Science policy: uncertainty in science
Interesting working paper published by the LSE Grantham Institute entitled Scientific Uncertainty: a user's guide.
Filter by Author
- John Jackson (5)
Filter by Category
- Biodiversity (13)
- (-) Science policy (5)
- Ecosystem services (4)
- Defra (3)
- Education (3)
- climate change (3)
Filter by Date
- 2017 (3)
- - Mar (1)
- - Nov (2)
- 2014 (2)
- - Feb (1)
- - Aug (1)
- 2013 (6)
- - May (2)
- - Jun (1)
- - Jul (2)
- - Dec (1)
- 2012 (8)
- - Feb (2)
- - Mar (1)
- - Apr (1)
- - May (1)
- - Jul (1)
- - Oct (1)
- - Nov (1)
- 2011 (62)
- - Jan (13)
- - Feb (9)
- - Mar (6)
- - Apr (5)
- - May (6)
- - Jun (5)
- - Jul (4)
- - Sep (2)
- - Oct (3)
- - Dec (4)
- 2010 (18)
- - Oct (2)
- - Nov (7)
- - Dec (9)
@nhm_science
Blogs
Filtered on Taxonomy term (Science policy), Date (Aug 2011).
Science policy: bibliometrics from Google and MS
Article in Nature about development of academic bibliometrics by Google and Microsoft. Declan Butler Computing giants launch free science metrics Published online 2 August 2011 | Nature 476, 18 (2011) | doi:10.1038/476018a
Science policy: Citizen science and social media
A useful overview article in Yale environment360 on citizen science and social media.
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: review of BBC science coverage
The report and response on the impartiality of BBC coverage of science has been published - commissioned by the BBC Trust. Interesting reading overall, with a conclusion of a high quality of coverage, but areas for improvement. In broad terms there is a need to improve the appropriate weight given in terms of the scientific consensus (where this exists) in areas of controversy - so how pro and con views on human-induced climate change are given. A lot of detail and case studies over a particular time period in evidence. One slight oddity is that it does not appear that wildlife/nature programming is considered as science: perhaps this is because the scientific basis is not explicit to the layperson?