DOCSLIB.ORG

TSB Does Get Research, Insists Chief but Agency Still Has Some Way to Go on Creative Industries

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
TSB Does Get Research, Insists Chief but Agency Still Has Some Way to Go on Creative Industries Updated daily at www.ResearchResearch.com Founded by William Cullerne Bown 28 May 2014 Last orders at the Royal Institution’s bar – p4 Practical policy UCL department on providing friendly competition – p5 Longitude Room for social science? – p23 TSB does get research, insists chief But agency still has some way to go on creative industries ELATIONS BETWEEN the research councils and the R by Adam Smith [email protected] Technology Strategy Board may have been “slightly bizarre” in the past but are now very strong, the TSB’s for 2011-15 has no financial target but does mention a chief executive has said. desire for greater engagement with TSB programmes. In an interview with Research Fortnight, Iain Gray, The TSB’s delivery plan for the financial year 2014-15 whose 7-year term ends on 31 October, said there had is yet to be published. been a “definite change in the relationship”, with far The TSB is understood to be talking to the AHRC more cooperation now than in the TSB’s first few years. about becoming involved in the next round of the Senior research council figures agree. Chris AHRC’s Knowledge Exchange Hubs for the Creative Watkins, director of translational research and indus- Economy. These hubs, in Bristol, Dundee, Lancaster try at the Medical Research Council, says the TSB took and London, are funded with £16m from the AHRC some time to work out what it needed to do with the until 2015-16. They are seen as an obvious chance for research councils, but that the parties now “have a closer collaboration between the council and the TSB. much greater degree of discussion”. “The hubs would have had more money and sup- Celia Caulcott, executive director for innova- port from businesses had the TSB been involved,” says tion and skills at the Biotechnology and Biological Frank Boyd, director of the TSB’s Knowledge Transfer Sciences Research Council, agrees. She says the coun- Network for creative industries. He is working with the cil had to convince the TSB to work with bioscientists. TSB, research councils and the innovation agency Nesta “We were concerned that if we could not get the TSB to on an innovation roadmap for the creative industries. get to grips with biology then we might not have ful- The idea of the TSB being involved in the hubs filled our obligations,” she says, adding that TSB staff is similar to how the Catapult centres work, a model had to be shown the potential applications of biology. under review by technology entrepreneur Hermann “If you are an automotive engineer, you don’t neces- Hauser. Gray expects Hauser’s review, which is due this sarily see biology as a technology.” autumn, to support the public-private collaboration Caulcott joined the BBSRC just one year after the that underpins the catapults. Hauser is also said to be TSB was set up in 2007. She says the research councils considering expanding the types of body that work “were expected to commit a certain amount of their with the catapults to include, for example, research budget to working with the TSB”. The BBSRC com- and technology organisations. “That makes a lot of mitted to spending at least £50 million of its 2011-15 sense,” says David Bembo, who chairs the Association budget on this, and the MRC’s delivery plan for 2011- for University Research and Industry Links. 15 earmarks £133m for it. But Bembo suggests there is still work to be done “We’re not driven by artificial financial targets to convince some universities of the value of being now,” Gray says. “About 5 or 6 years ago, it was a involved. “There are some institutions that don’t think slightly bizarre relationship driven by targets.” they’re in the frame,” he says, adding that the TSB’s Gray says he would like the creative industries, and programmes are not always easily especially their senior business figures, to get more accessible to academics. “That’s a Every new opportunity involved with the TSB. And some people, including lesson the TSB could learn from the for research funding David Willetts, minister for universities and science, research councils.” from every sponsor in want the agency to work more closely with the Arts Caulcott, however, disagrees: the UK, EU, US & beyond and Humanities Research Council. “That view treats the TSB as a Every discipline The AHRC had a target of spending £3m on working research council, but it’s not a Every fortnight with the TSB in 2008-11. The council’s delivery plan research council.” Issue No. 435 2 editorial Research Fortnight, 28 May 2014 Edited by Ehsan Masood [email protected] Tel: 020 7216 6500 Fax: 020 7216 6501 Unit 111, 134-146 Curtain Road, London EC2A 3AR elsewhere “We’re quite astonished that The Times Staying put has taken the decision to put such a non-story on its front page.” Nicola Gulley, editorial director at the Institute of Physics, insists a climate change GO Science is better off outside the Cabinet Office paper was rejected from the IoP journal Environmental Research Letters because it failed to pass peer review, not because of MPs on the House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee political concerns. Nature, 16/5/14. have long wanted the Government Office for Science to be transferred “Everything that I believe about out of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and into the democracy tells me that you cannot and Cabinet Office in the heart of the Whitehall machine. The committee’s should not have an entirely unelected part of a