/ Full archive

Recruiting : University Rep to co-lead Research Staff Association

PG research, R & KE Operations

A vacancy has arisen for one of the two posts of University Representative, the leaders of the Research Staff Association. This is not a faculty-specific post, any eligible person from any faculty can apply.

The BU Research Staff Association (RSA) is a forum to promote research culture at BU. Research staff from across BU are encouraged to attend to network with others researchers, disseminate their work, discuss career opportunities, hear updates on how BU is implementing the Research Concordat, and give feedback or raise concerns that will help to develop and support the research community at BU.

In addition to the two leaders, there are two reps from each faculty.

Eligible research staff are those on fixed-term or open-ended employment contracts (not PTHP/casual contracts) who have at least one year remaining on their contract at the time of recruitment.

If you are interested in this role, please supply a few words to demonstrate your suitability, interest, availability in relation to the position to Researchdev@bournemouth.ac.uk by the 21/01/21.

Please contact your faculty RSA rep to chat about it if you have any queries.

BU study reveals scale of bullying and harassment in TV industry

The role and social importance of TV and film during this pandemic has been much commented on. But how healthy is this industry? The good news is that this sector has been expanding at more than three times the rate of the wider economy, generating an annual trade surplus of almost £1 billion.  The less good news is that this expansion has been at the expense of its most valuable resource – its skilled workforce.  The preliminary report from our State of Play survey, undertaken shortly before Christmas and published today (11 January 2021) contains some shocking revelations.  The picture to emerge is one of an industry rife with unfair recruitment practices, a chronic lack of diversity, poor management, lack of professional development opportunities, entry-level exploitation (including unpaid work), mental health issues, and susceptibility to a culture of bullying… The list is a long and depressing one.  As one participant told us:

“I’m leaving the industry after twenty years. Had enough of bad practices. e.g. Bullying execs, relentless criticism, toxic working environments, stress, long working hours, not feeling valued, bad effect on my own mental health. No career development possibilities, no security.”

More than a third of our respondents told us they would have chosen differently had they known at the start of their career what they now know. It’s a far cry from the more familiar narrative about the joys of being creative, and work associated with self-actualisation. A summary of these findings has been published by Broadcast today.

None of this will come as much of a shock to scholars in the field of media industry studies (or indeed those of the Creative Industries more broadly).  The past decade has seen a steady flow of research suggesting that all is not well.  What has changed since the arrival of Covid-19, is that people are now seem to be much more willing to talk about it.  For a long time there has been a reluctance to discuss these systemic issues outside the academic community, and a tendency to dismiss them as ‘just the way the industry works’.  The publication of this report comes at a time when many in the industry are finally asking the question ‘why does it have to be the way the industry works?’  That makes it an exciting time for media industry scholars to be contributing to the debate.

The State of Play survey is a collaboration between BU’s Faculty of Media and Communication, the industry union Bectu, and the professional association Viva La PD. Bectu and Viva La PD are currently engaged in crucial discussions with major broadcasters, streamers and production companies, for which this research will provide critical insight.

The State of Play preliminary report is available here.

 

Conversation article: Five ways to manage your screen time in a lockdown, according to tech experts

shutterstock

John McAlaney, Bournemouth University; Deniz Cemiloglu, Bournemouth University, and Raian Ali, Hamad Bin Khalifa University

The average daily time spent online by adults increased by nearly an hour during the UK’s spring lockdown when compared to the previous year, according to communications regulator Ofcom. With numerous countries back under severe pandemic restrictions, many of us once again find ourselves questioning whether our heavy reliance on technology is impacting our wellbeing.

It’s true that digital devices have provided new means of work, education, connection, and entertainment during lockdown. But the perceived pressure to be online, the tendency to procrastinate to avoid undertaking tasks, and the use of digital platforms as a way to escape distress all have the potential to turn healthy behaviours into habits. This repetitive use can develop into addictive patterns, which can in turn affect a user’s wellbeing.

In our recent research, we explored how to empower people to have healthier and more productive relationships with digital technology. Our findings can be applied to those suffering from digital addiction as well as those who may feel their digital diet has ballooned unhealthily in the solitude and eventlessness of lockdown.

Screen time and addiction

Digital addiction refers to the compulsive and excessive use of digital devices. The design of digital platforms themselves contributes to this addictive use. Notifications, news feeds, likes and comments have all been shown to contribute towards a battle for your attention, which leads users to increase the time they spend looking at screens.

Screen time is an obvious measure of digital addiction, although researchers have noted that there is no simple way to determine how much screen time one can experience before it becomes problematic. As such, there is a continued lack of consensus on how we should think about and measure digital addiction.

Woman video conferences with others on a screen
Many of us have turned to video conferencing to keep in touch with friends and family.
shutterstock

During a global pandemic, when there often feels like no alternative to firing up Netflix, or video conferencing with friends and family, screen time as an indicator of digital addiction is clearly ineffective. Nonetheless, research conducted on digital addiction intervention and prevention does provide insights on how we can all engage with our digital technologies in a healthier way during a lockdown.

1. Setting limits

During the course of our research, we found that effective limit setting can motivate users to better control their digital usage. When setting limits, whatever goal you’re deciding to work towards should be aligned with the five “SMART” criteria. That means the goal needs to be specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and time-bound.

For example, instead of framing your goal as “I will cut down my digital media use”, framing it as “I will spend no more than one hour watching Netflix on weekdays” will enable you to plan effectively and measure your success objectively.

2. Online Support Groups

It might seem a little paradoxical, but you can actually use technology to help promote greater control over your screen time and digital overuse. One study has found that online peer support groups — where people can discuss their experiences with harmful technology use and share information on how to overcome these problems — can help people adjust their digital diet in favour of their personal wellbeing. Even an open chat with your friends can help you understand when your tech use is harmful.

3. Self-reflection

Meanwhile, increasing your sense of self-awareness about addictive usage patterns can also help you manage your digital usage. You can do this by identifying applications we use repetitively and recognising the triggers that prompt this excessive consumption.

Self-awareness can also be attained by reflecting on emotional and cognitive processing. This involves recognising feelings and psychological needs behind excessive digital usage. “If I don’t instantly reply to a group conversation, I will lose my popularity” is a problematic thought that leads to increased screen time. Reflecting on the veracity of such thoughts can help release people from addictive patterns of digital usage.

4. Know your triggers

Acquiring self-awareness on addictive usage patterns can actually help us to identify unsatisfied needs that trigger digital overuse. When we do this, we can pave the way to define alternative behaviours and interests to satisfy those needs in different ways.

