Growing concerns about climate change and energy security have led to a strong focus on energy demand reduction and energy efficiency within United Kingdom (UK) energy policy. At the same time, information and communication technologies (ICTs) have become pervasive in society and this has brought with it new policy options which use them as enabling technologies. One such policy option planned for implementation in the UK is the use of smart meters and real-time displays to encourage people to become more aware of their energy consumption and possibly change their energy-related behaviours. Smart meters and display units by definition link individuals, technologies and society, and their effectiveness is influenced by a range of factors. Ten semi-structured stakeholder interviews with industry, government and academia and a review of literature were conducted in order to identify which factors are most likely to contribute to the effectiveness of implementing smart meters and real-time displays in the UK. Further analysis showed a number of key themes and perspectives on behavioural change, particularly as they relate to household electricity use and the role of smart meters in the UK energy policy, including the role of ICTs in energy demand reduction more generally.
Disclaimer+The+ works+ available+ here+ are+ the+ responsibility+ of+ the+ individual+ author(s)+ and+ do+ not+ necessarily+ represent+the+views+of+other+SPRU+researchers.+As+maLers+of+policy+and+prac$ce,+SPRU+does+not+ endorse+individual+research+contribu$ons.+ Guidelines Don't worry!Multicriteria Mapping is ready to play with, without reading this Manual! The online tool is supported by easy pop-up help boxes at each stage of the process:
Neglected diseases have been characterised as a misalignment in the research system because so little research is directed towards such a large burden of disease. By focusing on one of the most extreme cases of misalignment, we highlight opportunities and potential pitfalls of targeting research towards specific social outcomes more generally. We trace how the category of neglected diseases came to prominence, largely framed as a problem to be addressed by scientific research. This mobilised R&D investment but there have been unintended consequences, particularly for broader health system strengthening and research capacity building efforts. These developments may contribute to a 'tragedy of the evaluation commons', where the effectiveness of broad remit research programs remain poorly characterised. This exacerbates a lack of evidence, relative to targeting specific diseases where the evaluation challenge is narrower. Research targeting then, is intimately tied to evaluation practice. A new research and policy agenda oriented towards broader research evaluation may support further investments not just for biomedical R&D in high-income countries, but also for researchers in other countries, for interdisciplinary, applied and social sciences, and ultimately, for poor patients.
Disclaimer+The+ works+ available+ here+ are+ the+ responsibility+ of+ the+ individual+ author(s)+ and+ do+ not+ necessarily+ represent+the+views+of+other+SPRU+researchers.+As+maLers+of+policy+and+prac$ce,+SPRU+does+not+ endorse+individual+research+contribu$ons.+ Guidelines Don't worry!Multicriteria Mapping is ready to play with, without reading this Manual! The online tool is supported by easy pop-up help boxes at each stage of the process:
The purpose of this essay is to critically review the design of methods for ethically robust forms of technology appraisal in the regulation of research and innovation in synthetic biology. It will focus, in particular, on the extent to which cost-benefit analysis offers a basis for informing decisions about which technological pathways to pursue and which to discourage. A further goal is to consider what (if anything) the precautionary principle might offer in enabling better decisions. And this, in turn, raises questions about why mention of precaution can excite accusations of unscientific bias or irrational, "anti-innovation" extremism. What does the polarized debate tell us about the politics around synthetic biology? In seeking more rigorous, timely, and practical ways to govern these remarkable new technologies, what might we be missing? The sophistication, diversity, and scope of synthetic biology may seem to make it a rather idiosyncratic area for exploring these general issues. It may seem to be a special case, with the bewildering pace of change amplifying the difficulties. But at root, some of the trickiest issues are just specific instances of familiar and long-standing conundrums in the governance of science and technology. The basic challenge is how to weigh up, for a wide range of potential options, the various pros and cons, as viewed from divergent perspectives, and find a way to justify the best course of action on behalf of society as a whole. This is the central problem addressed by a number of techniques in CBA. On the face of it, synthetic biology seems to present just one more application of these well-established and self-confident prescriptive methods. But there do emerge several obstinate, even prohibitive, difficulties for CBA. Although they are well acknowledged by the scholarly literature on and around this topic, they are often sidelined in practice. Yet all are central to the case for applying the concept of precaution to a field like synthetic biology. This essay will briefly explore multicriteria mapping, an appraisal method for exploring contrasting perspectives on emerging technologies, as one practical way to address them. The essay focuses on MCM, not because it presents any sort of panacea for appraisal, but because it is illustrative of the concrete implications of precaution. Setting out even just one among potentially many practical alternative methods at least refutes the last-ditch argument that CBA is the only operational choice.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.