DOCSLIB.ORG

Inventory of PE Mechanisms and Initiatives D.1.1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Inventory of PE Mechanisms and Initiatives D.1.1 Public Engagement Innovations for Horizon 2020 Inventory of PE mechanisms and initiatives D.1.1 Authors Tine Ravn Niels Mejlgaard Contributors Timo Aarrevaara Luciano d’Andrea Lea Møller Grønfeldt Emil Bargmann Madsen Kaisa Matschoss Mikko Rask Loreta Tauginiené Saule M. Zviniene May 2014 This report is electrically available at [URL address] This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for 1 research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no [611826] The PE2020 Project Year of implementation: February 2014 – January 2017 Web: http://www.PE2020.eu Project consortium: NCRC National Consumer Research Centre, Finland UH University of Helsinki, Finland AU University of Aarhus, Denmark Vilnius University International Business School, VU IBS Lithuania LSC Laboratorio di Scienze della Cittadinanza, Italy Contact information: Niels Mejlgaard, AU, [email protected] Grant agreement no: 611826 Project acronym: PE2020 Project full title: Public Engagement Innovations for Horizon 2020 Project funding scheme: Seventh Framework Programme, Collaborative Project, Small or medium scale focused research project, SiS.2013.1.1.1-6: Tools and instruments for a better societal engagement in “Horizon 2020” Project co-ordinator: Mikko Rask, National Consumer Research Centre E-mail: [email protected] Project website: www.PE2020.eu This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for 2 research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no [611826] The PE2020 project PE2020 will identify, analyse and refine innovative public engagement (PE) tools and instruments for dynamic governance in the field of Science in Society (SiS). PE2020 analyses the PE tools and instruments through a systemic and contextual perspective, and contributes to the potential and transferability of new governance innovations. PE2020 will create new knowledge of the status quo and trends in the field of public engagement in science, refine innovative PE tools and instruments and propose new ones. The project will do this by (1) further developing a conceptual model that provides a systemic perspective of the dynamics of public and stakeholder engagement; (2) creating an updated inventory of current and prospective European PE innovations; (3) context-tailoring and piloting best practice PE processes related to the grand challenges of the Horizon 2020 and (4) developing an accessible net- based PE design toolkit that helps identify, evaluate and successfully transfer innovative PE practices among European countries. New tools and instruments for public and societal engagement are necessary to boost the quality, capacity and legitimacy of European STI governance and to solve the looming problems related to the grand societal challenges of the Horizon 2020. In order to ensure practical relevance, the project will work through intensive co-operation between researchers and science policy actors. PE2020 will expand the capacity of European and national science policy actors to integrate better societal engagement by providing an easy access to new PE tools and instruments, to be included in the requirements and implementation of research in Horizon 2020 and beyond. Acknowledgements The authors and the whole project consortium gratefully acknowledge the financial and intellectual support of this work provided by the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration. This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no [611826]. The authors also wish to acknowledge the collaboration and valuable exchange of data related to public engagement with our sister project ENGAGE2020, specifically the generous involvement of project coordinator Marie Louise Jørgensen from the Danish Board of Technology. Legal Notice The sole responsibility for the content of this publication lies with the author/s. It does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the European Union. The European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein. This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for 3 research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no [611826] Contents THE PE2020 PROJECT 2 1 