Mindfulness meditation, for instance, could be an alternative way of relieving stress, fears, or anxiety that currently leads users to digital overuse. If you feel your digital overuse might simply be due to boredom, then physical activity, cooking, or adopting offline hobbies can all provide alternative forms of entertainment. Again, technology can actually help enable this, for example by letting you create online groups for simultaneous exercising, producing a hybrid solution to unhealthy digital habits.

Father and daughter have fun cooking in kitchen
Cooking is one alternative to unhealthy digital habits.
shutterstock

5. Prioritise the social

We must also remember that our relationship with digital media reflects our inner drives. Humans are innately social creatures, and socialising with others is important to our mental wellbeing. Social media can enhance our opportunities for social contact, and support several positive aspects of mental wellbeing, such as peer support and the enhancement of self-esteem. The engagement with media to purposefully socialise during a lockdown can support our mental health, rather than being detrimental to our wellbeing.

Ultimately, technology companies also have a responsibility to both understand and be transparent about how the design of their platforms may cause harm. These companies should empower users with explanations and tools to help them make informed decisions about their digital media use.

While we may consider this as a legitimate user requirement, technology companies seem to be at the very early stages of delivering it. In the meantime, reflecting on when and why we turn to our screens is a good basis upon which to form positive digital habits during new lockdowns imposed this year.

John McAlaney, Associate Professor in Psychology, Bournemouth University; Deniz Cemiloglu, Researcher, Bournemouth University, and Raian Ali, Professor, College of Science and Engineering, Hamad Bin Khalifa University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Department of Health and Social Care statement on prioritisation of research studies

NHS, Research Ethics

Please find below a statement from the Department of Health & Social Care. Please bear this in mind when in correspondence with NHS Trusts and if planning a clinical research study.
If you have any queries, please contact Suzy Wignall, Clinical Governance Advisor, in the first instance.

Statement from DHSC 

We recognise that at the current time those working in many NHS sites are under huge pressure as the number of COVID-19 cases and admissions to hospitals continue to rise and frontline clinical staff are unable to work due to sickness.

While we have a small number of proven treatments and vaccines for COVID-19, more are needed to reduce transmission, reduce the number of patients that require hospitalisation and to improve outcomes for those that do. It is therefore critical that at this challenging time we continue to recruit participants to our urgent public health (UPH) studies. As such I am writing to confirm that the current levels of prioritisation for research studies, set out within the Restart Framework still apply, as follows:

  • Level 1a (Top Priority) – COVID-19 UPH vaccine and prophylactic studies (as prioritised by the Vaccines Task Force and agreed by Jonathan Van-Tam, deputy CMO) and platform therapeutics trials (currently RECOVERY/RECOVERY +; PRINCIPLE; REMAP CAP).
  • Level 1b – Other COVID-19 UPH studies
  • Level 2 – Studies where the research protocol includes an urgent treatment or intervention without which patients could come to harm. These might be studies that provide access to potentially life preserving or life-extending treatment not otherwise available to the patient.
  • Level 3 – All other studies (including COVID-19 studies not in Level 1a or 1b).

I would also like to take this opportunity to remind you of the NIHR guidance for a second wave of covid 19 activity (https://www.nihr.ac.uk/documents/nihr-guidance-for-a-second-wave-of-covid-19-activity/25837).This guidance still applies and, as outlined, states that the deployment of staff funded through an NIHR Infrastructure award or funded by the NIHR Clinical Research Network (CRN) to front line duties should only occur in exceptional circumstances.

The deployment of clinical academic staff should be undertaken within the guidelines issued by a working group convened by the UK Clinical Academic Training Forum and the Conference of Postgraduate Medical  Deans of the UK. Where NHS Trusts consider they need to redeploy staff to support the frontline this should only be done to support clinical activity during the emergency phase of the pandemic and we would expect them to return to their R&D roles as soon as possible, once the pressures on the system reduce.

As indicated by the Restart Framework, at the current time, we need to continue prioritise our support for the most urgent COVID-19 research as part of the response to tackle the pandemic. At the same time we need to ensure we continue to try and maintain support to deliver non-COVID studies currently open on the portfolio, particularly those within Level 2. A system-wide Recovery, Resilience and Growth programme has been established which brings together the key partners across the clinical research ecosystem to ensure the UK is well-positioned to take a coordinated national approach to achieving the recovery of the UK’s clinical research delivery and restore a full, diverse and active research portfolio as soon as practicable.

10 things you need to know about the BU Financial Regulations and RKE

Post-award

Please read the following 10 things you need to know about the BU Financial Regulations in relation to research and knowledge exchange (RKE).

1. The purpose of the BU Financial Regulations is to provide control over university resources, ensuring the resources are being properly applied to achieve the university’s objectives. They provide practical guidance on the university’s policies relating to financial control. All matters concerning finance must be carried out in line with the Financial Regulations.

2. They apply to all of us, irrespective of your grade, role, department that you work in or what type of employment contract you hold.

3. Non-compliance with the regulations is potentially a disciplinary matter. See below for a non-exhaustive list of examples of potential breaches of the Financial Regulations in relation to RKE.

4. They apply to all university activities irrespective of the source of funding. Specific external funding such as research grants are still subject to our Financial Regulations because the funds are awarded to the university and not to an individual member of staff.

5. All bids/applications/quotations to external funders/clients must be costed by RDS and approved via the Activity Proposal Form (APF) process, prior to submission. The approved costs must match those submitted to the funder. If a named sub-contractor is included within the bid/application, this will be subject to BU Procurement procedures (see #7).  No commitment to outside agencies or to incur expenditure can be made without the proper approval being in place.  If a bid commits BU at the time of submission then the Contract Signing Policy & Procedures will need to be followed at bid stage.

6. A contract/agreement/grant offer letter, etc. cannot be signed until it has been reviewed by Legal Services. There are only certain people who can sign documents or agreements/contracts ‘on behalf of the university’. RKE projects cannot start until there is a signed contract in place. See the Financial Authority Limits and the Contract Signing Policy & Procedures.

7. All purchasing must be made in accordance with the BU Procurement Manual. There are thresholds determining when quotations and tendering procedures are required.

8. Principal Investigators are responsible for ensuring their RKE projects do not exceed the funds available/the approved budget. This can be monitored using the Research & Enterprise Database, RED.

9. All purchases must be approved prior to commitment. All purchases must have a purchase order raised prior to the order being placed or the work taking place.

10. Travel and Business Expenses can only be incurred in accordance with the Financial Regulations. The specific rules in are in the BU Business Travel Policy and the Staff & Visitors Expenses Policy.

