DOCSLIB.ORG

Public Archaeology in a Digital

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Public Archaeology in a Digital PUBLIC ARCHAEOLOGY IN A DIGITAL AGE By Lorna-Jane Richardson UCL Thesis submitted in fulfilment of the degree of Ph.D. in Information Studies I, Lorna-Jane Richardson, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. ……………………………………………………………………………… …………………………….. 2 ABSTRACT This thesis examines the impact of the democratic promises of Internet communication technologies, social, and participatory media on the practice of public archaeology. It is focused on work within archaeological organisations in the UK working in commercial archaeology, higher education, local authority planning departments and community settings, as well the voluntary archaeology sector. This work has taken an innovative approach to the subject matter through its use of a Grounded Theory method for data collection and analysis, and the use of a combination of online surveys, case studies and email questionnaires in order to address the following issues: the provision of authoritative archaeological information online; barriers to participation; policy and organisational approaches to evaluating success and archiving; community formation and activism, and the impact of digital inequalities and literacies. This thesis is the first overarching study into the use of participatory media in archaeology. It is an important exploration of where and how the profession is creating and managing digital platforms, and the expanding opportunities for networking and sharing information within the discipline, against a backdrop of rapid advancement in the use of Internet technologies within society. This work has made significant contributions to debates on the practice and impact of public archaeology. It has shown that archaeologists do not yet fully understand the complexities of Internet use and issues of digital literacy, the impact of audience demographics or disposition towards participation in online projects. It has shown that whilst recognition of democratic participation is not, on the whole, undertaken through a process of actively acknowledging responses to archaeological information, there remains potential for participatory media to support and accommodate these ideals. This work documents a period of great change within the practice of archaeology in the UK, and concludes with the observation that it is vital that the discipline undertake research into online audiences for archaeological information if we are to create sustainable digital public archaeologies. 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Declaration 2 Abstract 3 Table of Contents 4 Acknowledgements 8 List of Appendices 9 List of Figures 10 List of Tables 12 Chapter 1: Introduction 13 1.1 Introduction 13 1.2 Thematic Structure of this Thesis 18 Chapter 2: Researching Public Archaeology 21 2.1 A Background History of Public Archaeology 22 2.1.1 Meanings and Contexts of ‘Public Archaeology’ 24 2.1.2 Understanding the Audience for Public Archaeology 25 2.2 Social Inclusion and Public Archaeology 27 2.3 A Model for Public Archaeology 28 2.4 Community Archaeology 33 2.5 Managing Archaeological Authority 42 2.6 Public Access to Archaeology 47 2.7 Towards a Definition of Digital Public Archaeology 50 2.7.1 Contextualising Public Archaeology Online 55 2.8 Discussion 64 Chapter 3: Research Methods and Data Collection 66 3.1 Ethical Considerations for Data Collection Online 68 3.1.2 Data Collection Parameters & Other Issues 72 3.2 Literature Review of Research Using Online Surveys 74 4 3.2.1 Research Design: Coverage and Sampling 76 3.2.2 Surveys Undertaken 78 3.3. Netnography 81 3.4 Email Questionnaires 83 3.4.1 Archaeosoup Productions 84 3.4.2. Big Heritage 84 3.4.3. British Archaeological Jobs and Resources 85 3.4.4. Council for British Archaeology 85 3.4.5. English Heritage Archaeology section 86 3.4.6. Portable Antiquities Scheme 86 3.4.7. RESCUE - The British Archaeological Trust 87 3.4.8. The Royal Commission on Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland 87 3.5 Quantitative Data Collection 89 3.6 Qualitative Research and Grounded Theory 93 3.7 Scope and Discussion 95 Chapter 4: The Impact of Digital Inequalities on Public Archaeology Online 100 4.1 The Growth of Internet Technologies 101 4.2 The Potential Application of Internet Technologies in Public Archaeology 103 4.3 The Internet and Techno-Utopianism 105 4.4 Digital Exclusion and Digital Divides 107 4.4.1 Internet Access – Connectivity 109 4.4.2 Case Study - The Cosmeston Archaeology Project 112 4.4.3 Challenging Digital Inequalities in the UK 114 4.5 