INTRODUCTION 7 1.1 Public engagement with science 7 1.2 PE2020 7 2 OBJECTIVES AND DEFINITIONS 8 2.1 Working definitions 9 3 DATA COLLECTION AND CATEGORIZATION OF PE MECHANISMS/INITIATIVES 10 3.1 Data collection 10 3.2 Categorization of PE mechanisms/initiatives 11 4 INVENTORY OF PE MECHANISMS AND INITIATIVES 14 4.1 Public communication 14 Awareness raising activities 14 New social media 29 Science competitions (primarily young people) 29 Science events (only if they include dialogue-based activities) 33 Telethon (S&T fundraising) 33 Web-portals 34 4.2 Public activism 35 Demonstrations 35 Ombudsmand 35 Protests 35 Social movement 37 4.3 Public consultation 39 Children's conference 39 Choices method 39 Citizen initiated petition 40 Citizen panel 40 Co-creation spaces 43 Community appraisal,community profiling 44 Community based environmental management 46 Community indicators 47 Consultation document (web based) 48 This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for 4 research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no [611826] Delphi workshop 48 Direct consultation 49 E-consultation 49 Crowdsourcing (citizen science) 50 Focus groups 54 Foresight panel 55 IMAGINE (Appreciative Inquiry, AI) 58 Installation 58 Lay representation in research ethics committees (REC) 59 Parliamentary technology assessment 59 Participatory theatre 60 Petitions 60 Public consultation 61 Public debates 63 Public hearings 64 Public opinion surveys 65 Science shops 66 Stakeholder consultation (consultative panel) 67 STI councils 70 Systematic Tool for Behavioural Assumption Validation and Exploration (STAVE) 74 Technology assessment 74 4.4 Public deliberation 76 21st Century Town Meeting (by AmericaSpeaks) 76 ACE (act, create, experience), releases potential through Principle 21, Rio Summit 78 Action planning 80 Cafes of science (evt. 'conversation cafe or democracy cafe) 80 Citizen conference 82 Citizen jury 83 Citizens’ Summit 85 Consensus conference 87 Consensus seminar 90 Constructive Technology Assessment (CTA) 90 Decision teater (material deliberation) 91 Deliberative consulting 92 Deliberative poll 93 Electronic town meeting (eTM) 94 European Citizens' Deliberation' method 95 Formal public dialogue 98 Gatekeeper analysis method 98 Mock trial 99 National assembly 99 Open space (sml. unconferences, fish bowl) 99 Planning for real 102 Publi(c)forums 105 Publifocus 107 Science museums and centres (only beyond interactive procedures, dialogue based mechanisms) 107 This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for 5 research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no [611826] Science parliaments (Young European parliament) 108 SOCIAL AUDITING - is a way of measuring, understanding, reporting and ultimately improving an organisation’s social and ethical performance. 109 Walking tours (material deliberation) 110 World cafe 110 4.5 Public participation 111 Citizens' Assembly 111 Community policing 113 Initiative 114 Referendums 114 Participatory Appraisal 115 Participatory budgeting 116 Plebiscite 117 Scenario workshop 118 Youth Councils 118 5 REFERENCES 120 6 APPENDIX A – SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW 121 6.1 Compilation of literature review: Search strategy and grouping of texts 121 6.1.1 Group 1: General literature about public engagement 121 6.1.2 Group 2: Literature concerning evaluation and impact of public engagement 127 6.1.3 Group 3: Public engagement vis-à-vis deliberative innovations 134 6.1.4 Group 4: Public engagement and higher education institutions 139 6.1.5 Group 5: Public engagement concerning community based research 142 6.1.6 Group 6: Public engagement with regard to specific disciplines 142 This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for 6 research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no [611826] 1 Introduction 1.1 Public engagement with science Academics, political institutions, institutions of higher education, CSO’s, and other SIS practitioners have increasingly turned their attention and resources towards the promotion of public engagement with issues and decisions broadly concerning science and technology. For instance, with the proliferation of novel technologies such as new biotechnologies the need to include the public in early scientific developments for