legislative process. On the other hand, report on its inquiry into government horizon scanning, published earlier it works. And it works extremely well.” this month, gave added urgency to this ambition. The departing chairman of the Environment The MPs fear that GO Science has become isolated in its two decades at Agency, Chris Smith, finds himself warming to the House of Lords. Politics Home, 15/5/14. BIS. Chief scientific adviser Mark Walport and his team do excellent work, they say, but then comes the sting: quoting cabinet secretary Jeremy “There has been a growing sense of Heywood, they claim the office’s “impeccable” work has “not always frustration and anger among black British academics over how our commu- translated into actual policy changes”. nities have been treated by the British As Whitehall speak goes, that is some indictment. To paraphrase the fic- university system.” tional Sir Humphrey Appleby: “These science chaps might be top-drawer, William Ackah, a lecturer in community and voluntary-sector studies at Birkbeck, but unless we can see them they haven’t a hope in hell of being heard.” University of London, calls for black studies So, should GO Science move down the road to become more visible? to be an option in UK higher education. The Certainly, the Cabinet Office is the place for cross-government Guardian, 14/5/14. policy. Its joint heads, Francis Maude and Oliver Letwin, are powerful “This is going to make an ‘us and them’ Conservative modernisers who have the prime minister’s ear. situation: the medical researchers will be One motivation for moving GO Science to BIS was to keep Whitehall laughing and the enabling scientists in maths, chemistry, physics and so forth science advice and the running of the research councils under one roof. will be suffering.” That carries less weight today, as the network of chief scientists and the Biologist Gustav Nossal thinks the research councils’ remit have both expanded beyond their 1994 borders. Australian government is dividing sci- ence by promising $20 billion for medical Walport himself has said that science funding is not his business. research while cutting funding in other But for the marriage to work, the Cabinet Office has to want GO Science areas. The Australian, 15/5/14. too—and there is little sign of mutual attraction (see Analysis, page 6). “We want to avoid a situation where we When Heywood created a cross-government facility for horizon scan- have two communities that don’t speak to ning last July, he chose the Cabinet Office even though the Foresight each other. We don’t want a ‘Google bus’ office at GO Science is a world leader in analysing the future. Going back type of scenario.” Jess Tyrrell, communications consultant for further, the Behavioural Insights Team, which pioneered the idea of the Centre for London think tank, explains testing policies before rolling them out, was also created in the Cabinet the idea behind a planned website that Office. This is not a party-political issue, as the original nudge unit was will help young people living in the Tech City area to benefit from education and job the last Labour government’s idea. opportunities. Wired, 14/5/14. Clearly, successive governments have opted to run fresh, more innova- tive policy-making initiatives away from BIS. That might seem like an argument for getting Walport’s team out of there, but grafting it onto the decade Cabinet Office is unlikely to make it more influential. Indeed, geographic location is rarely the main determinant in the pursuit of influence. There “It is simply fantasy that are other factors that Whitehall’s power brokers believe GO Science lacks. UK ministers are going to Jon Day, chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee, summed up one control appointments to such factor in his evidence to the Commons inquiry. Horizon scanning, he said, needed “a senior champion” with cross-departmental influence. research ethics committees.” On balance, GO Science is better off where it is.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Factsheet: Research and Innovation in Scotland
    Research and innovation in Scotland Scientific research and innovation drive the economy, create and innovation across public services, universities, colleges jobs and enrich and advance our society. In recognition of and business, as well as attracting global investment. But this, there is broad consensus across the political spectrum what does delivering this target look like for Scotland? to increase total investment in UK research and development (R&D). The UK government has committed to ensure that This document provides an insight into the current total investment in UK R&D reaches 2.4% of UK GDP by 2027. research and innovation landscape in Scotland to inform The Royal Society is calling for investment in R&D to reach discussions over how people across Scotland can have 3% of GDP by 2030. To achieve this, the UK must create a the opportunity to contribute to and share the benefits vibrant environment that fosters and encourages research of R&D investment in the UK. How much is spent on R&D activity in Scotland? FIGURE 1 R&D spend in Scotland1. 8.2% of the UK’s population £2.7bn 7% of £498 is based in Scotland2. in 2018 UK total per capita Who performs R&D in Scotland? FIGURE 2 Percentage distribution of R&D spend in Scotland and UK wide3. Government Private Government Private and UKRI non-profit and UKRI non-profit 7% 1% 7% 2% Higher Higher Education Education 42% Scotland 24% UK wide £2.7bn £37.1bn Business Business 50% 68% RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SCOTLAND – MAY 2021 1 Where does R&D take place in Scotland? FIGURE 3 Map of R&D activity in Scotland4.