Information Retrieval and the Impact of ‘Search’ 118 4.6 Demographics and Internet Use in the UK 120 4.7 Demographics of Participation in Online Archaeology 122 5 4.8 Trolling, Privacy Concerns and Online Abuse 126 4.9 Dispositional Barriers to Participation Online 131 4.10 Discussion 135 Chapter 5: Participation, Evaluation and Policy 138 5.1 Engagement, Participation and Co-Production 139 5.2 Digital Public Archaeologies in Practice 145 5.2.1 Data Results From 2010 to 2011 147 5.2.2 Data Results From 2011 to 2012 148 5.2.3 Data Results From 2012 to 2013 149 5.3 Evaluating the Success of Digital Public Archaeology 151 5.4 Organisational Funding and Attitudes to Public Engagement Online 155 5.5 Managing Social Media Use Through Policy 156 5.6 Archiving Material Generated by Digital Public Archaeology 164 5.7 Discussion 167 Chapter 6: Online Communities in Archaeology 171 6.1 What is an Online ‘Community’? 172 6.2 Social Capital and Weak Ties 179 6.3 The Impact of Social Capital, Weak Ties and Online Activism on Archaeology 184 6.3.1 Cherrywood Crannog and Social Media-Based Activism 187 6.3.2 RESCUE - Difficulties Harnessing Social Media Activism 194 6.4 Twitter as Archaeological Community 197 6.4.1 The Use of Twitter at Archaeological Conferences 203 6.5 Leveraging Online Communities: Crowdsourcing in Archaeology 208 6.6 Discussion 217 Chapter 7: Case Study - The Day of Archaeology 220 7.1 Founding the Project 220 6 7.2 Project Structure 223 7.3 Participation in the Day of Archaeology 225 7.4 Exploring Use and Contributions 228 7.5 The Day of Archaeology as Archaeological Community 230 7.5.1 Analysis of the #dayofarch Twitter Hashtag 232 7.5.2 Online Survey 233 7.5.3 Analysis of Website Content 236 7.6 The Day of Archaeology as an Educational Resource 240 7.7 Archiving the Day of Archaeology 242 7.8 Discussion 243 Chapter 8: Understanding Archaeological Authority in a Digital Context 246 8.1 What is ‘Authority’? What is Archaeological Authority? 248 8.2 Multi-Vocality and Opening the Field of Discourse 254 8.3 Information Literacy and Information-Seeking Behaviour 256 8.4 Alternative Archaeologies and the Internet 268 8.5 Locating Archaeological Authority Online: Case Studies from the Twitter Platform 270 8.6 Email Questionnaire Case Studies 277 8.7 Discussion 281 Chapter 9: Conclusion 286 9.1 Overview of Chapter Conclusions 287 9.2 Future Research Directions 292 9.3 Conclusion 293 Bibliography 298 7 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research has been generously supported by the Arts and Humanities Research Council. I would like to thank my supervisors; Melissa Terras, Tim Schadla-Hall and Dan Pett for all their kindness, motivation, help, guidance and support. I am very grateful to Spencer Carter, James Dixon, Jan Freeman, Don Henson, Gabe Moshenska, David Osbourne, Matt Pope, Andrew Reinhard and Ethan Watrall for reading and commenting on parts of this thesis as it took shape. I would also like to thank all those who agreed to take part in my surveys, case studies and interviews for their time, and their kindness, in sharing their data, thoughts and observations. Huge thanks to the members of the Day of Archaeology collective; Jaime Almanza-Sanchez, Monty Dobson, Andy Dufton, Stu Eve, Tom Goskar, Pat Hadley, Matt Law, Jess Ogden, and Dan Pett. I would also like to thank the following people for their conversation, support and assistance: Marc Barkman-Astles, Andy Bevan, Chiara Bonacchi, Helen Bristol, Andy Burnham, Spencer Carter, Robert Chapple, Alison Clark, David Connolly, Hugh Corley, Adam Corsini, Chris Cumberpatch, Jim Dixon, Arlo Fitzgerald, Jill Goddard, Shawn Graham, Sam Hardy, Sue Harrington, Mike Heyworth, Guy Hunt, Peter Insole, Stuart Jeffrey, Gary Lock, Andrew Macdonald, Rena Maguire, Ben Marwick, Sarah May, Carol McDavid, Sarah McLean, Colleen Morgan, Martin Newman, David McOmish, Adrian Olivier, Hilary Orange, David Osbourne, Dean Paton, Sara Perry, Angela Piccini, Ashley Pooley, Clare Richardson, Doug Rocks-Macqueen, Henry Rothwell, Jane Ruffino, Anthea Seles, Caroline Smith, Dave Standing, Roy Stephenson, Suzie Thomas, Gerry Wait, Mike Webber and Brian Wilkinson. If I have forgotten anyone, please accept my apologies. For Ellie. For her loyal friendship, and accompanying need for regular fresh air and exercise. 