Examples of potential breaches of BU Financial Regulations, which could lead to further action (such as disciplinary proceedings):

  • Signing a contract that has not undergone legal review and/or without the required approvals in place.
  • Changing the financial figures in an external funding application so they no longer match those approved via the APF process.
  • Starting work on an externally-funded RKE project, before a contract has been signed.
  • Committing to purchases, without prior approval or without having a purchase order.
  • Exceeding the budget available for an RKE project.
  • Spending more on travel, subsistence or accommodation than the rates specified in the Staff & Visitors Expenses Policy, without prior approval.
  • Not adhering to the procurement procedures set out in the BU Procurement Manual.

COVID-19 in Qatar

international, open access, Publishing, writing

Peer reviewing is the backbone of academic publishing. It is this peer review process to ensure that papers/publications have been vetted scientifically prior to publication by experts in the field, i.e. one’s peers. However, the process is not without its problems. One such problems is the delay in academic publishing. For example, a few days ago we published a substantive editorial on COVID-19 in Qater [1].  When we submitted this in July 2020 the information in our editorial was very up to date, and it still was when the Qatar Medical Journal accepted it on 26th July 2020.  Unfortunately, with all the incredibly rapid developments in vaccine development, approval and roll out some of the paper now reads like ‘historial data’.

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH)

 

Reference:

  1. van Teijlingen, E.R., Sathian, B., Simkhada, P., Banerjee, I. (2021) COVID-19 in Qatar: Ways forward in public health & treatment, Qatar Medical Journal 2020(38): 1-8 https://doi.org/10.5339/qmj.2020.38

UKRI Early Career Researcher Forum opens to applications

UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) is calling on postdoctoral researchers, research associates and other early career researchers to join its new Early Career Researcher Forum.

The forum will give researchers a voice in UKRI’s strategy, policy development and decision making.

UKRI hopes to help build a community for early career researchers to benefit from peer interactions, learning, support and other opportunities.

Apply to join the forum today

The forum is open to researchers who identify themselves as employed as early career researchers.

Submit an application to join the Early Career Researcher Forum.

UKRI are asking for applications by 18:00 on 29 January. Applications may be submitted after this date, but those wishing to attend induction events at the end of February should submit their application by this deadline.

Funding development briefings are changing…

Funding opportunities

From 20th January 2021, the RDS Funding Development Briefings will occur weekly, on a Wednesday at 12 noon.

Each session will cover the latest major funding opportunities, followed by a brief Q&A session. Sessions will also include a spotlight on a particular funding opportunity of strategic importance to BU. The timetable for January & February 2021 is below. Further details will be available on the BU Research Blog a week in advance of the session. Sessions will be recorded and made available after the session for those who cannot attend.

Please email RKEDF@bournemouth.ac.uk to receive the Teams invite for these sessions.

Here is your January & February timetable, with details for March, April & May to follow shortly:

Date Spotlight Funding Opportunity
Wednesday 20th Jan 12pm Newton International Fellowships (British Academy & Royal Society)
Wednesday 27th Jan 12pm Phillip Leverhulme Prizes
Wednesday 3rd February 12pm National Institute of Health (US)
Wednesday 10th February 12pm EPSRC Overview including EPSRC Fellowships
Wednesday 17th February 12pm ESRC Overview
Wednesday 24th February Horizon Europe (EU)

HE policy update for the w/e 8th January 2021

international, Student Engagement

Happy New Year!

We’re back into busy times, to keep things manageable for colleagues we will try and keep our updates focussed on the main news and keep the wider interest elements short on commentary, with links that can be followed for more detail.

What’s in store for 2021

A New Year often sees predictions made about the shape of the year ahead.  A lot was announced, not least by the OfS, in the last quarter of 2021 so it will be a busy year. BU staff can read our latest horizon scan here.

Research Professional offer EU 2021: eight areas to watch predicting what the next 12 months may mean for research policy.

Horizon Europe research programme access

Four years on and the UK and EU have agreed a post-Brexit trade deal with access to a number of programmes including participation in Horizon Europe through associate membership between 2021-2027. However, the UK has chosen not to participate in the Erasmus student exchange programme due to cost concerns.

While access to the EU programmes has been granted the details still have to be negotiated individually per programme (in part this is because the regulatory aspects of some programmes are still being developed). This Research Professional article has useful detail on the programmes the UK can associate with. And Wonkhe explain: as in everything else to do with the EU from now on the UK may participate in the governance of programmes as an observer, and in expert groups, but will not be included in any formal decision-making processes associated with each programme.

The Horizon Europe budget is valued at 95.5 billion Euros. The budget is bigger than the last round, however, the remit it must cover is bigger too. Research Professional write: Horizon Europe has a fully fledged European Innovation Council for the first time, which will support the growth of R&D-based businesses. The programme will also lead nations and organisations in funding R&D missions intended to achieve objectives in areas such as cancer and climate change.

On the ‘other programmes’ Research Professional report that Besides Horizon Europe and Erasmus+, the EU will launch or continue a variety of other programmes that will support research and innovation. Its regional funds will continue to provide tens of billions of euros for disbursement by local governments, while the launch of dedicated space, digital, defence and health programmes will provide targeted support for these fields in ways that, the bloc hopes, will chime with its main R&D programme.

Boris Johnson: The deal means certainty for our scientists who will be able to continue to work together on great collective projects…Because although we want the UK to be a science superpower, we also want to be a collaborative science superpower. We will be able to set our own standards, to innovate in the way that we want, to originate new frameworks for the sectors in which this country leads the world, from biosciences to financial services, artificial intelligence and beyond.

Research Professional (RP): Analysts will be poring over the texts as soon as they are released to see exactly what kind of access to EU collaboration the deal provides, and how much it will cost the UK. It has previously been suggested that the UK may be up to £3bn out of pocket by paying into the Horizon programme, and that the money to do so would come out of the domestic R&D budget. RP go on to say: even with the deal, there are bound to be setbacks for R&D and education ties.

Turing Mobility Scheme

It was widely trailed by media sources in late December that Erasmus was off the table. Nearly 10,000 UK students participated in Erasmus during 2018-19. The PM stated the Erasmus deal was extremely expensive (costing £2 billion more than we’d receive back) and instead the UK will launch its own Turing scheme supporting study and work placements abroad backed by £100 million.

It is intended to support 35,000 students in schools, colleges and universities for placements and overseas exchanges from September 2021. It has a social mobility aspect and will target students from disadvantaged areas to improve accessibility to the scheme and opportunities. The new scheme offers up a wider range of countries than could be accessed through Erasmus+. Applications will open early in 2021 and organisations are promised funding to administer the scheme as well as grants for the students’ international experience. Providers are told to begin preparation with international partners as soon as possible. Wonkhe: it has already been noted that a standalone scheme that requires individual institutions to negotiate the terms of exchanges with their counterparts in other countries is a much less efficient way of facilitating study abroad than a continent-wide programme – an issue that may be addressed in the terms of reference for the scheme.

