Science Policy UK: report on strategically important metals
UK Government response to the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee report on Strategically Important Metals.
Filter by Author
- John Jackson (7)
Filter by Category
- Biodiversity (100)
- Science policy (67)
- government (23)
- Ecosystem services (22)
@nhm_science
Blogs
Filtered on Taxonomy term (House of Commons Science and Technology Committee), Date (2011).
Science Education UK: report on practical and field science in education
The UK House of Commons Science and Technology Committee has produced a report on Practical experiments
in school science lessons and science field trips. There are some fairly prosaic concerns on bureaucratic barriers to out-of-classroom science, but an interesting, complex and partial picture of the role of practicals and field work in education and in educating scientists. Wide range of evidence views from different UK organisations.
Science policy UK: peer review and research integrity
The UK parliament's House of Commons Committee on Science and Technology has published a report of its inquiry on Peer Review in Scientific Publications, with conclusions and recommendations. /... more
.../The Committee examines the current approach, reminding publishers, funders and scientists of the principles involved and urging caution on use of impact factors. Recommendations on better coordination and innovation, training for peer review, open access to data and other issues. The report looks at developments in virtual pre- and post-publication commentary and review.
A key conclusion is that there is insufficient oversight of research integrity in the UK: the recommendation is for a government body for regulation and key responsible individuals for each research employer (it is emphasised that the responsibility for ensuring integrity lies significantly with the employer).
This recommendation picks up on the late 2010 report from the UK Research Integrity Futures Group, formed by Research Councils UK (RCUK), Universities UK (UUK) and the UK Department of Health (DH), in association with the UK Higher Education Funding Councils (HEFCs), the Wellcome Trust, the Association of Medical Research Charities (AMRC) and the Association of British Pharmaceutical Industries (ABPI). Some concern that the UK Research Integrity Office is not being funded beyond its current term.
Science Policy UK: Parliamentary inquiry into science lessons and field science in school education
The UK Parliament's House of Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology has announced a new inquiry into school science lessons and field trips. Evidence by 11 May 2011. /...more
.../key questions of interest are:
1. How important are practical experiments and field trips in science education?
2. Are practical experiments in science lessons and science field trips in decline? If they are, what are the reasons for the decline?
3. What part do health and safety concerns play in preventing school pupils from performing practical experiments in science lessons and going on field trips? What rules and regulations apply to science experiments and field trips and how are they being interpreted?
4. Do examination boards adequately recognise practical experiments and trips?
5. If the quality or number of practical experiments and field trips is declining, what are the consequences for science education and career choices? For example, what effects are there on the performance and achievement of pupils and students in Higher Education?
6. What changes should be made?
7. Is the experience of schools in England in line with schools in the devolved administrations and other countries?
Science Policy UK: Parliamentary inquiry into peer review
The UK House of Commons Science and Technology Committee has just launched an inquiry into peer review with a deadline for evidence of 10 March 2011. This is regularly raised in the context of research funding - RCUK and RAE - but this seems to be linked in part to the controversy on climate science, although the scope is very much wider. /...more
.../
The inquiry is into "the operation and effectiveness of the peer review process used to examine and validate scientific results and papers prior to publication" and is interested in particular in:
- the strengths and weaknesses of peer review as a quality control mechanism for scientists, publishers and the public;measures to strengthen peer review;
- the value and use of peer reviewed science on advancing and testing scientific knowledge;
- the value and use of peer reviewed science in informing public debate;
- the extent to which peer review varies between scientific disciplines and between countries across the world;
- the processes by which reviewers with the requisite skills and knowledge are identified, in particular as the volume of multi-disciplinary research increases;
- the impact of IT and greater use of online resources on the peer review process; and
- possible alternatives to peer review
There will obviously be a lot of discussion on the overall approach in funding and publication, where there has been a lot of change in the past decade - peer review colleges, research assessment in HE, electronic publication and pre-publication, and so on. Would also be interesting to think about the way in which peer review operates into policy areas - the IPCC and possible development of IPBES will be interesting, where there is development of expert consensus for large assessment exercises that involve wide multidisciplinary groupings.
Earth Science Policy UK: Rare earth metals - parliamentary enquiry
There is current interest in rare earth and strategic metals in UK policy circles - I made a post on this in December. The UK Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology has just issued a briefing note for parliamentarians to tie in with the Select Committee inquiry. Covers the basics, but not much reference to other international policy initiatives.
Earth Science policy: Rare earths and strategic metals
Interesting Nature news blog post yesterday on science policy discussions in the US on rare earth metals and their availabilty. This has been a fairly regular topic in the last five years with concerns on where the metals are and how markets operate.
In the US, there have been reports such as the 2008 Minerals, Critical Minerals, and the U.S. Economy from the National Research Council, aimed at Congress. Richard H has pointed to European developments: the EU Raw Materials Initiative resulted in the publication of Critical Raw Materials in June 2010, the report and an annex of an Ad Hoc Task Force on Defining Critical Raw Materials. I believe that a Communication from the Commission is due on this in January - although it has leaked a little to the press.
In the UK, there is a current inquiry of the House of Commons Committee on Science and Technology on Strategically Important Metals, which is asking questions about the UK position - written evidence due by 17 December 2010.
The lists of metals in the different reports shift slightly, owing to methodologies for assessment and the economic or strategic interests defined. Politically, there is increasing noise about working with China - such as from a conference last week in Germany that was reported in Der Spigel. The German government raised this in mid October with the release of a national strategy and there have been exchanges since, with proposals for G8 and G20 discussions.