8 LIST OF APPENDICES The appendices for this thesis are included on the accompanying CD-ROM, which can be found attached to the rear cover of this thesis. The contents are: Appendix A: Survey 1: Archaeology & Twitter 2011 Appendix B: Survey 2: Archaeology & Social Media Policy Appendix C: Survey 3: Archaeology & Twitter 2012 Appendix D: Survey 4: Preserving Public Archaeology Content Created Online Appendix E: Survey 5: Measuring the Success of Your Digital Project Appendix F: Survey 6: Understanding Barriers to Public Engagement with Archaeology Online Appendix G: Survey 7: Live-tweeting at Archaeology Conferences Appendix H: Survey 8: Archaeology & Twitter 2013 Appendix I: Survey 9: Using the Internet for Archaeology Appendix J: Email Questionnaire Results Appendix K: UK Archaeology Online Spreadsheets Appendix L: Day of Archaeology survey results Appendix M: List of Conference Papers Presented 9 LIST OF FIGURES Fig. 2.1: Approaches to archaeology suggested by Merriman, Holtorf and Matsuda & Okamura. 29 Fig. 2.2: Screenshot of the Heritage Gateway website.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Moneylab Reader: an Intervention in Digital Economy
    READER A N INTERVENTION IN DIGITAL ECONOMY FOREWORD BY SASKIA SASSEN EDITED BY GEERT LOVINK NATHANIEL TKACZ PATRICIA DE VRIES INC READER #10 MoneyLab Reader: An Intervention in Digital Economy Editors: Geert Lovink, Nathaniel Tkacz and Patricia de Vries Copy editing: Annie Goodner, Jess van Zyl, Matt Beros, Miriam Rasch and Morgan Currie Cover design: Content Context Design: Katja van Stiphout EPUB development: André Castro Printer: Drukkerij Tuijtel, Hardinxveld-Giessendam Publisher: Institute of Network Cultures, Amsterdam, 2015 ISBN: 978-90-822345-5-8 Contact Institute of Network Cultures phone: +31205951865 email: [email protected] web: www.networkcultures.org Order a copy or download this publication freely at: www.networkcultures.org/publications Join the MoneyLab mailing list at: http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/moneylab_listcultures.org Supported by: Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences (Hogeschool van Amster- dam), Amsterdam Creative Industries Publishing and the University of Warwick Thanks to everyone at INC, to all of the authors for their contributions, Annie Goodner and Morgan Currie for their copy editing, and to Amsterdam Creative Industries Publishing for their financial support. This publication is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial ShareAlike 4.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/. EDITED BY GEERT LOVINK, NATHANIEL TKACZ AND PATRICIA DE VRIES INC READER #10 Previously published INC Readers The INC Reader series is derived from conference contributions and produced by the Institute of Network Cultures. They are available in print, EPUB, and PDF form. The MoneyLab Reader is the tenth publication in the series.
    [Show full text]
  • START up FUNDING New Product Idea? How to Raise Finance
    START UP FUNDING new product idea? How to raise finance * crowdfunding vs traditional funding methods London San Francisco Salisbury Introduction CONTENTS 1. Crowdfunding * * * * 526 k+ 95% 50% £2.5 bn Overview Raising finance new businesses of uk companies are of uk gdp generated by uk gdp in 2013 2. Other Funding Methods registered in 2013 small businesses small businesses Overview * Data from ... Detailed Breakdown * UK National Statistics 3. Pitch your idea to industry There are a number of avenues to raise funds for a new idea. We have presented a few in the next chapter but it is not an exhaustive list. The aim of this guide is to give you vital 4. IS IT A Business ? information on how to increase your chances of success to raise finance, whether you are using on-line methods such as Crowdfunding or a more traditional approach like pitching 5. Intellectual Property your product to industry. (Protecting your project) How Innovate can help, see here. 6. How Innovate can help Want help with your Crowdfunding campaign? 7. Appendix Additional Online Content List of Crowdfunding websites (organised by industry) To make the most of this brochure, please use the hyper links throughout to browse additional content on the web. About Innovate Product Design For more information about the sponsor and writer of this brochure please visit the ‘How Innovate Can Help’ section. Innovate Product Design Ltd 2014 winners 2 London San Francisco Salisbury 3 Sources: Mass Solution, Kickstarter.com 1 CROWDFUNDING 1 m raised by crowdfunding campaigns successfuly raised by pebble on plastforms in 2013 funded in 2012 kickstarter the big four Also known as crowd financing and equity crowfunding, Kickstarter describes it as “the practice of funding a project or venture by raising many small amounts of money from a large number of people, typically via the Internet.” kickstarter indiegogo THERE ARE 3 MAIN Startup FUNDING MODELS: 1 Reward based: crowdfunder crowdcube Raise finance in exchange of a reward and/or voting rights.