Universities Minister, Michelle Donelan, praises the new scheme highlighting the access to new countries and the disadvantaged element, and raising issue with aspects of Erasmus+: Erasmus’s benefits went overwhelmingly to students who were already advantaged. The language barrier meant that it was very hard for students not already studying a modern foreign language to take part, to flourish at their chosen university and get the most out of the academic experience. A 2006 study found that of those taking part in Erasmus from the UK, 51 per cent were from families with a high or very high income. There are no details on proportions of Turing funding to be allocated to disadvantaged backgrounds yet, however, it is assumed there will be a balance. Donelan concludes:  none of this is to decry Erasmus+… the fact is that it is simply too limiting for the global Britain that we aspire to. Of the hundred best universities in the world in the QS World Rankings, only twelve are in the EU. If we have stayed with Erasmus+ it would have cost several hundreds of millions of pounds to fund a similar number of exchanges, not have been global in nature and continued to deliver poor participation rates for young people from deprived backgrounds.

Education Secretary Gavin Williamson said: We have designed a truly international scheme which is focused on our priorities, delivers real value for money and forms an important part of our promise to level up the United Kingdom. These opportunities will benefit both our students and our employers, as well as strengthening our ties with partners across the world.

Vivienne Stern, director of Universities UK International: While the announcement that the UK will now not be participating in Erasmus+ is disappointing, we are pleased that the prime minister has committed to a new UK programme to fund global mobility. We now ask the UK government to quickly provide clarity on this Erasmus+ domestic alternative, and that it be ambitious and fully funded. It must also deliver significant opportunities for future students to go global which the Erasmus programme has provided to date.

She also stated: Evidence shows that students who have international experience tend to do better academically and in employment, and the benefits are greatest for those who are least advantaged.

An independent blogger for Wonkhe is more sceptical: It is doubtful that the Turing Scheme could match the success of Erasmus, which is after all, a 33-year-old programme considered by many to be the most positive endeavour to come from the EU. The blog – Will Turing be a good enough exchange? – also disagrees with the cost figures – Offsetting these receipts [educational exports revenue] against the entry cost as a non-EU Erasmus Programme country, the UK receives a net return on far more than it contributes. The article states the £100 million won’t go far – It…might just be sufficient for the first year of the scheme while Europe is still suffering the impact of Coronavirus, but in a post Covid world, this will be spread thin at best… this is largely in part to the growing appetite for UK students to study or train abroad… The overall number of mobilities throughout the wider education sector already stands near the 35,000 mark, only made possible through funding, greater than £100 million, that is already allocated to the UK through the Erasmus+ programme. DfE’s allocation for the Turing in 2021 does not account for this.

The blog continues: Turing also does not account for the extra expenses involved in international travel… Expanded opportunities for international mobilities are welcomed in principle, but in practice, heavy promotion of international mobilities may result in astronomical travel expenses, visas fees and in the case of Anglophone destinations, steep cost of living – all which require a far greater investment than DfE’s promised £100 million… What’s also striking is that the total funding isn’t a sufficient amount to fund the additional support mechanisms…needed to encourage students from non-traditional backgrounds… Institutions may be placed in the uncomfortable dilemma of offering fewer overall opportunities to students or targeted places for widening participation students, as a result of the restricted funding. If this is an area of interest do read the full blog as other barriers for both outgoing and incoming students are highlighted.

Finally, Wonkhe note that the UK has historically imported Erasmus+ students from the rest of the EU at twice the rate it exports UK students to other EU destinations.

Parliamentary Activity

These Lords Oral questions on Turing provide some additional clarification. Lord Parkinson stated: We are working directly with educational institutions to make sure that people are able to take up those opportunities and we will provide additional funding for disadvantaged students to cover, for instance, the cost of passports or visas, or for students with disabilities to undertake preparatory visits to make sure that all the necessary accommodations can be made for them. The side-stepping in response to questions on inbound students was notable. This PIE news article also highlights that Turing seems destined to fund outbound opportunities only.

Returning to the Lords oral questions, specifically on the HE sector:
Q – Lord Patel – what assessment have the Government made of the impact on universities of losing a significant amount of finance on inward-bound exchange schemes, because it will now cost money for them to set up exchanges?

A – Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay: We have been liaising with the higher education sector through groups such as the Russell Group and MillionPlus as the negotiations were ongoing and as we developed the Turing scheme, which is the back-up to it.

An Early Day Motion in Parliament championed by the Scottish National Party noted that the Turing scheme will not replicate many aspects of the Erasmus+ scheme such as youth work, adult education, sport, culture and vocational training.

There has been a flood of parliamentary question on the Turing scheme. Below is a small selection – all are due to be answered on Monday 11 January.

Regulatory – OfS Chair

Education Secretary of State Gavin Williamson has earmarked Baron James Wharton to be the next Chair of the Office for Students. If he is approved he’ll commence the role in March 2021.

Wharton currently sits on the Conservative benches in the House of Lords (he was given a life peerage by the PM in September 2020). Previously he was a Conservative MP (2010-17) including roles as an Under-Secretary of State (local Government and international development). After his stint as an MP he was instrumental in Boris’ leadership campaign acting as his Campaign Manager. Prior to his political career Wharton was a solicitor; there is little in his career which suggests an interest in Education. Here Research Professional highlight criticism of the Government that the interview panel was dominated by Conservative leaning. Wharton will appear before the House of Commons education committee who will consider his appointment and publish recommendations (if necessary). Williamson has the final say on the appointment.

Admissions

The UCAS deadline has been pushed back to 29 January to account for Covid disruption and to support applicants with limited access to digital devices.

Most of the admissions related news this week relates to the cancellation of GCSE, A and AS level exams in England and Northern Ireland (Wales and Scotland had already abandoned exams). Teacher assessment will form the basis of final grades. The DfE and Ofqual have collaborated to plan the alternative arrangements and contingency options and the DfE have promised a consultation to fine-tuned the details with the sector. Dods have provided a summary of the main points in the Commons debate on the cancellation of exams here.

Vocational and technical qualification assessment will continue in January where it is safe to do so. The DfE and Ofqual will make arrangements for those unable to hold the January assessments and agree an approach to vocational and technical qualification final assessments moving forward.

During the Commons statement Education Select Committee Chair, Robert Halfon, asked Gavin Williamson to confirm that the centre-assessed grading (CAG) system would maintain standards and provide a level playing field for disadvantaged children, with a fair appeals process. He also asked if the Department would make sure independent assessors – perhaps retired teachers and Ofsted inspectors – were available to provide a check and balance on CAGs.