idealistic, democratic, instrumental and normative reasons have become evident (Bucchi and Neresini 2007; Burchell et al. 2009; Marris & Rose 2010). In this regard, one rationale for including public input has been to increase democratic participation and reinforce scientific citizenship while acknowledging that scientific and technological advances call for new initiatives, platforms and opportunities to engage the public in democratic ways. Other benefits of public engagement include processes of deliberation in S&T governance “to enhance the capacity to respond to emerging issues with levels of public engagement that are proportionate to the issues” (Burgess
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Escritura, Comunicación Científica Y Acceso Abierto: Un Proyecto Internacional Y Multidisciplinario-NECOBELAC
    Rev. salud pública. 11 (2): 310-314, 2009 310 REVISTA DE SALUD PÚBLICA · Volumen 11(2), Abril 2009 Escritura, Comunicación Científica y Acceso Abierto: un Proyecto Internacional y Multidisciplinario-NECOBELAC Scientific writing, scientific communication and open access: an international, multidisciplinary project – NECOBELAC Diony Pulido O, Rocío Robledo M, Carlos A. Agudelo y Grupo de Trabajo NECOBELAC Instituto de Salud Pública. Departamento de Salud Pública. Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Bogotá. [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Recibido 14 Diciembre 2008/Enviado para Modificación 28 Diciembre 2008/Aceptado 4 Marzo 2009 RESUMEN Una red de colaboración entre seis países de Europa, América latina y El Caribe ha iniciado un proyecto para mejorar la comunicación y la diseminación científica en salud pública. El proyecto apunta a fomentar la comunicación científica en aspectos de valor actual y futuro como son la escritura científica y el acceso abierto a la informa- ción en salud. El proyecto NECOBELAC (www.necobelac.eu) es auspiciado por la Comunidad Europea (7th Framework Programme) y tiene una duración de tres años. Como un reto, el proyecto reconoce las diferencias socio culturales entre los países que participan y se ocupará de generar redes de instituciones en colaboración estre- cha para realizar programas de entrenamiento e intercambio de saberes en produc- ción de información y difusión (incluyendo los aspectos técnicos y éticos). El proyecto NECOBELAC incluye al Istituto Superiore di Sanità (ISS) de Italia, coordinador del mismo, el Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC) de España, la Universidad de Nottingham (SHERPA) del Reino Unido, BIREME de Brasil, el Instituto de Salud Pública (ISP) de Colombia y la Universidade de Minho, de Portugal.
    [Show full text]
  • No. 62 - March - April 2013
    No. 62 - March - April 2013 Facebook Twitter RSS EIFL update EIFL team meets Aung San Suu Kyi on Myanmar trip EIFL-Licensing update Renewal agreement for OED Online and Oxford Reference Online Extension of pilot agreement for Wiley-Blackwell Standard Journals Collections Mary Ann Liebert Journals now available through EIFL EIFL-OA update EIFL joins the new DOAJ Advisory Board EPT awards Iryna Kuchma for her advocacy of OA EIFL releases results of OA advocacy grants EIFL Call for proposals: Open access advocacy campaigns EIFL-IP update EIFL statement in support of LDC TRIPs waiver Thanks to CFL tweeters! EIFL supports open dialogue on text and data mining Copyright reform in Poland: libraries are prepared EIFL-FOSS update EIFL FOSS launches disability tools for libraries guide and support community Webinars survey reveals FOSS progress EIFL-PLIP update Libraries tell impact stories Library health services showcase their impact Five library ICT services improve farmers’ lives Three public libraries help young people find jobs Five libraries win EIFL-PLIP award for social inclusion New PLIP award to mark international women’s day Events March – April 2013 events EIFL | knowledge without boundaries EIFL update EIFL team meets Aung San Suu Kyi on Myanmar trip As part of the Beyond Access delegation to Myanmar, EIFL team members Rima Kupryte and Monika Elbert met with Nobel Peace Prize laureate and Myanmar MP Aung San Suu Kyi. The delegation met with Aung San Suu Kyi in Naypyidaw to discuss her vision of public libraries in Myanmar and the roles these libraries can play in the communities they serve.
