, as well as its usage for decision-making processes in the social sciences. Are there alternative models to assess scientific quality in the social sciences?"
Increasingly, the lines are blurred between academic publications in the 'peer-reviewed' literature, which attract comments and debate amongst scientists, policy-makers, and others, and comments and discussions which take place on blogs and in the serious twittersphere. If we want to improve the evidence base, generally, of decision-making, is it timely to look at the quality of evidence we bring to bear on social media sites for communicating science and entering into policy dialogue?