Dods have a podcast – Teacher’s pet or Class Clown – on the school closure.

Williamson responded – he would be happy to work with Halfon and the Education Committee on any additional actions that can be taken to ensure fairness, and would certainly take on board his idea to bring in retirees as independent assessors

Robert Halfon (Chair, Education Committee) also made the news earlier in the week when he spoke frankly about the Government’s performance during Radio 4’s Woman’s Hour on Tuesday. Asked why the sudden school closure one day after pupils returned he stated he didn’t know – he’d received messages throughout the weekend on schools, mainly being assured that they would remain open, transmission rates were marginal and the risk to teachers was low. He went on to say that Government needed to have a consistent policy that didn’t change every few days. When asked whether the Education Secretary Gavin Williamson was fit for the role, Halfon said he made a point of not getting drawn on particular personalities but commented that it’s “the whole Government,” and described it as “a shambles”.

Some sources this week have noted that the Government’s Skills White paper (one of Williamson’s flagship ministerial pieces) still hasn’t been published and suggested that the Government is biding its time as Williamson’s competence is questioned from some quarters.

Finally, many students improved their A and AS level grades during the autumn 2020 exams.

Research

Science, Research and Innovation Minister, Amanda Solloway, announced £213 million for UK science facilities upgrades, including microscopes, super computers and testing facilities for innovative technologies and blast labs for terror attacks. The fund aims to enable researchers to respond to global challenges such as COVID-19 and climate change. The funding is part of the Government’s R&D Roadmap sources and allocated against specific projects with facilities with Scotland receiving a good proportion of the funding. Breakdown:

  • £29m to upgrade and replace UK scientific equipment
  • £25m to support the installation of highly sophisticated testing facilities at leading UK universities
  • £34m for data and digital research infrastructure relationships
  • £33.5m to upgrade facilities of UK scientific councils
  • £15m for the Capability for Collections Fund

Science Minister Amanda Solloway said: The response from UK scientists and researchers to coronavirus has been nothing short of phenomenal. We need to match this excellence by ensuring scientific facilities are truly world class, so scientists can continue carrying out life-changing research for years to come as we build back better from the pandemic.

From the world’s most detailed microscopes tracking disease to airborne drones monitoring greenhouse gas emissions, our investment will enhance the tools available to our most ambitious innovators across the country. By doing so, scientists and researchers will be able to drive forward extraordinary research that will enable the UK to respond to global challenges such as achieving net zero carbon emissions by 2050.

Artificial Intelligence: The UK AI Council (an independent expert committee) published the AI Roadmap which makes recommendations to inform the  Government’s strategic direction on Artificial Intelligence, including a National AI Strategy. They call on Government to ‘double down’ on the AI recent investment and look to the horizon and be adaptable to disruption. The 16 recommendations are here.

Inquiries and Consultations

Click here to view the updated inquiries and consultation tracker. Email us on policy@bournemouth.ac.uk if you’d like to contribute to any of the current consultations.

Other news

Student Poll: A YouGov poll of students describes Coronavirus as negatively effecting motivation and self-discipline for some, alongside familiar messages for mental health and loneliness. Also:

  • Despite many news stories of universities imposing draconian measures on students, or failing to provide adequate nutrition to those forced to isolate, a majority of students (58%) say their university has handled student safety and wellbeing well during the coronavirus crisis. Just over a third (36%) say their university dealt with the issue badly.
  • By contrast, over four in five students (85%) say the UK government’s response has been poor, while only one in nine (11%) say it has done a good job.
  • Full results here, with University/Government judgements starting from page 28.
  • Note – students were surveyed late December, before the current lockdown announcement.

Youth opportunity: The Learning and Work Institute’s final Youth Commission Report (Number 6) – Unleashing Talent: Levelling up opportunity for young people was published. It examines how to improve education and employment opportunities for 16-24 year olds and calls for a 10 year strategy. Recommendations relevant to HE are:

  • three quarters of young people to gain A level equivalent qualifications by age 25 (currently two thirds do)
  • Reversing the decline in apprenticeships – aiming for one in three young people to take part in an apprenticeship and for this to galvanise action in the same way the 50% target for higher education did
  • Diversify HE routes – Focus on growing Higher Technical routes and HE access at all ages. Widen access by introducing maintenance grants of around £3,000 per year and evaluating access initiatives
  • Supporting young people to combine work and study through a new Youth Allowance in Universal Credit

The reforms would cost an extra £4.6bn per year, focusing on investing more in technical education and employment opportunities. Before the pandemic, half of the £20bn spent each year on education and employment went on higher education.

Non-continuation: HEPI published A short guide to non-continuation in UK universities. Summary here.

HE for the Future: Advance HE blog on reshaping HE for the future. The blog discusses how the fourth industrial revolution, growth of artificial intelligence and the pandemic are significantly changing the employment landscape.

  • Thought leaders have recognised that the emerging skills landscape cannot be supplied by a one-directional pipeline between secondary education and professional work.
  • The ‘art of the possible’ has been transformed over the last nine months. Engaging, participatory high quality higher education has been taking place across disciplinary, institutional and geographical boundaries, demonstrating that it is possible to motivate and engage students and develop the competencies for virtual working and the habits of mind required for life-long learning in an online environment. This has raised questions about whether the three-year on-campus residential degree is fit for purpose and provides value for money. The proliferation of alternative opportunities including degree apprenticeships and flexible modes of accredited delivery, as well as open access courses and certificated programmes from ‘big-tech’ companies, such as Google, Amazon and Apple is encouraging students to question the cost and the value of the predominant model of higher education.
  • The pandemic has highlighted that most higher education institutions need to enhance their capacity to deliver flexible and resilient education systems that would meet student expectations and the accelerating social and economic transformations that wider society anticipates. This requires a ‘rethink’ not only of what and how we teach but also what shape HEIs need to take to deliver on the changing demands of students, employers and society.

The blog goes on to promote Advance HE’s work and online seminars on the topic.

Medical training expansion: The Royal College of Physicians call on the Government to expand the number of medical training opportunities. Our summary is here.

Significant appointments: This link details all the recent appointments to key bodies such as the Student Loans Company board, OfS, Ofqual, Children’s Commissioner, social mobility, FE, and apprenticeships.

Online skills: The Government has launched the ‘An Hour to Skill’ campaign aiming to help more people boost their skills from home, support their mental wellbeing and help build a better working future. It urges people to set aside one hour a week for online learning by taking a free course from The Skills Toolkit. Demos research shows that one in three people have used online learning to help them get a better job, and that on average, online learning can boost annual pay by £3,640 too. The campaign builds on the Government’s Plan for Jobs and initiatives aiming to shrink the skills gap across the UK, and allowing Brits to re-skill and up-skill for the future of work.