    [Show full text]
  • Reports of Meetings
    European Science Editing 10 February 2011; 37(1) Reports of Meetings METM10 – a jamboree for editors and translators Mediterranean Editors and Translators Meeting 2010, Tarragona, Spain, 28-30 October 2010 I first came across the Mediterranean Editors and repeated at various times of the year, mainly in Barcelona. Translators (MET) group after I joined the translation The ones I missed at METM10 included “Righting citing” team on Actas Dermosifiliográficas, a bilingual dermatology by Iain Patten, helping editors to spot referencing errors or journal produced by Elsevier. My motivation for attending misplaced citations and suggesting ways to resolve these the first MET meeting was partly the wish to put faces on issues; Alan Lounds on how genre analysis can support the other members of a team I had only met virtually and editors and translators of research articles in improving partly the need for guidance to improve the quality of my abstracts and introductions; John Bates on approaches to medical output. effective paragraphing; Marije de Jager and Dado Cakalo What greeted me was a community of supremely with pointers on how editors should deal with plagiarism in professional editors and translators willing to openly share science writing; and Felicity Neilson with an introduction their expertise in order to provide better language services to editing medical texts. and promote the related professions. Most of the sessions offered were practice-based, with real working examples of During the issues in hand presented by experienced professionals. The conference proper had a rich programme of plenary The 2010 MET meeting, “Facilitating knowledge transfer speeches, panels, and parallel sessions of knowledge updates – through editing, translation, coaching”, was held in and promising practices for editors and translators.
    [Show full text]
  • Marc Scheufen on the Organisation and International Political Economy
    International Law and Economics Marc Scheufen Copyright Versus Open Access On the Organisation and International Political Economy of Access to Scienti c Knowledge International Law and Economics More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/13428 Marc Scheufen Copyright Versus Open Access On the Organisation and International Political Economy of Access to Scientific Knowledge 123 Marc Scheufen Ruhr University of Bochum Faculty of Law Bochum Germany ISBN 978-3-319-12738-5 ISBN 978-3-319-12739-2 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-12739-2 Springer Cham Heidelberg New York Dordrecht London Library of Congress Control Number: 2014958302 © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. Exempted from this legal reservation are brief excerpts in connection with reviews or scholarly analysis or material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Duplication of this publication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the Copyright Law of the Publisher’s location, in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from Springer. Permissions for use may be obtained through RightsLink at the Copyright Clearance Center.
    [Show full text]
  • Advantages, Policy and Advocacy Ariadne Chloe Furnival ABSTRACT the Open Access
    1 Open access to scholarly communications: advantages, policy and advocacy1 Ariadne Chloe Furnival2 ABSTRACT The Open Access (OA) movement regards OA modes of disseminating research as the unequivocal future of scholarly communication. Proponents of the open access movement itself have, over the last ten years, carried out systematic research to show how OA can tangibly benefit researchers, institutions and society at large. Even so, the number of research papers being uploaded to OA institutional repositories remains relatively low, frequently based on concerns which often contradict the facts. Policies for OA have been introduced to encourage author uptake, and these are also discussed here. Briefly delineating aspects of these phenomena, this paper will then move on to outline and discuss advocacy for OA in organisations, and whether this should be “downstream”, in the form of informational campaigns, or “upstream”, in the form of top-down change management. This paper seeks to make a contribution to these issues in the OA sphere, by brining into the debate strands from the literature of the sociology of science and management science that will hopefully elucidate aspects of author reactions to OA, and the perceived changes that its adoption gives rise to. Introduction Ever since the enshrining of the concept of Open Access (hereafter, “OA”) in the declarations like those of the Budapest OA Initiative (2002), the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing (2003) and the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities (2003) – famously referred to as the “3 B‟s” by Peter Suber – , there has been a veritable proliferation of projects worldwide promoting OA as the future mode of scholarly communication.