    [Show full text]
  • Název 1 99Funken 2 Abundance Investment 3 Angelsden
    # Název 1 99funken 2 Abundance Investment 3 Angelsden 4 Apontoque 5 Appsplit 6 Barnraiser 7 Bidra.no 8 Bloom venture catalyst 9 Bnktothefuture 10 Booomerang.dk 11 Boosted 12 Buzzbnk 13 Catapooolt 14 Charidy 15 Circleup 16 Citizinvestor 17 CoAssets 18 Companisto 19 Crowdcube 20 CrowdCulture 21 Crowdfunder 22 Crowdfunder.co.uk 23 Crowdsupply 24 Cruzu 25 DemoHour 26 DigVentures 27 Donorschoose 28 Econeers 29 Eppela 30 Equitise 31 Everfund 32 Experiment 33 Exporo 34 Flzing v 35 Fondeadora 36 Fundit 37 Fundrazr 38 Gemeinschaftscrowd 39 Goteo 40 GreenVesting.com 41 Greenxmoney 42 Hit Hit 43 Housers 44 Idea.me 45 Indiegogo 46 Innovestment 47 Invesdor.com 48 JD crowdfunding 49 Jewcer 50 Karolina Fund 51 Katalyzator 52 Ketto 53 Kickstarter 54 KissKissBankBank 55 Kreativcisobe 56 Labolsasocial 57 Lanzanos 58 Lignum Capital 59 Marmelada 60 Massivemov 61 Mesenaatti.me 62 Monaco funding 63 Musicraiser 64 MyMicroInvest 65 Nakopni me 66 Namlebee 67 Octopousse 68 Oneplanetcrowd International B.V. 69 Penězdroj 70 Phundee 71 PledgeCents 72 Pledgeme 73 Pledgemusic 74 Pozible 75 PPL 76 Projeggt 77 Rockethub 78 Seed&Spark 79 Seedmatch 80 Seedrs 81 Snowballeffect 82 Spacehive 83 Spiele offensive 84 Start51 85 Startlab 86 Startme 87 Startnext 88 Startovac 89 Startsomegood 90 Syndicate Room 91 TheHotStart 92 Thundafund 93 Tubestart 94 Ulule 95 Venturate 96 Verkami 97 Vision bakery 98 Wemakeit 99 Wishberry 100 Zoomal Legenda: *Sociální média Vysvětlení zkratek pro sociální média F - Facebook T - Twitter Lin - LinkedIn G+ - Google plus YouT - YouTube Insta - Instagram
    [Show full text]
  • REWARD-BASED CROWDFUNDING for CREATIVE PROJECTS by Aiste Juozaponyte 1548985 GRADUATION ASSIGNMENT SUBMITTED in PARTIAL FULFILLM
    REWARD-BASED CROWDFUNDING FOR CREATIVE PROJECTS BY Aiste Juozaponyte 1548985 GRADUATION ASSIGNMENT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF COMMUNICATION- SYSTEMS OF THE INSTITUTE OF COMMUNICATION AT THE UTRECHT UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES UTRECHT, 2012 06 04 Management summary Crowdfunding is an emerging phenomenon that is taking the idea of investment into a new and never before seen level. Organizations and individuals find themselves achiev- ing successful results by relying on widely dispersed individuals rather than professional investors. The main aim of this thesis centers on potentials for non-professional creative individuals to use reward-based crowdfunding. The theoretical framework defines crowdfunding practice and gives an overview of how it emerged from another nascent term - crowdsourcing. Reward-based crowdfunding, as the focus of this study, is explained in greater detail by observing one of the most popular platforms for creative projects called Kickstarter. In addition, this chapter highlights that the crowd is playing a leading role in crowdfunding initiatives. Participating individuals are part of a community where conver- gence and collaboration take place. Furthermore, theory suggests that reward-based crowdfunding is not solely focused on economic aspects, as social attributes are shaping the scope of activities and goals. Conducted qualitative research confirms that several potentials are current for non- professional creative individuals to use reward-based crowdfunding model as researched on Kickstarter. Not only can they raise funding, but also gain significant public attention for their projects presented on Kickstarter. An appealing and transparent communication approach should be implemented, such as defining goals using S.M.A.R.T.