Subscribe!

To subscribe to the weekly policy update simply email policy@bournemouth.ac.uk. A BU email address is required to subscribe.

External readers: Thank you to our external readers who enjoy our policy updates. Not all our content is accessible to external readers, but you can continue to read our updates which omit the restricted content on the policy pages of the BU Research Blog – here’s the link.

Did you know? You can catch up on previous versions of the policy update on BU’s intranet pages here. Some links require access to a BU account- BU staff not able to click through to an external link should contact eresourceshelp@bournemouth.ac.uk for further assistance.

JANE FORSTER                                            |                       SARAH CARTER

VC’s Policy Advisor                                                             Policy & Public Affairs Officer

Follow: @PolicyBU on Twitter                   |                       policy@bournemouth.ac.uk

Updated guidance for RKE activities in this lockdown period

Knowledge Exchange

The Government announced that new national restrictions came into force across England on 5th January to curb the spread of COVID-19 and that these will remain in place until at least late February 2021. In a similar way to the first lockdown, during this time you must not leave your home except for permitted reasons. Only essential activity will continue on-campus (further details to follow). Research remains a priority for BU and we have put processes in place to ensure time-critical research requiring access to campus facilities can continue. However, the fundamental message remains Stay at Home if you can.

Research on-campus: All on-campus research activity has been suspended temporarily. However, researchers and research students undertaking time-critical research which cannot be undertaken from home and who require access to specialist facilities, resources and equipment on-campus for their work can make a request to their Faculty to access the campus during this lockdown period. You will need to contact your Faculty Operations Team to request access, even if you have received approval previously. On-campus research activities involving face-to-face contact with participants are unlikely to be permitted during this lockdown period. It is recommended that before requesting permission to proceed with research on-campus, you read the latest government guidance on labs and research facilities.

Research off-campus and outside of the home: Research and knowledge exchange activities which take place off-campus and outside of the home should be reviewed in light of the latest government guidance on essential work. If these activities can be undertaken in a compliant way, the risk assessment should be updated and approved by the relevant Deputy Dean (Research & Professional Practice) and Faculty Operations Team. If the research cannot be undertaken under the new lockdown conditions, it should be paused until late February 2021. For colleagues that have previously completed the return to research process and/or undertaking research in the context of COVID-19 process, and have received a letter stating that they can undertake research off-campus, this permission is now paused until restrictions are lifted. If you have reviewed the activities, still wish to proceed and have the approval from your Deputy Dean (Research & Professional Practice) and relevant partner approvals, please email RDSProjectAdmin@bournemouth.ac.uk and an appropriate letter will be issued. It is recommended that before requesting permission to proceed with research activities, that you read the latest government guidance on research. This is important as although BU’s campuses have been made COVID-19 secure enabling you to continue to come into work, this cannot be guaranteed in off-campus locations, and therefore careful consideration needs to be taken as to the feasibility of research proceeding between now and late February 2021.

Further information:

Read the Government’s latest information on universities and the COVID restrictions here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/950367/Students_returning_to_and_starting_higher_education_in_Spring_Term_2021.pdf

Science/Health/Arts/Comms Interdisciplinary Projects: Collaboration Opportunity

Fusion

logo - science, health, and data communications research groupThe Science, Health, and Data Communications Research Group will be conducting a series of workshops to start off the new year, designed to help Bournemouth researchers form new networks and collaborative projects around educating and communicating research to the public.

This series will take place from Monday 18 January 2021 to Friday 22 January 2021, each day from 1-3pm, online, and open to any and all researchers across the university. See full details and register on EventBrite.

This “crucible” programme, based on NESTA’s highly successful Crucible-in-a-Box, will focus on activities designed to connect researchers based on mutual interests, and develop those interests into new directions for collaborative research. It will also include interactive sessions on communicating your research to the media, collecting data for impact studies, working in interdisciplinary teams, and communications strategies.

If you are unable to participate in these sessions, we will likely be running them again. Full details are available on the EventBrite link; questions and requests to be notified of future events can be directed to Lyle Skains (lskains@bournemouth.ac.uk).

Net Zero

The Think Tank Onward have published its latest research report, Getting to zero, which marks the launch of a major cross-party programme of research  to understand the political and practical challenges to achieving net zero by 2050, and to develop policies to help people and places who may be disrupted in the transition.

You can read the full report here.

Summary below provided by Dods.

Getting to zero will be jointly chaired by Rt Hon Caroline Flint, who served as Shadow Energy and Climate Change Secretary for 4 years, and Dame Caroline Spelman, who was Environment Secretary for 2 years and negotiated the Sustainable Development Goals for the UK at Rio 2012. The wider steering group includes Melanie Onn, former Labour MP for Great Grimsby and Deputy CEO of Renewables UK, Ruth Edwards, MP for Rushcliffe, and Guy Newey, Energy Systems Catapult. A full list is included below.

The launch report for the programme, published today, argues that the UK has led the world in delivering net zero in recent years:

  • The UK was the first major economy to legislate for Net Zero emissions by 2050, prompting China, Japan, France and South Korea to follow suit. With the USA expected to join the club in 2021, more than three fifths (62%) of global CO2 emissions, and three quarters (74%) of global GDP, will shortly be subject to legally binding net zero targets.
  • The UK’s manufacturing, industrial, heat and electricity sectors have all decarbonised by around half since 1990, the highest rates in the G7. Over the same period, China and India have seen their manufacturing and industrial emissions grow by 370% and 280% respectively and China’s emissions from heat and electricity have risen 540%.

But as the UK goes further and faster to delivering net zero there will increasingly be geographic, political and economic trade offs that need to be better understood and mitigated. Looking at the distribution of jobs in industries that contribute more than 2% of UK carbon emissions, Onward finds:

  • The UK’s least prosperous regions disproportionately rely on heavily emitting industries for jobs at present. The East Midlands has the highest proportion of jobs in high emitting industries (42%), closely followed by the West Midlands (41%), Yorkshire and the Humber (38%), and the North West (38%). In contrast, London and the South East have the lowest proportion of jobs in high emitting industries, with 23% and 34% respectively. In total, more than half (52%) of high emitting jobs are located in the North, Midlands (19%) and Scotland (9%).
  • Politically, there is a strong correlation between the political battlegrounds of recent elections, and the areas with the most high emitting jobs. Of the top tenth of constituencies by high emitting jobs, 14% are in Scotland, 28% are in the North and 22% are in the Midlands, but just 5% are in London. In the reverse, over half (52%) of the lowest tenth of constituencies by high-emitting jobs are in London. Just 5% are in the Midlands.
  • The seats that make up the so-called Red Wall in the North and the Midlands, which were targeted at the last election and which will form the key battleground at the next election, are likely to suffer the highest levels of disruption of any constituencies. 43% of workers in the Red Wall work in currently high-emitting industries, compared to an average of 37% for Conservative and Labour seats outside the Red Wall. Liberal Democrat seats have the lowest proportion of high emitting jobs – just 32% on average.
  • The more rural a constituency is, the more its local economy relies on high emitting jobs. Nearly half (48%) of the top decile of constituencies by high emitting jobs are classified as rural or towns, while just a quarter (25%) are in cities. In contrast, more than half (54%) of the seats least reliant on high emitting jobs are in cities, 44% are in towns and only 2% are rural.

