Search results

1 – 7 of 7
Per page
102050
Citations:
Loading...
Available. Open Access. Open Access
Article
Publication date: 24 April 2020

Glenn Hampson

It's hard to envision a system more global and more integrated than research. Many stakeholders affect and are affected by changes in the research ecosystem; the ecosystem differs…

9116

Abstract

It's hard to envision a system more global and more integrated than research. Many stakeholders affect and are affected by changes in the research ecosystem; the ecosystem differs in significant ways across the globe and between researchers, institutions and fields of study; and there are many questions that exclusive action can't address. There are also broad ecosystem-level questions that need answering. For these reasons alone, global approaches to reform are needed.

The first step in this exploration isn't to start looking for “solutions”, but to develop a better understanding of how our needs and interests overlap. By identifying the broad contours of common ground in this conversation, we can build the guardrails and mileposts for our collaborative efforts and then allow the finer-grained details of community-developed plans more flexibility and guidance to evolve over time.

What are these overlapping interests? First, the people in this community share a common motive – idealism – to make research better able to serve the public good. We also share a common desire to unleash the power of open to improve research and accelerate discovery; we are all willing to fix issues now instead of waiting for market forces or government intervention to do this for us; and we want to ensure that everyone everywhere has equitable access to knowledge.

There is also very broad agreement in this community about which specific problems in scholarly communication need to be fixed and why, and well as many overlapping beliefs in this community. OSI participants have concluded that four such beliefs best define our common ground: (1) research and society will benefit from open done right; (2) successful solutions will require broad collaboration; (3) connected issues need to be addressed, and (4) open isn't a single outcome, but a spectrum.

OSI has been observing and debating the activity in scholarly communication since late 2014 with regard to understanding possible global approaches and solutions for improving the future of open research. While the COVID-19 pandemic has made the importance of open science abundantly clear, the struggle to achieve this goal (not just for science but for all research) has been mired in a lack of clarity and urgency for over 20 years now, mostly stalling on the tension between wanting more openness but lacking realistic solutions for making this happen on a large scale with so many different stakeholders, needs and perspectives involved.

Underlying this tension is a fundamental difference in philosophy: whether the entire scholarly communication marketplace, driven by the needs and desires of researchers, should determine what kind of open it wants and needs; or whether this marketplace should be compelled to adopt open reform measures developed primarily by the scholarly communication system's main billpayers-funders and libraries. There is no widespread difference of opinion in the community whether open is worth pursuing. The debate is mostly over what specific open solutions are best, and at what pace open reforms should occur.

OSI has proposed a plan of action for working together to rebuild the future of scholarly communication on strong, common ground foundation. This plan – which we're referring to as Plan A – calls for joint action on studies, scholarly communication infrastructure improvement, and open outreach/education. Plan A also calls for working together with UNESCO to develop a unified global roadmap for the future of open, and for striving to ensure the community's work in this space is researcher-focused, collaborative, connected (addressing connected issues like peer review), diverse and flexible (no one-size-fits-all solutions), and beneficial to research. UNESCO's goal is to finish its roadmap proposal by early 2022.

For a full discussion of OSI's common ground recommendations, please see the Plan A website at http://plan-a.world.

Details

Emerald Open Research, vol. 1 no. 13
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 2631-3952

Keywords

Access Restricted. View access options
Article
Publication date: 20 January 2023

Tryggvi Thayer

The purpose of this study was to determine in what ways the competence frameworks analyzed converge or diverge and whether they are similar enough to be considered equivalent.

355

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to determine in what ways the competence frameworks analyzed converge or diverge and whether they are similar enough to be considered equivalent.

Design/methodology/approach

This study is based on a comparative analysis of competence frameworks describing sustainability education and foresight and futures education.

Findings

This study finds that sustainability education and futures and foresight education differ in significant ways in terms of expected outcomes as described by competence frameworks. The two educational fields cannot be considered equivalent. Rather, we find that they are complementary.