    [Show full text]
  • O Open Access Ao Serviço Da Ciência, Dos
    Acesso Aberto ao Conhecimento Eloy Rodrigues [email protected] Antevisão da apresentação… . Open Access /Acesso Aberto . O que é? . Porquê? . Como? . A evolução recente do Open Access no mundo . O Acesso Aberto na Universidade do Minho . Notas finais O que é o Open Access? Open Access, “Acesso Aberto” (ou "Acesso Livre" ) significa a disponibilização livre na Internet de cópias gratuitas, online, de artigos de revistas científicas revistos por pares (peer- reviewed), comunicações em conferências, bem como relatórios técnicos, teses e documentos de trabalho. Acesso Aberto, a quê? Essencial: Aos cerca de 2.5 milhões de artigos publicados por ano, a nível Acesso Livremundial, em a cerca quê? de 28,000 revistas com peer-review em todas as disciplinas académicas e cientificas. Recomendável/Opcional: A comunicações, teses e dissertações, relatórios, working papers, artigos não revistos (preprints); monografias; etc. Não Aplicável: O Acesso Aberto não se aplica a livros sobre os quais os autores pretendam obter receitas ou textos não académicos, como notícias ou ficção. AS ORIGENS AS ORIGENS Insatisfação Acesso Aberto porquê? . Promover a eficiência e o progresso da investigação e da ciência. Aumentar a visibilidade, o acesso, a utilização e o impacto dos resultados de investigação. Melhorar a monitorização, avaliação e gestão da actividade científica. «Somos como anões aos ombros de gigantes, pois podemos ver mais coisas do que eles e mais distantes, não devido à acuidade da nossa vista ou à altura do nosso corpo, mas porque somos mantidos e elevados pela estatura de gigantes.» Bernardo de Chartres, referido por João de Salisbúria, Metalogicon, III, 4. “What Des-Cartes did was a good step.
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter for IFLA Section No. 11 School Libraries and Resource Centers
    Newsletter for IFLA section no. 11 School Libraries and Resource Centers Issue 54, June 2012 http://www.ifla.org/en/publications/school-libraries-and-resource-centers-section-newsletter TABLE OF CONTENTS IFLA Section 2 International Projects 4 Research 19 Awards & Recognitions 24 Resources 27 Conferences 29 “EMMILE diving in web 2.0” by Daniele Duane Ceccarelli (and image in EMMILE article) Newsletter for School Libraries and Resource Centers – Issue no. 54 – June 2012 1 Section Chair’s Message Randi Lundvall, Section Chair [email protected] Collaboration between School Libraries and Public Libraries for the benefit of the student is the theme of our joint session with the Section for Public Libraries in Helsinki on 14 August. Papers from many parts of the world will be presented during a 3 hours long session. I am looking forward to seeing many participants in the audience who are interested in this year’s theme. At the IFLA Conference 2011 in San Juan there was an increase of people joining us at our two Standing Committee meetings compared to previous years. This is encouraging. Our Standing Committee can hold 16 people and we need more members. Most of the committee work is of course done by the officers, usually by mail. When we get the opportunity to meet each other more frequently than at the annual conferences, we find it very rewarding. This Feb- ruary the Secretary, Barbara Schultz-Jones, the Web Officer, Tricia Adams, and I were able to work together for a few days in Milan at The European Meeting on Media and Information Lit- eracy (EMMILE) conference.
    [Show full text]
  • EASE Guidelines for Authors and Translators of Scientific Articles to Be Published in English, June 2014
    EASE1 GuidelinesEASE Guidelines for Authors and Translators for of Scientific Authors Articles to be Published andin English, June 2014 Translators ofFrom Scientific the Editors’ Desks Articles to Be Published in English June 2014 2 Guidelines 6 Practical tips Appendices 7 Abstracts 8 Ambiguity 9 Cohesion 10 Ethics 11 Plurals 12 Simplicity 13 Spelling 14 Text-tables 15 About EASE Updated annually, freely available in many languages at www.ease.org.uk ©2014 European Association of Science Editors (www.ease.org.uk). Non-commercial printing allowed. 2 EASE Guidelines for Authors and Translators of Scientific Articles to be Published in English, June 2014 EASE Guidelines for Authors and Translators of Scientific Articles to be Published in English To make international scientific communication more and your interpretation and main consequences of your efficient, research articles and other scientific publications findings (conclusions). The abstract must reflect the should be COMPLETE, CONCISE, and CLEAR, as content of the article, as for most readers it will be the explained below. These are generalized but not universal major source of information about your study. You must guidelines, intended to help authors, translators, and use all keywords within the abstract, to facilitate on-line editors. Common sense is necessary when applying these searching for your article by those who may be interested rules, as perfection is impossible to reach. in your results (many databases include only titles and abstracts). In a research report, the abstract should be First of all: informative, including actual results. Only in reviews, • Carefully plan and conduct your study (e.g. Hengl et meta-analyses, and other wide-scope articles, should al.
