Another nasty thought, a number of universities are now claiming the copyright of _all_ work written by staff, contrary I believe to the UN Charter on Human Rights). So maybe academics will be controlled by their employers deciding, perhaps in consultation with funders, what may or mat be published in order to comply with the new regulations.
Robert
Professor Robert Moore
School of Sociology and Social Policy
Eleanor Rathbone Building
The University of Liverpool
L69 7ZA
Telephone and fax: 44 (0) 1352 714456
________________________________________
From: email list for Radical Statistics [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of PILLINGER Rebecca [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 19 April 2016 15:58
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: serious threat to evidence informed policy
I have a lot of problems with the impact agenda (science doesn’t work by drawing conclusions from each study individually so dissemination to policy audiences shouldn’t happen on a per-journal-article basis; academics aren’t necessarily always the best skilled people to present their own research to non-academics anyway; it encourages the investigation of new research questions when that’s already rewarded and we need to be incentivising replication; not-immediately-policy-relevant questions are also important to investigate; among many others). But this is equally bad in the other direction!
Like Wendy, I also wonder how this is supposed to interact with the impact agenda. Are they going to do away with that and no longer require us to demonstrate the impact of specific pieces of work? Or will both be in place, so that we must demonstrate impact while not being allowed to encourage policymakers to engage with our work (or perhaps even to present it in their presence)? (In which case I guess impact in the future will happen either by hoping really hard that politicians feel a sudden and spontaneous urge to read the issue of a journal with our article in it, or via private sector third parties who come and listen to us present with the extremely tacit understanding that they will then go away and talk to politicians entirely coincidentally and just happen to mention all this interesting research they’ve heard about lately.)
Is there no way we could not have the impact agenda and not have this “anti-lobbying “ restriction as well? No chance that government funding could be used to set up centres whose entire job was to read through the literature on policy-relevant (and maybe even other) questions and summarise the results for policy (and perhaps other non-academic) audiences? Letting researchers get on with doing what they do best, producing the research in the first place and disseminating it via journal articles and conferences?
Rebecca
From: email list for Radical Statistics [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Phillip Kent
Sent: 19 April 2016 14:07
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: serious threat to evidence informed policy
Another posting and blog link about this, on the PSCI-COM list:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1604&L=psci-com&F=&S=&P=32549
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Marchant, Paul <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
In regard to the thread on the threat to evidence informed policy ....
This came around on the Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) www.sgr.org.uk<http://www.sgr.org.uk> e-list this month, with a call to sign the petition to Parliament
Paul Marchant
-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Stuart Parkinson
Sent: 06 April 2016 17:06
To: sgrforum
Subject: [Sgrforum] Petition on anti-lobbying clause for research grants
Dear forum
There was a bit of discussion on this list a few weeks ago about a new anti-lobbying clause due to be introduced in the conditions for government research grants. SGR is starting to work with other science campaign groups on this issue, and a petition to parliament has been set up, which we encourage you to sign. A link to the petition and an article explaining the concerns are given below.
Please do forward the petition to your contacts
many thanks
Stuart
----------
Petition: Exempt grants for academic research from new 'anti-lobbying'
regulation
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/122957
The anti-lobbying clause will undermine evidence, policy and the public interest (Comment) https://www.theguardian.com/science/political-science/2016/feb/18/the-anti-lobbying-clause-will-undermine-evidence-policy-and-the-public-interest
----------
_______________________________________________
Sgrforum mailing list
Info and options: http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/sgrforum
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>.
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk<http://www.radstats.org.uk>.
*******************************************************
****************************************************** Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your message will go only to the sender of this message. If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically to [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>. Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk<http://www.radstats.org.uk>. *******************************************************
****************************************************** Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your message will go only to the sender of this message. If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically to [log in to unmask] Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk. *******************************************************
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************
|