Research limitations/implications

This study is based on an analysis of competence frameworks that have been published in peer-reviewed publications. They do not necessarily reflect what is actually practiced in educational environments. Also, competence frameworks may be in circulation that have not been described in scholarly publications and are therefore not included in this study.

Practical implications

The results of this study can be helpful for further refining and developing both sustainability education and futures and foresight education by clarifying the different roles that they play in promoting the skills needed to address long-term challenges in uncertain futures.

Social implications

The rapid rise in prominence of sustainability education, in particular, but also foresight and futures education, is indicative of current concerns about the future of our planet and the beings that inhabit it. There is a sense that a key role of education should be to contribute to a pursuit of positive futures for all. By clarifying how current educational practices address this need, this study contributes to the overall goal of education.

Originality/value

Sustainability education and foresight and futures education have been regarded as being at least similar enough that implementing one may preclude the necessity for the other. This study shows that there are significant differences between the two as they have been defined in published competence frameworks. In particular, it shows that sustainability education emphasizes the use of anticipatory intelligence for strategic planning, while foresight and futures education emphasize the generation of anticipatory intelligence. The two fields are found to be complementary in that they address different, but equally necessary, skills needed to address long-term challenges.

Details

On the Horizon: The International Journal of Learning Futures, vol. 31 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1074-8121

Keywords

Access Restricted. View access options
Article
Publication date: 1 June 2001

Rosemary Kennedy and Anthony Charles Sidwell

The recently constructed Museum of Tropical Queensland in Townsville is reviewed as a case study in research into re‐engineering the construction delivery process. The project…

500

Abstract

The recently constructed Museum of Tropical Queensland in Townsville is reviewed as a case study in research into re‐engineering the construction delivery process. The project involved an innovative approach to the procurement of a public building and resulted in a highly successful outcome. Several key areas which were identified as contributing to the success of this project need to be investigated further to establish their role in contributing to the success of other construction industry projects.

Details

Construction Innovation, vol. 1 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1471-4175

Keywords

Access Restricted. View access options
Article
Publication date: 19 April 2011

Salinda Perera, Steven Davis and Marton Marosszeky

Value in construction is defined in so many ways and used to mean many different things, often linked to cost, time, objectives and customers that there exists no concise and…

1234

Abstract

Purpose

Value in construction is defined in so many ways and used to mean many different things, often linked to cost, time, objectives and customers that there exists no concise and complete description of what constitutes value within a construction context. Hence, the purpose of this paper is to study the current perceptions of value by the construction players and compare with emerging theories of value in the literature.

Design/methodology/approach

Empirical evidence of prevailing perceptions of value within the support role provided by the head contractor (HC) to the subcontractors (SCs) is presented based on two years of action research on six construction sites in Sydney, Australia.

Findings

The results show that value management during the construction phase is currently understood as intrinsic to other HC functions. The paper presents a list of activities identified by HCs and SCs as key support services to be performed by the HC to enable efficient progression of construction.

Research limitations/implications

There are limitations in generalising the outcomes of this study to the construction industry. Further research is required in advancing the role of the HC in overall construction organisation.

Originality/value

This paper adds value in advancing the role of the HC in construction. Empirical evidence of value‐based management closely following the current perceptions of the construction players compared to managing value as a separate function is presented.

Details

Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, vol. 16 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1366-4387

Keywords

Access Restricted. View access options
Article
Publication date: 9 September 2021

Zhu Huang, Chao Mao, Jun Wang and Abdul-Manan Sadick

The construction industry is the major sector in China but it has been exposed to a series of problems including low productivity and workforce shortage. However, construction…

1916

Abstract

Purpose

The construction industry is the major sector in China but it has been exposed to a series of problems including low productivity and workforce shortage. However, construction robots as an effective and sustainable approach to overcome the difficulties in construction industry have not been widely adopted. Few studies attempted to investigate on the adoption of construction robots in China. In order to fill this gap, this study aim to address the barriers to the adoption of construction robots in China.