The research will spend the next nine months ahead of COP26 looking at three aspects of the net zero transition: how to decarbonise incumbent industries; how to retrain and upskill workers at risk of disruption; and how to create the regulatory and financial conditions for innovation. It will use statistical research, polling and focus groups and engage a wide range of Whitehall departments, industries and campaigners.

Ted Christie-Miller, author of the report:

“Net zero will require more than legal commitments. It demands a plan that is not only practical but which smooths the transition for those people and places whose livelihoods are based in the carbon economy, many of whom are in the Red Wall battlegrounds that decided the last election and may well decide the next.”

 

“The UK has an historic opportunity in advance of COP26 next year to develop lasting policies that can not only deliver net zero but which can carry the support of voters and companies through a titanic transformation of our economy and society. It must take it.”

 

Dame Caroline Spelman, Co-chair of the Getting to zero commission:

“Reducing carbon consumption to net zero is the socially responsible decision our generation has taken to help future generations; but we must make sure the impact of this does not aggravate existing inequalities in our country. This can only be done by enabling mitigation for those who will be hardest hit and taking advantage of the opportunities that are there to be grasped.”

 

Rt Hon Caroline Flint, Co-chair of the Getting to zero commission:

“The challenge of net zero is immense; the deadlines are rushing towards us. This requires faster decision making than we are used to in British politics, as we change our industries, our homes, how we get from place to place and the very energy we use. In cleaning up our act, no community should be left behind. They will all have to be part of the journey and share the benefits. I look forward to working with Dame Caroline Spelman and the wide range of contributors to the Getting to zero project.”

 

 

Call for evidence – sport and recreation

The House of Lords Select Committee have called for evidence on a National Plan for Sport and Recreation.

The Committee are considering the effectiveness of current sport and recreation policies and initiatives, how people can be encouraged to lead more active lifestyles and the case for a national plan for sport and recreation.  They are keen to receive written evidence from experts with an interest, experience or expertise in sport and recreation policy and practice.

The Committee is taking a broad view of ‘sport and recreation’ and is interested in hearing about all activities that support an active lifestyle. It hopes to learn about success stories and opportunities, challenges, and how things could be improved going forward.

The Committee would particularly like to hear from experts:

  • with experience of motivation through and the benefits of technology in regard to physical activity (e.g. wearables, apps etc)
  • who can provide thoughts/experience in regard to comparable international models/policies
  • with expertise on data collection of physical activity, its use and reliability
  • on encouraging under represented groups and children to lead more active lifestyles
  • on how racism, homophobia, transphobia, misogyny and ableism in sport be tackled
  • on the opportunities and challenges facing elite sports in the UK and what can be done to make national sports governing bodies more accountable

The deadline is Friday 29th January.

Information about the inquiry and all the questions which the Committee would like to learn more about can be found on the inquiry webpage.

Colleagues intending to submit written evidence to this inquiry must engage with the BU policy team (policy@bournemouth.ac.uk) and share a draft prior to submitting evidence.

Colleagues who haven’t previously submitted to a select committee or would like support are encouraged to get in touch. We can advise, provide a template and guidance on how to write your submission.

You are invited to the Ageing and Dementia Research Centre Seminar

Student Engagement

You are cordially invited to this seminar which is open to all BU staff and students.

(Please email adrc@bournemouth.ac.uk for the zoom link to access the seminar).

 

 

Dementia and digital selfhood: Identity formation in the age of social media.

Dr. Catherine Talbot

10th February @ 12.30pm

Abstract:  A diagnosis of dementia in mid-life can be challenging, often causing losses or changes in a person’s identity as a worker, partner, or parent. Dementia also continues to be a stigmatised condition, whereby those with the diagnosis are frequently identified as ‘victims’ and ‘sufferers’. In contrast, social media may provide some individuals with a means of reconstructing identity, by facilitating narrative and community membership. In this presentation, Dr Catherine Talbot will discuss the findings of her interview study with 11 people with young-onset dementia who use Twitter. Her findings suggest that people with young-onset dementia are using Twitter to re-establish, communicate, preserve, and redefine their identities. However, there are some risks as Twitter was sometimes a hostile environment for individuals who did not present in a ‘typical’ manner or faced technical difficulties because of their symptoms. These findings have important implications for post-diagnostic support provision and the design of accessible social media platforms.

Biography: Catherine is a cyberpsychologist specialising in social media, health, and qualitative methods. Her PhD research concerned the use of Twitter by people with dementia to facilitate social connection, self-expression, and a sense of identity. She is interested in positive technology usage by people with stigmatised health conditions and how technologies can be developed to promote wellbeing and social inclusion. Catherine is a committee member of the British Psychological Society (BPS) Cyberpsychology Section.

Please email adrc@bournemouth.ac.uk for the zoom link to access the seminar.

UK participation in EU programmes for research, innovation and higher education

Horizon Europe

As part of the agreement reached between the UK and the EU, the UK has announced that it will associate to Horizon Europe (2021-27). Association will give UK scientists, researchers and businesses access to funding under the programme on equivalent terms as organisations in EU countries. The next step is for both sides to formally adopt the full text of the agreement taking into account the finalised EU Programme Regulations.

The UK also reached agreement with the EU and Euratom to associate to the next Euratom Research & Training (R&T) Programme 2021-2025 subject to ratification of the overall deal and finalisation of the regulations. This agreement includes UK participation in the ITER fusion collaboration through membership of Fusion for Energy.

A new Turing scheme starting in September 2021 will replace the UK’s participation in Erasmus+. The programme will provide similar opportunities for students to study and work abroad as the Erasmus+ programme and will include countries across the world.

Once the overall deal has been ratified by all sides and the Horizon Europe and ITER programme regulations have been finalised there will be a formal process between the UK and the EU to conclude the association agreement.