    [Show full text]
  • Crowdfunding Schemes in Europe
    Crowdfunding Schemes in Europe by David Röthler and Karsten Wenzlaff EENC Report, September 2011 Crowdfunding Schemes in Europe by David Röthler and Karsten Wenzlaff EENC Report, September 2011 This document has been prepared by David Röthler and Karsten Wenzlaff on behalf of the European Expert Network on Culture (EENC). A draft was peer-reviewed by EENC member Aleksandra Uzelac. This paper reflects the views only of the EENC authors and the European Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. The EENC was set up in 2010 at the initiative of Directorate-General for Education and Culture of the European Commission (DG EAC), with the aim of contributing to the improvement of policy development in Europe. It provides advice and support to DG EAC in the analysis of cultural policies and their implications at national, regional and European levels. The EENC involves 17 independent experts and is coordinated by Interarts and Culture Action Europe. About the authors David Röthler, Master´s degree in Law, trainer, consultant and journalist in the fields of political communication, media and European funding. He teaches at journalism schools in Austria and Germany. His focus is on participatory journalism, social media and new funding schemes e.g. crowdfunding and social payment. Furthermore he has extensive experience with the management of international projects. He is founder of the consultancy PROJEKTkompetenz.eu GmbH. Personal Weblog: politik.netzkompetenz.at Karsten Wenzlaff is the founder of the Institute of Communications for Social Communication (ikosom), a Berlin-based research facility for new forms of electronic technology.
    [Show full text]
  • Crowdfunding, Crowdsourcing and Digital Fundraising
    Fundraising for Archives Crowdsourcing, Crowdfunding and Online Fundraising Crowdfunding, Crowdsourcing & Digital Fundraising Aim of Today This session will help to demystify the landscape surrounding crowdsourcing, crowdfunding, and online fundraising providing you with information and tools essential when considering these different platforms. Plan for today • Understand the digital fundraising techniques • Evaluate what components are required for an online campaign to be successful • What does a good online case for support look like • Reflect on examples of good practice • Build a crowdfunder plan 4 5 Apples…….oranges……or pears? Digital isn’t complicated – change is! 7 DO YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TOOLS FOR THE JOB TO NAVIGATE THE MAZE 8 Your Crowd… • Internal Stakeholders • External Stakeholders Databases: Which one do you choose? Microsoft Dynamics 10 Who’s Online ONS 2015 ONLINE DONATION METHOD Blackbaud 2014 12 DO YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TOOLS FOR THE JOB TO NAVIGATE THE MAZE • Email • Website / online platform • Social Media • CRM System / Database • Any others…… You need to be able to engage with your online audience on multiple platforms! 13 Email "Correo." by Itzel402 - Own work. Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons - 14 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Correo..jpg#/media/File:Correo..jpg http://uk.pcmag.com/e-mail-products/3708/guide/the-best-email-marketing-services-of-2015 15 Social Media 16 Social Media Channel Quick Guide •Facebook - Needs little explanation. Growing a little older in terms of demographics. Visual and video content working well. Tends to get higher engagement than Twitter. •Twitter - The other main channel. Especially useful for networking and news distribution.