    [Show full text]
  • Innovation Toolkit Science and Innovation Network
    INNOVATION TOOLKIT SCIENCE AND INNOVATION NETWORK INNOVATION IN THE UK Powered by INNOVATION IN THE UK: UNDERSTANDING AND CONNECTING WITH THE UK INNOVATION SYSTEM - CLICK A SECTION TO GET STARTED - > > > Introduction to the UK Comparative performance Understanding UK innovation system of UK innovation Innovation policy INTRODUCTION TO THE UK INNOVATION SYSTEM INTRODUCTION TO THE COMPARATIVE UNDERSTANDING UK INNOVATION A UK INNOVATION SYSTEM B PERFORMANCE OF THE UK C INNOVATION POLICY TOOLKIT INNOVATION SYSTEM 4 PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR INNOVATION IN THE UK (FEATURES AND CONDITIONS) CREATING KNOWLEDGE EXPLOITING KNOWLEDGE Stable, independent science and Ranked one of the best countries research funding sector: in the world for University- business interaction: Research Councils provide competitive grants for specific projects and programmes. !! Specific competitive funding streams for knowledge exchange such as the •! Intermediary Higher Education Innovation Fund Higher Education Funding Councils provide • Universities block grant funding to Universities on the ! organisations (HEIF). basis of quality measured by the Research •! Public Sector •! Technology Assessment Exercise. • Research transfer offices !! Growing networks of university ! exploitation funds like Fusion IP Establishments •! Business £5.85bn govt spend for science and research incubation and IP group. •! Research from the budget in 2015-16 including both Funding bodies •! Science & resource and capital expenditure. innovation parks !! Large and diverse public and private commercialisation
    [Show full text]
  • Diversity Results for UKRI Funding Data 2014-15 to 2018-19 Diversity Results for UKRI Funding Data
    Diversity results for UKRI funding data 2014-15 to 2018-19 Diversity results for UKRI funding data Contents Executive summary 03 Background 04 Diversity characteristics 06 Diversity analysis 09 Award rates 11 Award value 13 Studentship starts 15 References 16 2 Diversity results for UKRI funding data Executive summary In June 2020, UK Research and Innovation 3 Award values also differ by diversity characteristics. (UKRI) is publishing data for diversity Our analysis indicates that female and ethnic minority awardees tend to apply for and win smaller awards. For characteristics of its funding applicants example, the median award value for female awardees and recipients for the past five years. This is approximately 15% less than the median award publication differs from previous data values of males (£336,000 vs £395,000). Similarly, the releases in the following ways: median award value for ethnic minority awardees is approximately 8% less than that of white awardees (£353,000 vs. £383,000). This finding highlights a need ■ For the first time, data have been harmonised across to understand whether ethnic minority and female all research councils applicants tend to apply for smaller awards, or whether ■ The publication includes new, previously unpublished, there is an influence of other factors such as career data on award values stage and discipline, which in turn affect award value. ■ The data are being made available in a range of formats to facilitate access and analysis by the community We advise against using these findings alone to draw conclusions on the relationship between protected characteristics and application and award rates.
