Suchergebnisse

The country's top scientific advisers during the Covid pandemic are now free to tell the truth which the former Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, wanted to silence. Giving evidence to the Covid public inquiry are Sir Patrick Vallance, the government's former Chief Scientific Adviser, followed by Professor Chris Whitty, the Chief Medical Officer for England and […]
The post When the science was silenced appeared first on EU ROPE.

The goals of open science are, broadly, to democratize access and to promote good research practices. Unfortunately, these goals fall short in several key ways, at the center of which are equity, diversity, and inclusivity (EDI) not only of the community, but of the fruits of their labors. Historically, the open science movement has been dominated by a narrow demographic with the access and support (institutional and otherwise) to time and resources they can spend on "open science" efforts. This monolithic culture has been furthered by (1) a gravitation of open science efforts on technical solutions and valuation of technical skills and (2) a reliance on computational resources that are inaccessible to a large proportion of the globe. While the community has become more diverse in the past few years, there is still a long way to go and the products of open science remain sequestered in the global North. Furthermore, EDI disparities have been highlighted by continuing socio-economic issues, recent increases in related scholarship, and the COVID-19 pandemic, revealing that our science isn't as open as it should be. From culture to reachability, accessibility, there remains a lot of room for improvement. Failure in achieving EDI goals, not only hinders science, but imposes clear limitations and biases in the voices around us and the knowledge we produce. Science benefits from diversity in perspectives, experiences, and beliefs, in addition to accessible tools and reproducible research practices. New ways of thinking, understanding and learning are needed, new ways of establishing inclusion as a culture is needed to encourage and include historically underrepresented people, without such practices open science would not be as open as it should be.

AbstractCorporate social responsibility (CSR) has evolved over time into a mature interdisciplinary scientific field. However, there is a lack of research to explore the disciplinary association patterns and diffusion trajectories of scientific knowledge within this field. This research proposes a knowledge tracing framework that combines text analysis based on scientific texts and main path extraction based on citation networks to fill this gap. This framework is implemented in a dataset containing 15,949 papers related to CSR in the social sciences published from 1969 to 2022. This study identifies 19 main research directions within this field and their five growth trends. Combined with disciplinary categories of publication venues, both the disciplinary origins and disciplinary association patterns of these knowledge contents are also revealed. Besides that, three knowledge diffusion paths are obtained, which meticulously reveal the knowledge evolution and paradigm shift. Aside from the methodological novelty and result scarcity, this study also identifies research streams and potential opportunities. To begin with, CSR‐related studies have shown the tendency of microscopic and interdisciplinary. Then, related research methods show the tendency to be complicated and focus on causal logic. On this basis, some future agendas of CSR are also proposed in this work.

This paper covers two phases of the history of science, technology and institutional co-operation in Africa - pre-colonial and colonial. It is structured into three sections. Section one looks at pre-colonial science and technology (S&T) and points out that most discussions on the socioeconomic analysis of S&T in Africa often neglect the pre-colonial phase, even though indigenous knowledge is important. Section two deals with the colonial phase in which the S&T activities of the British, French and other colonial powers are discussed. The third section looks at the establishment of inter-territorial co-operation in S&T activities during the colonial era and the eventual breakdown of effective S&T cooperation among the newly independent countries in Africa.

The Lisbon Strategy was adopted by the Heads of State and Government of the European Union (EU) in 2000. By moving science into a central position for the development of a European knowledge‐based economy and society, its adoption at political level seems to have been a powerful catalyst for the increased involvement of scientists in science policy in the EU. Recognising the need for scientists to act collectively in order to contribute to shape the future of science policy in Europe, a pioneering group of European science organisations leaders and representatives, as well as other scientists, initiated a European, interdisciplinary, inclusive movement leading to the creation of the European Research Council (ERC) to support basic research of the highest quality. Having scientists' campaign for the funding of bottom‐up research by the EU Framework Programmes exclusively on scientific grounds, and for an ERC, was a unique event in the recent history of European science policy. For the first time, the scientific community acted collectively and across disciplinary or national boundaries as a political actor for the sake of a better science policy for Europe.

"Beginning Research in Political Science takes a learn-by-doing-approach to guide students through all of the steps needed for their own original projects. Each chapter builds from the previous chapter with step-by-step instructions that guide students towards the project's completion. The text features recent data from the World Values Survey and instructional SPSS Statistics software tutorials, along with a variety of features reflecting its consistent pedagogy"--