    [Show full text]
  • Crowdfunding
    Anche gli archeologi fanno crowdfunding Carolina Megale – Crowdfunding, crowdsourcing: per l’archeologia è l’uovo di Colombo! – ... se trovi chi ti dà i soldi e chi collabora. Però sì, gli archeologi dovreb- bero osare di più: se ci provi seriamente, ce la puoi fare. – E così scavare diventa un lavoro vero. Lavoro pagato! Fu un’archeologa nel lontano 2001 a mettermi il tarlo in testa, quan- do ancora stavo preparando la tesi di laurea del vecchio ordinamen- to: “Ah certo, l’archeologa la puoi fare, basta che tu non voglia essere pagata perché soldi non ce ne sono!”. Poi è venuto il concorso per il dottorato: quarta in graduatoria cioè prima senza borsa. E qui le pa- role di quell’archeologa sarebbero state: “E che vòi? Se hanno i soldi, te li danno a te?”. Così son cresciuta con la consapevolezza che soldi per l’archeologia ce ne sono pochi, e quei pochi sicuramente non li avrebbero dati a me. Un bel problema. Nel 2007, quando il mio periodo di formazione universitaria era ormai concluso e i professori con cui collaboravo non mancavano di sottolineare che “l’università fa formazione ma non dà lavoro” (al- meno non a me, evidentemente), decisi di mettere in piedi, assieme a Giandomenico De Tommaso e Francesco Ghizzani Marcìa, un nuovo progetto di ricerca che avrebbe appagato dal punto di vista scienti- fico le mie aspirazioni di archeologa: la ripresa dello scavo del sito romano di Poggio del Molino a Populonia (Piombino), interrotto da vent’anni per mancanza di fondi. Avevamo idee chiare, obiettivi, metodi e permessi: ci mancavano solo le risorse economiche.
    [Show full text]
  • Crowdfunding Reshaping the Crowd’S Engagement in Culture
    Crowdfunding Reshaping the crowd’s engagement in culture Crowdfunding Reshaping the crowd’s engagement in culture AUTHORS OF THE STUDY Isabelle De Voldere, IDEA Consult (Project coordinator) Kleitia Zeqo, IDEA Consult PROJECT TEAM Eveline Durinck, IDEA Consult Pierre Padilla, IDEA Consult Kathrin Kohl, ECN Oliver Gajda, ECN Markus Chandler, Ecorys Jakub Gloser, Ecorys Tim Fox, Ecorys Joost Heinsius, Values of Culture Sylvia Amann, Inforelais The research team would like to thank all the stakeholders that have contributed to the research by sharing their valuable expertise and insights during the interviews, workshops and online DISCUTO process. EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Education and Culture Directorate D – Culture and Creativity Unit D.1 – Cultural Policy Contact: DG EAC Unit D.1 E-mail: [email protected] European Commission B-1049 Brussels Disclaimer This document has been prepared for the European Commission; however, it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union. Freephone number (*) : 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you). More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://europa.eu). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2017 ISBN 978-92-79-67975-9 doi: 10.2766/011282 © European Union, 2017 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Image(s) © image #298767080.
    [Show full text]
  • Crowdfunding: Exposing the Link Between Projects and Reward Mechanisms
    Crowdfunding: Exposing the link between projects and reward mechanisms CROWDFUNDING “Exploring the link between projects and reward mechanisms” Candidate: Sofia Alexandra Cardoso André dos Santos Advisor: Professor Juan Andrei Villarroel Fernandez, PhD [email protected] Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of MSc in Business Administration, at the Universidade Católica Portuguesa, June 2013 Crowdfunding: Exposing the link between projects and reward mechanisms ABSTRACT CROWDFUNDING: EXPLORING THE LINK BETWEEN PROJECTS AND REWARD MECHANISMS Sofia Alexandra Cardoso André dos Santos Crowdfunding is a recent organizational phenomenon for which there is little academic research. More than just offering a categorization of the crowdfunding reality, the aim of this study is to unveil the ways in which projects and rewards are linked across the global crowdfunding scenario. For the purpose of this study, several crowdfunding platforms were reviewed, with the focus of analyzing project characteristics such as owners, type and intent and finding a connection between the referred variables and the reward schemes which were commonly associated with them. The findings pointed out significant differences and clear reward preferences among the different project owners’ profiles and even among the different types of projects categories present in the crowdfunding platforms. Ultimately, the reader will be able to understand the links between project features and reward mechanisms and how they play out in the crowdfunding scenario. Moreover, they will be able to identify what type of rewards they may expect from a specific project type. This can be of great relevance for seekers and backers, since it clarifies what rewards a platform will offer taking into account the projects it promotes.