    [Show full text]
  • An Leabharlann
    March 2013 Volume 22: Issue 1 CONTENTS Guidelines For Contributors 2 Editorial 3 Information compliance and libraries: part 1 data protection Terry O’Brien 4 Rare books in Irish Libraries: an investigation of current challenges in providing access to historical collections David Parkes & Clare Thornley 12 Martello, Marconi and Metadata: The Irish Hurdy Gurdy Museum of Vintage Radio Sarah Connolly and Marie-Therese Carmody 18 Library Ireland Week Staff Exchange Scheme: Diary of an Exchange Bernadette Gardiner 23 CONFERENCE REPORTS EAHIL – Health information without frontiers 25 Public Libraries’ Section Annual Conference 28 Inside NECOBELAC 30 BOOK REVIEWS • Emergency Planning and Response for Libraries, Martello, Data Archives and Museums Caroline McMullan 33 • Building and managing e-book collections: a protection how-to-do-it manual for librarians Brid McGrath 34 Marconi • Personalising library services in higher education David Meehan 35 • Using mobile technology to deliver library and the Rare books services: a handbook Breda Bennett 36 SOFTWARE REVIEW • ALISON’s eLearning Module: Microsoft Digital Metadata in Irish Literacy – Computer Basics Damien Wyse 38 Robert (Bob) Pearce 1932-2013: An Appreciation Libraries Mary Burke 40 NEWS from the Stacks 41 Book Reviews, Conference Reports Page 1 of 44 Library Association of Ireland, Guidelines For Contributors Cumann Leabharlann na hÉireann, c/o 138-144 Pearse Street, Dublin 2 An Leabharlann: The Irish Library publishes articles on • Book reviews should include the full title, author or www.libraryassociation.ie libraries, librarianship and related topics of interest to editor, publication details and price. the library and information community on the island of • Conference reports should include details such as the An Leabharlann An Leabharlann: The Irish Library is published 22–1 by The Library Association of Ireland and The Ireland.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal Vol 10 No 4 Colophon Amended
    Journal of the European Association for Health Information and Libraries Vol. 10 No. 4 December 2014 Contents Editorial Letter from the Assistant Editor - S. Wood-Lamont 2 Feature Articles Theme issue: The librarian of the future: education, skills, expectations The library of the future is present J. Blumenthal 3 The encouragement of the open access movement: an essential realm for health information professionals in the 21st century P. Toro-Sanchez-Blanco, V. Juan-Quilis 6 The Bibliosan 2.0 project: an online tools for librarians, researchers and health professionals A. Barbaro, D. Gentili, C. Rebuffi 10 Health sciences libraries and public health education awareness in social media platforms M. Şendir 13 The librarian as a leader: development of leadership in the library and information profession A. Sutton, A. Booth 15 EAHIL 2015 Workshop, 10-12 June 2015, Edinburgh, Scotland 18 Internet Page Take a look! B. Thirion 20 Emerging challenges The Librarian of the Future O. Obst 24 News from EAHIL Letter from the President M. Dozier 26 EAHIL Council Elections 2015-2018 Results 27 EAHIL/EBSCO Scholarships for the Edinburgh Workshop 2015 P. Morgan 28 Reports of the CEC Courses at the Rome Conference What is Altmetrics? The impact of Altmetrics on researchers and on librarian’s professional life. V. Scotti 29 Patient Information, Health Consumer/Patient Libraries G. Cognetti, I. Truccolo 30 Open Access (OA) capacity-building for Europe’s libraries: 2020 V. Proudman, P. de Castro, E. Poltronieri 31 Library Research Support Services Worldwide. V. Proudman 32 Obituary Remembering Luisa Leone 34 Editorial Sally Wood-Lamont Editor-in-Chief Cluj-Napoca, Romania Contact: [email protected] Hello Everyone, The 14th EAHIL Conference in Rome was a great success in all aspects, scientific and social and our last issue's content is witness to this.