    [Show full text]
  • House of Commons Business, Innovation and Skills Committee: Inquiry Into Open Access: Response from the Royal Astronomical Society
    House of Commons Business, Innovation and Skills Committee: Inquiry into Open Access: Response from the Royal Astronomical Society Executive summary 1. This is the formal submission to the BIS Committee inquiry into Open Access from the Royal Astronomical Society (RAS). With around 3750 members (Fellows), the RAS is the leading learned society representing the interests of astronomers, space scientists, planetary scientists and geophysicists. 2. Our response centres on three of the four key points raised by the Committee; namely the acceptance of the Finch Group Report, the costs of Article Processing Charges (APCs) and the level of ‘gold’ open access uptake in the rest of the world. 3. The RAS is concerned about the implementation of the Finch recommendations by Research Councils UK (RCUK). The resulting guidelines endorse the ‘gold’ model for Open Access publishing, but do not give a clear policy steer on the way in which researchers in higher education institutions will be able to access APCs. Furthermore, there is no guidance on how research groups should handle international collaborations, in particular where a UK researcher is not the lead author on a paper. 4. The Society has additional concerns about the cost of APCs. For the most active research groups and for most journals, these are likely to be significantly higher than their current institutional subscription. 5. We also urge MPs to investigate the issue of international competitiveness further. It appears that no other nations (including other EU members, China, Japan and the United States) have so far adopted the Open Access model being implemented in the UK.
    [Show full text]
  • Speakers' Biographies
    Interdisciplinary Research HE Sector Day Speakers’ Biographies – in agenda order Please note that further information is to be added shortly. Professor Michael Wilmore (Executive Dean - Faculty of Media and Communication, Bournemouth University) Professor Michael Wilmore’s academic career spans more than twenty-five years, several disciplines, and positions both in the UK and Australia. He has held posts as Associate Dean (Learning Innovation) at Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, and Associate Dean (Education) at the University of Adelaide, initially in the Department of Anthropology, but for the majority of time in the Department of Media, including more than three years as Head of Department. His experience in university leadership encompasses extensive work on curriculum development, information and communication technology projects, collaborations with industry and other education providers, as well as finance and workload management. He has been an active researcher on a number of projects funded through competitive research grants. Each has involved extensive interdisciplinary and industry collaborations, ranging from media organisations in Nepal to the antenatal department of a large hospital. His research interests primarily concern development and health communication, but he has also completed educational research and a project on fieldwork practices in archaeology, which was his first area of study as an undergraduate at the University of Exeter. To read more: http://staffprofiles.bournemouth.ac.uk/display/mwilmore Dr. Louise Mansfield (What Works Centre for Wellbeing / Brunel University London) Dr. Louise Mansfield is Deputy Director of the Brunel Centre for Sport, Health and Wellbeing (BC.SHaW) in the College of Health and Life Sciences. Her research focuses on gendered inequalities in sport, physical activity and fitness across the lifespan.
    [Show full text]
  • Nurse Review of Research Councils Response by the Wellcome Trust - April 2015 Key Points
    Wellcome Trust CONSULTATION RESPONSE Nurse Review of Research Councils Response by the Wellcome Trust - April 2015 Key points The UK is renowned for its research excellence and much of this can be attributed to the Research Councils and the dual support system. The Councils effectively champion their separate disciplines. However, we do not think that they collaborate successfully to support interdisciplinary research that addresses major scientific or social challenges. One way to address this could be reconfiguring Research Councils UK (RCUK) so it becomes a true umbrella body, with sufficient authority and budget to enable it to fund and coordinate cross-cutting challenges, and provide oversight and management of national, international and multi-disciplinary facilities. There is a role for both response-mode and more targeted funding in the science portfolio. The Government has a key role in setting strategic priorities, but this should be done transparently and with input from expert advisers. Final funding decisions must be based on excellence. The Research Councils must better support and incentivise industry collaborations and entrepreneurship to promote translation and innovation. Introduction 1. The Wellcome Trust is a global charitable foundation dedicated to improving health. In 2015, we will invest around £750 million in biomedical research and the medical humanities — a figure that we plan to increase over the next five years. Our breadth of support includes public engagement, education and the application of research, and the majority of our funding is currently spent in the UK as a direct result of both the excellence of the research base and the Government’s commitment to science.
