Dear all,
In response to the last comments on the subject (hopefully they've copied in ok)
The problem, as I see it, with option 2, is that the "smarter" option requires a window into the future, and as such is immeasurable. How can you design a smart measure of things that have yet to happen, or which are linked through a long chain of events.
I see no system that could get that right, and because of the fact that we don't/can't know what will have major impact in the future, I'm strongly in favour of option one - where the emphasis on societal and economic impact is reduced.
Stewart Fishwick
New Blood Lecturer in Geophysics
Department of Geology
University of Leicester
> Dear Sheila,
> I wonder which of the following two general lines you're intending to take:
> - "The overall level of emphasis on societal and economic impact
> should be reduced";
> or
> - "The measurement of societal and economic impact should be smarter,
> and take account of non-immediate and indirect impacts"?
> My personal preference is for the latter, but I hardly constitute any kind of majority vote.
|