Design/methodology/approach

Through literature review, semi-structured interview 24 factors hindering the adoption of construction robots are summarized. Next, a total of valid 150 questionnaires delivered to the 7 stakeholders were collected. Ranking analysis was used to identify 21 critical factors was determined by the mean score analysis and factor analysis extracted 21 critical factors into 5 clusters.

Findings

Results indicate that the “technological performance and management” cluster is the most dominant of the 5 clusters. The most important barrier is “Limited research and design input”, followed by “High purchase cost” and “Unstructured construction environment”. Construction robots are still under R&D have had limited field applications in the production and construction process.

Originality/value

The research findings provide a useful reference for different stakeholders to identify the critical factors appropriate strategies to promote the adoption of construction robots. Furthermore, this study provides recommendations to promote adoption of construction robots.

Details

Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, vol. 29 no. 9
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0969-9988

Keywords

Access Restricted. View access options
Book part
Publication date: 14 December 2004

Philip F. Napoli

The boundaries of Little Italy are not precise, and have shifted over time. In the 19th century, the district extended south of Canal Street into the area identified by Jacob Riis…

Abstract

The boundaries of Little Italy are not precise, and have shifted over time. In the 19th century, the district extended south of Canal Street into the area identified by Jacob Riis as the “Mulberry Bend,” and described as “the foul core of New York’s slums.”3 By the 1960s, Little Italy had retreated across Canal Street, as the Italian population began to leave the neighborhood for other areas in the city. For the purposes of this paper, Little Italy shall be understood as comprising three census tracts in New York City’s Manhattan county, numbers 41, 43, and 45. This area, lying within a short walking distance of City Hall, is roughly bounded by Canal Street on the south, Bowery on the East, Broadway on the west, and East Houston street to the north. Nicknamed the Mulberry District, it became the first and largest Italian enclave in the United States between 1870s and 1924. While there had been an Italian community in New York for generations, historian George Pozetta has argued that the winter of 1872–1873 was pivotal in the development of this community, when more than 2000 poor Italian immigrants, arrived at Castle Garden, the immigrant reception center, unable to care for themselves.4 These immigrants were quickly fitted in to the preexisting Italian community, taking advantage of the contacts provided by the bossi, typically northern Italian men who had arrived earlier, to find jobs in such local enterprises as groceries and saloons, and with American employers. Once the new comers settled, a process of chain-migration began. By the later 1870s, the bossi were acting as agents for gangs of labor sent out from New York to work in other areas across North American. As a result, the Mulberry district became a sort of transshipment point for Italian labor.

Details

Race and Ethnicity in New York City
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-0-76231-149-1

Access Restricted. View access options
Article
Publication date: 12 January 2018

Silvia Albareda-Tiana, Salvador Vidal-Raméntol and Mónica Fernández-Morilla

The purpose of this case study is to explore the principles and practices of sustainable development (SD) in the university curriculum.

4310

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this case study is to explore the principles and practices of sustainable development (SD) in the university curriculum.

Design/methodology/approach

To explore the principles linked with the sustainable development goals (SDGs) and the learning and teaching practices in sustainability at the International University of Catalonia (Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, UIC, in Catalan), an empirical study was carried out by using a mixed methodology for data collection. Indicators related to SDGs found in the University curriculum (quantitative analysis) were measured using Excel, combined with in-depth semi-structured interviews to the deans of different faculties (qualitative study), which were analysed using Atlas.ti.

Findings

Several visions, difficulties and challenges were identified in this mixed-method study around the concept of sustainability, which allowed the authors to describe and portray a specific starting position in relation to the SDGs at the UIC.

Research limitations/implications

The presence of dimensions linked to the SDGs in the University curriculum were analysed by means of a quantitative study. However, global competences related to education for sustainable development were not studied.

Practical implications

Special emphasis was given to the challenges and opportunities for training future graduates and the whole University community in SD.

Originality/value

This paper shows a methodological exploration of the principles related to the SDGs and the learning and teaching practices in sustainability in higher education.

Details

International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, vol. 19 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1467-6370

Keywords

1 – 7 of 7
Per page
102050