    [Show full text]
  • Setting up UK Research & Innovation
    House of Commons Science and Technology Committee Setting up UK Research & Innovation Eighth Report of Session 2016–17 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 7 December 2016 HC 671 Published on 13 December 2016 by authority of the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee The Science and Technology Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Government Office for Science and associated public bodies. Current membership Stephen Metcalfe MP (Conservative, South Basildon and East Thurrock) (Chair) Dr Roberta Blackman-Woods MP (Labour, City of Durham) Victoria Borwick MP (Conservative, Kensington) Stella Creasy MP (Labour (Co-op), Walthamstow) Jim Dowd MP (Labour, Lewisham West and Penge) Chris Green MP (Conservative, Bolton West) Dr Tania Mathias MP (Conservative, Twickenham) Carol Monaghan MP (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North West) Graham Stringer MP (Labour, Blackley and Broughton) Derek Thomas MP (Conservative, St Ives) Matt Warman MP (Conservative, Boston and Skegness) The following were also members of the committee during the parliament: Nicola Blackwood MP (Conservative, Oxford West and Abingdon) (Chair of the Committee until 19 July 2016) Liz McInnes MP (Labour, Heywood and Middleton) Valerie Vaz MP (Labour, Walsall South) Daniel Zeichner MP (Labour, Cambridge) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication Committee reports are published on the Committee’s website at www.parliament.uk/science and in print by Order of the House.
    [Show full text]
  • PIONEERING a DIGITAL FUTURE “The Web, As I Envisaged It, Has Not Been Seen Yet
    DIGITAL ECONOMY DIGITAL PIONEERING A DIGITAL FUTURE Research Councils UK Digital Economy Programme PIONEERING A DIGITAL FUTURE “The Web, as I envisaged it, has not been seen yet. The future is still so much bigger than the past.” SIR TIM BERNERS-LEE, MIT £120m Investment between 2008–11 Digital technologies are transforming business, government £29bn and society. Research is vital in making sure they have the best estimated size of UK ICT possible impact for everyone. sector by 2012 The Research Councils UK (RCUK) New economic models Digital Economy Programme is supporting The economy is becoming increasingly global research to understand how the novel and borderless. As new companies and 3m design and use of digital technologies can individuals use digital technologies to innovate, jobs in the UK creative contribute to a innovative, healthy economy the market can change rapidly. New business industries and ICT sectors and inclusive society. models will be created to adapt and take advantage of the changing environment. Opportunities Sustainable society £1.77bn Digital technologies offer huge potential for In the sustainable societies of the future, people potential savings by providing providing efficient and easy to access public will be able to make informed choices. Improved all public services online services. They can connect people in rural areas, delivery of information and services will foster enable remote access to healthcare, build social changes in behaviour to minimise the negative inclusion, and help solve our energy crisis. It has impact of our activities. been estimated that if everyone was connected the Treasury would make overnight savings 10m 1 people in the UK have of £1.77bn.
    [Show full text]
  • Case for the Creation of UK Research and Innovation (UKRI)
    CASE FOR THE CREATION OF UK RESEARCH AND INNOVATION A new public body in place of the seven Research Councils, Innovate UK, and the research and knowledge exchange functions of the Higher Education Funding Council for England JUNE 2016 Case for the creation of UK Research and Innovation Contents 1. Summary ................................................................................................................................... 3 2. Strategic Context ...................................................................................................................... 6 3. Aims and Outcomes ............................................................................................................... 11 4. Consideration of Options ....................................................................................................... 13 5. Appraisal of preferred option ................................................................................................. 21 6. Transitional Arrangements ..................................................................................................... 25 7. Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 26 Annex A – Structure and Governance of UK Research and Innovation .................................. 27 2 Case for the creation of UK Research and Innovation 1. Summary 1. The UK research and innovation systems are world-leading. The existing landscape and the bodies within it have evolved over
    [Show full text]
  • Where to Keep Research Data DCC Checklist for Evaluating Data Repositories Angus Whyte (DCC)
    A Digital Curation Centre ‘working level’ guide Where to keep research data DCC Checklist for Evaluating Data Repositories Angus Whyte (DCC) Please cite as: Whyte, A. (2015). ‘Where to keep research data: DCC checklist for evaluating data repositories’ v.1 Edinburgh: Digital Curation Centre. Available online: www.dcc.ac.uk/resources/how-guides Digital Curation Centre, 2015 Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Preface Fold-outs are quick start guides for researchers, What is the Digital Curation summarising good practice in relation to a specific Centre? data management topic. The Digital Curation Centre (DCC) is a world- Case studies describe how some organisations leading centre of expertise in digital information develop and deliver curation. They aim to curation. complement a How-to Guide or Checklist, and illustrate practical challenges and lessons learnt. Our primary aims are: Examples are shorter and offer ‘who, what, where, • Build research organisations’ capacity, how, when’ summaries of approaches to RDM capability and skills in managing data service delivery. • Support knowledge exchange and Catalogues offer half page entries profiling key development of good practice in digital resources in RDM. These include the Tools and curation Services Catalogue, and Disciplinary Metadata Directory. What guidance publications does DCC produce, and for what How can I reuse the content of audiences? this publication? We aim to help a broad audience including research All our content is licensed under Creative Commons support, library and IT service staff, as well as data CC-BY. If you do adapt or modify our content we producers.