    [Show full text]
  • Marginalising Christians
    Marginalising Christians Instances of Christians being sidelined in modern Britain Marginalising Christians Instances of Christians being sidelined in modern Britain Copyright © The Christian Institute 2009 First printed in December 2009 ISBN 978-1-901086-46-1 Published by The Christian Institute Wilberforce House, 4 Park Road, Gosforth Business Park, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE12 8DG All rights reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced, or stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, mechanical, electronic, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of The Christian Institute. The Christian Institute is a Company Limited by Guarantee, registered in England as a charity. Company No. 263 4440, Charity No. 100 4774. A charity registered in Scotland. Charity No. SC039220 Contents Foreword 5 Education 9 Violence and crime 15 The media 23 The police 33 Employment 43 Local councils 51 Public funding 61 Goods and services 67 Conclusion 71 References 75 Foreword When ‘diversity rules’ are used to justify suspending a nurse who offered to pray for a patient’s recovery, as happened to Caroline Petrie on 17 December 2008, something has gone very wrong in modern Britain. This report examines the growing marginalisation of Christians and catalogues cases of discrimination. In January 2009 a poll showed that more than four out of five churchgoers (84 per cent) think that religious freedoms, of speech and action, are at risk in the UK. A similar proportion (82 per cent) feel it is becoming more difficult to live as a Christian in an increasingly secular country.1 This growing sense of intolerance felt by Christians is made all the worse when they face hostility in the name of ‘equality and diversity’.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing the Potential for Crowdfunding and Other Forms of Alternative Finance to Support Research and Innovation Final Report
    Assessing the potential for crowdfunding and other forms of alternative finance to support research and innovation Final Report EUR [number] EN January – 2017 EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Research and Innovation Directorate B — Open Innovation and Open Science Unit B.3 — SMEs, Financial Instruments and State Aid Contact: Steve Rogers E-mail: [email protected] [email protected] European Commission B-1049 Brussels EUROPEAN COMMISSION Assessing the potential for crowdfunding and other forms of alternative finance to support research and innovation Final Report EY Open Evidence Politecnico di Milano European Crowdfunding Network Directorate-General for Research and Innovation 2017 Access to Risk Finance EUROPEAN COMMISSION EUROPE DIRECT is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you) LEGAL NOTICE This document has been prepared for the European Commission however it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. More information on the European Union is available on the internet (http://europa.eu). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2017. PDF ISBN 978-92-79-59130-3 doi: 10.2777/046608 KI-01-16-636-EN-N © European Union, 2017. Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged Table of Contents LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ 5 LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... 5 LIST OF ACRONYMS ....................................................................................................... 7 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Vector the Critical Journal of the British Science Fiction Association
    Vector The critical journal of the British Science Fiction Association Fairy Tales of Victorian Science and Technology No. 270 LATE SPRING 2012 £4.001 Vector 270 The Critical Journal of the British Science Fiction Association ARTICLES BSFA Reviewers’ Poll – The Best of 2011 Vector Edited by Martin Lewis .......................... 4 http://vectoreditors.wordpress.com 2011 in Pictures Features, Editorial Shana Worthen Jonathan McCalmont ............................ 17 and Letters: 127 Forest Road, Loughton, Essex IG10 1EF, UK From Outcasts to Black Mirror: British [email protected] SF Television 2011 Book Reviews: Martin Lewis Alison Page .......................................... 21 14 Antony House, Pembury Place, London, E5 8GZ Gaia Beware: Infertility in Science Production: Martin McGrath Fiction due to Bioterrorism, Pollution [email protected] and Accidental Iatrogenic Events British Science Fiction Association Ltd Victor Grech with Clare Thake-Vassallo The BSFA was founded in 1958 and is a non-profitmaking and Ivan Callus .................................... 26 organisation entirely staffed by unpaid volunteers. Registered in England. Limited by guarantee. BSFA Website www.bsfa.co.uk Modern Marvels: The Fairy Tales of Company No. 921500 Victorian Science and Technology Registered address: 61 Ivycroft Road, Warton, Tamworth, Melanie Keene ..................................... 31 Staffordshire, B79 0JJ President Stephen Baxter Vice President Jon Courtenay Grimwood Chair Ian Whates [email protected] RECURRENT Treasurer Martin Potts 61 Ivy Croft Road, Warton, Kincaid in Short: Paul Kincaid ............. 33 Nr Tamworth, B79 0JJ Picture This: Terry Martin .................... 36 [email protected] Membership Services Peter Wilkinson Resonances: Stephen Baxter ................ 38 Flat 4, Stratton Lodge, 79 Bulwer Road Foundation Favourites: Andy Sawyer .. 40 Barnet, Hertfordshire, EN5 5EU [email protected] MEMBERSHIP FEES UK £29 pa or (Unwaged - £20 pa).
    [Show full text]