Just as citizens are members of a civil society, they are also members of a digital society through their interactions over the Internet. These interactions have and will continue to evolve over time, and the current trends are towards continuous connection to the Internet, interconnectedness, ease of communication and collaboration. Many of these interactions have beneficial societal implications, but clearly there are also emerging dangers to citizens when they use the Internet. This white paper provides a synthesis of major themes pertaining to the Next Generation of the Internet (NGI) extracted from recent consultations on societal, economic, design and legislative concerns, and their implications for technological developments of the Internet.
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to draw on previous research and propose a framework for evaluating interest‐based bargaining (IBB) around three criteria: efficient, amicable and wise, where mutual gains are not self‐evident.Design/methodology/approachThis paper reviews both survey and case study research on IBB in the USA and Canada. Based on trends discerned in the data, the paper uses the three criteria to present research and propositions on evaluating the IBB process.FindingsIBB connects front stage acts by negotiators during collective bargaining with backstage environments and fosters collaboration hinging on dialogue across competing values involving online and offline processes during negotiations. Where mutual gains are not self evident, there these findings underpin criteria for evaluating the IBB process's potential to serve enduring values of industrial democracy and employee voice and the newer values of collaboration and partnership in strategic decision making.Research limitations/implicationsThe amicable criterion predisposes the framework favorably towards amicable relations, which creates a favorable bias within the framework towards the IBB process when compared to other bargaining processes. There is a need for updated quantitative data on IBB trends at a national level, similar to the three FMCS surveys last reported in 2004, and a need for institutional linkages that will increase case study research on IBB, similar to recent research on Kaiser Permanente.Practical implicationsNegotiators, trainers and policy makers will gain from the criteria listed here to evaluate IBB where mutual gains are not self‐evident.Originality/valueThe framework presented in the paper advances an original framework to evaluate IBB.
PurposeThis research investigates the issues of concern for American film and television (TV) unions, the features of issues, whether issues are threats, opportunities or mixed evaluations, and unions' distributive or integrative approaches to issues (Walton and McKersie, 1965).Design/methodology/approachThe first author interviewed 25 union leaders and used thematic analysis to identify issue characteristics and evaluations of issues as threats, opportunities or mixed. Using language analysis, the authors then connected these evaluations to integrative or distributive approaches.FindingsThe findings revealed three larger issues of concern (positioning the union and jurisdiction, shifting patterns of risk and negotiating and enforcing contracts) and five characteristics (locus, boundary, manageability, predictability and scope). These characteristics then determined how interviewees viewed issues as threats, opportunities or mixed evaluations. Three characteristics grouped together to form threats: external locus, indistinct boundaries and low manageability. Indistinct boundaries contributed to assessments of issues as mixed. These issue types, characteristics and interpretations revealed a metaphorical above- and below-the-line differentiation among film and TV unions based on the members continued ownership of their work. With one exception – BTL unions on positioning union and jurisdiction – leaders' language reflected distributive approaches to issues.Originality/valueThis study delves deeper into Walton and McKersie's (1965) classical two-part classification of issues by adding a typology of characteristics and operational definitions to aid in identifying threats, opportunities and mixed evaluations through the novel use of issue analysis in industrial relations.
Abstract Trustworthiness is typically regarded as a desirable feature of national identification systems (NISs); but the variegated nature of the trustor communities associated with such systems makes it difficult to see how a single system could be equally trustworthy to all actual and potential trustors. This worry is accentuated by common theoretical accounts of trustworthiness. According to such accounts, trustworthiness is relativized to particular individuals and particular areas of activity, such that one can be trustworthy with regard to some individuals in respect of certain matters, but not trustworthy with regard to all trustors in respect of every matter. The present article challenges this relativistic approach to trustworthiness by outlining a new account of trustworthiness, dubbed the expectation-oriented account. This account allows for the possibility of an absolutist (or one-place) approach to trustworthiness. Such an account, we suggest, is the approach that best supports the effort to develop NISs. To be trustworthy, we suggest, is to minimize the error associated with trustor expectations in situations of social dependency (commonly referred to as trust situations), and to be trustworthy in an absolute sense is to assign equal value to all expectation-related errors in all trust situations. In addition to outlining the features of the expectation-oriented account, we describe some of the implications of this account for the design, development, and management of trustworthy NISs.
AbstractTurning the wealth of health and social data into insights to promote better public health, while enabling more effective personalized care, is critically important for society. In particular, social determinants of health have a significant impact on individual health, well-being, and inequalities in health. However, concerns around accessing and processing such sensitive data, and linking different datasets, involve significant challenges, not least to demonstrate trustworthiness to all stakeholders. Emergingdatatrust servicesprovide an opportunity to address key barriers to health and social care data linkage schemes, specifically a loss of control experienced by data providers, including the difficulty to maintain a remote reidentification risk over time, and the challenge of establishing and maintaining a social license.Datatrust servicesare a sociotechnical evolution that advances databases and data management systems, and brings together stakeholder-sensitive data governance mechanisms with data services to create a trusted research environment. In this article, we explore the requirements fordatatrust services, a proposed implementation—the Social Data Foundation, and an illustrative test case. Moving forward, such an approach would help incentivize, accelerate, and join up the sharing of regulated data, and the use of generated outputs safely amongst stakeholders, including healthcare providers, social care providers, researchers, public health authorities, and citizens.