    [Show full text]
  • The Foundation for Science and Technology Page 1 DEBATE
    DEBATE SUMMARY Bringing science to the heart of government: the Nurse Review of the Research Councils Held at The Royal Society on 12 th January, 2016. The Foundation is grateful to the Association for Innovation, Research and Technology Organisations (AIRTO), the BRE Group, The ERA Foundation and the National Physical Laboratory for supporting this debate. The hash tag for this debate is #fstnurse . Audio files of the speeches are on www.foundation.org.uk . Chair: The Earl of Selborne GBE FRS Chairman, The Foundation for Science and Technology Speakers: Sir Paul Nurse FRS FMedSci HonFREng Chair of the Nurse Review and Director, The Francis Crick Institute Professor Philip Nelson FREng Chair, RCUK Executive Group and Chief Executive, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council Gareth Davies Director General, Business & Science, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills Panellist: Professor Dame Jocelyn Bell Burnell DBE FRS FRSE FRAS FInstP President, The Royal Society of Edinburgh SIR PAUL NURSE said that his review had been economic, technological, social and environmental the product of a positive process of consultation issues of the day. and engagement. This included close working with the Research Council themselves -with He had been at pains to emphasise that the support from an excellent Advisory Group covering Research Councils had done well for many years, the full breadth of the research agenda, a were highly respected across the world and had Reference Group which had explored specific made significant contributions to knowledge and questions and provided invaluable international the economic and social good. We were, expertise, and a call for evidence to which some therefore, building from a high base.
    [Show full text]
  • The Postnormal Times Reader
    POSTNORMAL TIMES ARE BEST DEFINED AS ‘AN TIMES READER THE POSTNORMAL IN-BETWEEN PERIOD WHERE OLD ORTHODOXIES THE ARE DYING, NEW ONES HAVE YET TO BE BORN, AND VERY FEW THINGS SEEM TO MAKE SENSE’. OR, AS EZIO MAURO PUTS IT: ‘WE ARE HANGING POSTNORMAL BETWEEN THE “NO LONGER” AND THE “NOT YET” AND THUS WE ARE NECESSARY UNSTABLE – TIMES NOTHING AROUND US IS FIXED, NOT EVEN OUR DIRECTION OF TRAVEL.’ READER From the Introduction EDITED BY ZIAUDDIN SARDAR ZIAUDDIN EDITED BY www.postnormaltim.es EDITED BY ZIAUDDIN SARDAR We live in a period of accelerating change. New trends, technologies and crisis emerge rapidly and transform familiar social and political landscapes. Established and cherished ideals, with deep historical roots, can be overturned overnight. Unconventional and uncommon notions and events can appear as though from nowhere, proliferate, and become dominant. e last few years alone have witnessed the emergence of populism and the far right in Europe and the US, Brexit, cracks in the European Union, cyber wars accompanied by the re- emergence of a cold war. China as an increasingly dominant new superpower. Pandemics like the Ebola and Zika viruses. Climate change leading to extreme weather events. Driverless cars. AI. ‘Fake News’. ‘Alternative Facts’. ‘Post-Truth’. ‘Disruptive technologies’ that disrupt and oen corrupt everything. Everything seems to be in a state of flux, nothing can be trusted. All that we regard as normal is melting away right before us. e postnormal times theory attempts to make sense of a rapidly changing world, where uncertainty is the dominant theme and ignorance has become a valuable commodity.
    [Show full text]