    [Show full text]
  • De Castro Neco EAHIL Lisboa
    12th EAHIL Conference. DISCOVERING NEW SEAS OF KNOWLEDGE Technologies, environments and users in the future of health libraries Lisbon, Portugal, 14th - 18th June 2010. TRAINING IN SCIENTIFIC WRITING AND OPEN ACCESS PUBLISHING IN EUROPE AND LATIN AMERICAN COUNTRIES: COMMON GOALS IN DIFFERENT SCENARIOS Paola De Castro 1, Daniela Marsili 1, Elisabetta Poltronieri 1, and the NECOBELAC Working Team 1Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy * NECOBELAC Working Team: Istituto Superiore di Sanità (ISS, IT Project coordinator) Paola De Castro, Elisabetta Poltronieri, Daniela Marsili; The University of Nottingham (UNOTT, UK) Bill Hubbard, Peter Millington; Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC, SP) Remedios Melero; Centro Latino Americano e do Caribe de Informação em Ciencias da Saude (BIREME BR) Abel L. Packer; Instituto de Salud Pública (ISP, CO) Carlos Agudelo Calderón, Rocío Robledo Martínez, Diony Pulido Ortega; Universidade do Minho (UMINHO, PT), Eloy Rodrigues, Ricardo Saraiva, José Carvalho; Key Perspectives Ltd (UK), Alma Swan; Universidad National de Educación a Distancia de Madrid (UNED, SP) Alicia López Medina. [email protected] INTRODUCTION The betterment in production and dissemination of scientific information in the field of public health represents a shared commitment for the globalization of knowledge respecting the right to health. The promotion of dissemination initiatives in the area of public health and health-related disciplines based on Open Access (OA) to research results represent a common task (including technical and ethical issues); furthermore, it involves an increasing number of scientific institutions and universities in Europe and Latin American countries. To this goal, collaboration networks have been created both in Europe and Latin America to promote the dissemination of scientific outputs.
    [Show full text]
  • HINT 11(1) July 2013
    HINT HEALTH INFORMATION NEWS AND THINKING HINT 11(1) July 2013 HINTS on Writing for Publication by Helen Fallon, should tell what you are writing about; what your expertise in the area is and why you think readers of the journal would be Deputy Librarian, NUI Maynooth interested in your article. While an editor will generally not give Begin with the End in Mind a firm commitment to publishing an article based on a sugges- tion s/he will generally indicate if interested in seeing the com- Before you begin writing give some thought to the audience pleted article and may give a timeframe for submission. and purpose of your article. If it is primarily based on practice, it may be best suited to a professional journal. Practice-based Work from an Outline journals value experience; articles describe practice and fre- Most academic authors work from an outline. The outline or quently have a straightforward structure telling about an event structure is the framework or scaffold on which you build the or a process. Articles can be written in an informal tone, using article. Having an outline allows you order and eliminate ideas. the first person. Writing can appear a less onerous process when you can view If your article is based on research or a mixture of research and the structure of a 5,000 word article at a glance. Writing isn’t a practice it might appeal to an academic/ peer-reviewed jour- linear process. Scientists generally begin with the results sec- nal. Peer-reviewed journals have a longer lead-in time and tion.
    [Show full text]