ObjectivesThrough the Multidisciplinary Ecosystem to study Lifecourse Determinants and Prevention of Early-onset Burdensome Multimorbidity (MELD-B) project, we established the SAIL MELD-B e-cohort (SMC) and the SAIL MELD-B Young adults e-cohort (SMYC), with the aim to enhance the understanding of 'burdensomeness' in individuals living with multimorbidity, including identifying new clusters of burdensome indicators, exploring early life risk factors and modelling potential preventative scenarios. ApproachWe use routinely-collected anonymised linked demographic, health and administrative data sources available within the SAIL Databank to define SMC and SMYC. These cohorts were developed using a reproducible, maintainable, methodological pipeline that allows for dynamic updates as data coverage expands. The pipeline efficiently processes new burdensomeness concepts, facilitating the extraction of relevant records associated with the concepts identified for use in the SMC and SMYC. ResultsSMC and SMYC comprises of 5,180,602 and 896,155 individuals registered with a Welsh General Practice at any time between 1st January 2000 and 31st December 2022 respectively. Analysis of primary and secondary care health data reveals that the most common conditions in SMC were depression (21.6%), anxiety (21.1%), asthma (17.5%), hypertension (16.2%), and atopic eczema (14.1%). In SMYC, the most common conditions were atopic eczema (21.2%), asthma (11.6%), anxiety (6.0%), deafness (4.6%), and depression (4.3%). Conclusions and ImplicationsSMC and SMYC provide two generalisable population samples, which can be used to address various research questions across MELD-B. The adaptability of the methodological pipeline allows cohort curation to be repurposed for other projects accessing population-scale data sources and trusted research environments.
The Internet provides fast and ubiquitous communication that enables all kinds of communities and provides citizens with easy access to vast amounts of information, although the information is not necessarily verified and may present a distorted view of real events or facts. The Internet's power as an instant source of mass information can be used to influence opinions, which can have far-reaching consequences. This report's purpose is to provide input into the advisory processes that determine European support for research into the effects and management of Fake News (e.g. deliberate misinformation), Echo Chambers (e.g. closed communities where biases can be reinforced through lack of diversity in opinions), and the Internet's influence on social and political movements such as Populism; to provide insight into how innovation that takes these aspects into account can be supported. To address this aim, this report concerns socio-technical implications of the Internet related to the impact of closed communities and misinformation and makes recommendations derived from a consultation with domain experts concerning the research needed to address specific challenges. This study has used the Delphi Method, an iterative consultation mechanism aimed at consensus building within a targeted panel of experts. Three rounds of iteration were undertaken and a total of fourteen experts participated in all three rounds. The result of the consultation is 67 assertion statements that reached consensus amongst the experts in five broad themes, and these are presented in this report and summarised into key recommendations. The key overarching recommendation is that we need to understand how opinions are formed and are influenced in the current digital age. Investigations are needed to understand the underlying cognitive and emotional processes that enable peoples' opinions to be influenced in the context of a hybrid media system that mixes online and offline channels and broadcast and interactive social media.
The Internet provides fast and ubiquitous communication that enables all kinds of communities and provides citizens with easy access to vast amounts of information, although the information is not necessarily verified and may present a distorted view of real events or facts. The Internet's power as an instant source of mass information can be used to influence opinions, which can have far-reaching consequences. This report's purpose is to provide input into the advisory processes that determine European support for research into the effects and management of Fake News (e.g. deliberate misinformation), Echo Chambers (e.g. closed communities where biases can be reinforced through lack of diversity in opinions), and the Internet's influence on social and political movements such as Populism; to provide insight into how innovation that takes these aspects into account can be supported. To address this aim, this report concerns socio-technical implications of the Internet related to the impact of closed communities and misinformation and makes recommendations derived from a consultation with domain experts concerning the research needed to address specific challenges. This study has used the Delphi Method, an iterative consultation mechanism aimed at consensus building within a targeted panel of experts. Three rounds of iteration were undertaken and a total of fourteen experts participated in all three rounds. The result of the consultation is 67 assertion statements that reached consensus amongst the experts in five broad themes, and these are presented in this report and summarised into key recommendations. The key overarching recommendation is that we need to understand how opinions are formed and are influenced in the current digital age. Investigations are needed to understand the underlying cognitive and emotional processes that enable peoples' opinions to be influenced in the context of a hybrid media system that mixes online and offline channels and broadcast and interactive social media.