Horizon 2020 and ETC (Interreg) 2014-20

Successful UK bids, awarded or to be awarded, will continue to receive EU grant funding from the Commission for the lifetime of individual Horizon 2020 projects. This includes calls that end after 1 January 2021.

The Withdrawal Agreement between the UK and the EU confirms that 2014-20 ETC programmes (includes Interreg) will be able to continue with UK project partners, and UK project partners can continue delivering their projects in line with existing programme rules and timescales. See here for FAQs for existing Interreg award holders.

UK have opted out of the following:

The UK has announced that it will not participate in European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) programmes in 2021-2027, and the UK government will not be pursuing participation in European Territorial Cooperation programmes in 2021-2027, which includes Interreg.

There are a few EU programmes where the UK’s access is excluded, which currently includes:

  • Erasmus student exchange programme (see above)
  • Galileo satellite navigation system’s encrypted military signal
  • European Innovation Council
  • Next Generation EU $750bn Covid-recovery programme
  • European Geostationary Navigation Overlay System (EGNOS) for “safety critical applications”, such as flying aircraft or navigating ships through narrow channels

Further information

More information can be found here:

RDS will provide further information in due course.

First BU paper accepted for 2021

NHS, open access, Publishing, writing

Congratulations to Prof. Vanora Hundley whose article ‘Escalation triggers and expected responses in obstetric early warning systems used in UK consultant-led maternity units’ is now available Open Access online. The paper has been accepted in Resuscitation Plus. Co-authors include FHSS Visiting Faculty Prof. Gary Smith and Dr. Richard Isaacs.

The paper reports on a review of OEWS [Obstetric Early Warning Systems] charts and escalation policies across consultant-led maternity units in the UK (n = 147). OEWS charts were analysed for variation in the values of physiological parameters triggering different levels of clinical escalation. The observed variations in the trigger thresholds used in OEWS charts and the quality of information included within the accompanying escalation protocols is likely to lead to suboptimal detection and response to clinical deterioration during pregnancy and the post-partum period. The paper concludes the development of a national OEWS and escalation protocol would help to standardise care across obstetric units.

 

Congratulations!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

Conversation article: Brexit and Covid: can British citizens travel in Europe after January 1?

British tourists hoping to travel to Europe in the new year will need to cancel or postpone their trips until the restrictions are lifted.
Andy Rain/EPA

Dimitrios Buhalis, Bournemouth University

The combined forces of COVID-19 and Brexit have created massive uncertainty over where British people can and cannot travel.

A number of countries rapidly imposed travel bans on the UK in an attempt to control the spread of a new variant that was identified as spreading across the country. Most European countries halted land and air transportation links with the UK or reinforced quarantine periods, as did Canada, India, Russia, Colombia, Kuwait and Turkey. Government advice and rules have been changing regularly.

But more confusion awaits after December 31 at 11pm. The UK left the EU on January 31 2020 and the transition period after Brexit comes to an end on this date. From January 1, British citizens will lose their automatic right to free movement in the European Union as a result of the nation’s decision to vote to leave the bloc.

Rules announced on December 9 stressed that under COVID-19 restrictions, Britons could be barred from EU entry on January 1 2021, when Britain becomes a “third country” to the European Union unless their travel is deemed essential.

From January 1 2021, the relationship between the UK and the EU may be determined by the trade agreement that is currently being negotiated. It may be that travel arrangements are agreed in that deal but, so far, talks are stalling on other issues.

As Britain becomes a “third country” (any country not in the EU) from January 1 2021, British residents cannot assume the right to visit EU countries while COVID restrictions are in place. When the UK was an EU member state, travel within the EU was regulated by the fundamental principle of freedom of movement. Now that the UK is no longer a member state, it can therefore no longer expect automatic travel rights.

On October 22, the EU Council instructed member states to gradually lift travel restrictions for residents of only eight “third countries” with low coronavirus infection rates. These included Australia, New Zealand and Singapore. All others, including British residents from January 1 (as the UK becomes a third country), will not be allowed to travel to the EU until the COVID-19 situation allows this travel restriction to be lifted. All the countries granted an exception had significantly less severe COVID situations than many other parts of the world so we can see there is some way to go before the UK meets such a hurdle, even beyond the current bans that have been brought in because of the new virus strain.

Holiday planning

These rules mean that British tourists hoping to travel to Europe in the new year, including those who may have flights booked already, will need to cancel or postpone their trip until the restrictions are lifted or Britain is added to the list of safe “third” countries.

Understandably, the pandemic, new strains of the virus, restrictions around the world and the expected third wave following the Christmas holiday prevent short term optimism.



Read more:
What are Australian-style and Canadian-style Brexit trade deals?

Until COVID-19 is contained and more people are vaccinated, both domestically and internationally, it is unlikely that much non-essential travel will be allowed. Realistically, this should be in late spring or early summer time.

If British tourists are prevented from travelling due to government restrictions, they should be refunded by suppliers, or, if they wish, they can accept value vouchers for future use.

Hat, sunglasses, mobile phone, shell, two passports with boarding passes and a plane figurine with a no symbol over it
British residents are barred from visiting EU countries under the current COVID restrictions.
ADragan/Shutterstock

After Easter, we should see restrictions lifted and more international travel activity. Global tourism has been haemorrhaging as a result of COVID-19-induced restrictions and the consequent economic recession.

Most governments will be observing the COVID situation very carefully and evaluate when it will be safe to reduce restrictions and remove travel bans. It is in the best interest of all stakeholders that this happens as soon as it is safe to do so.

It is worth noting, too, that many European countries are very keen to welcome back British travellers when it is safe to do so. Several kept their borders open, even when the epidemiological situation in the UK was much worse than in many tourism destinations.

The Brexit impact on travel

After COVID restrictions are lifted, most British travellers will find that Brexit brings some minor inconveniences. They will have to use “all passports” or “visa not required” lanes at borders and will travel similarly to non-EU citizens.

When the European Travel Authorisation and Information System (ETIAS) is introduced in the second half of 2022, visa-exempt, non-EU citizens will need to apply for travel authorisation online before their trip and pay a fee of 7 euros.

Other than that, they will be restricted to staying less than 90 days in a 180 period in the Schengen region.

Brexit sign at bus stop on UK high street reads:
British travellers are wishing for a worry-free 2021 – but will they get one?
Yau Ming Low/Shutterstock

One thing we’ve learned during the COVID era is how much we miss travelling. In the short term, if the virus is contained and restrictions relaxed, short and mid haul trips, often arranged at the last minute, will be the best option. And if you’re looking to take a trip to Turkey, Made in Turkey Tours can help get you there at your preferred style and budget.

Dimitrios Buhalis, Professor, Bournemouth University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.