Last week, the four UK higher education funding bodies launched a consultation on the proposed Open Access Policy for REF2029.
Proposed changes from the REF2021 policy include an open access requirement for longform publications, the shortening of permittable embargo periods for journal articles and changes to article deposit and licensing requirements. More details on the proposed policy can be found here: https://www.ref.ac.uk/guidance/ref-2029-open-access-policy-consultation/
BU will be submitting an institutional response to the consultation, however anyone with an interest in open access publishing and what this might mean in relation to the REF is also invited to respond as an individual. You can respond to the consultation on the UKRI engagement hub.
The consultation closes on Monday 17 June 2024 and the REF team intends to publish the final REF2029 Open Access Policy in summer/autumn 2024.
As part of the special issue in Frontiers in Public Health on ‘Evidence-based approaches in Aging and Public Health’ the guest editors included 15 academic papers. These 15 contributions to the Special Issue were introduced in placed in perspective in our editorial ‘Editorial: Evidence-based approaches in Aging and Public Health‘ [1] which was accepted for publication two days ago. The guest editors included two Visiting Faculty to FHSS: Prof. Padam Simkhada and Dr. Brijesh Sathian.
The next round of the Academy of Medical Sciences Springboard scheme will open soon. The University can submit up to 4 application. We will be running a university Expression of Interest (EOI) process to select applicants to the scheme.
The Academy of Medical Sciences Springboard scheme offers £125,000 funding over 2 years towards research costs and professional development. The scheme is targeted at those in the early stages of their first independent research position and have not yet been in receipt of substantial research funding. Applications are encouraged from across the biomedical field from molecular, cellular and structural biology to anatomical, physiological, psychological, epidemiological and public health research areas.
Timeline
Internal Expression of Interest deadline: Friday 19th April noon. EOIs should include the completed form and an up-to-date CV (including publications, previous research funding and employment history)
Candidates Informed of Outcome: Wednesday 24th April.
BU deadline to nominate Candidates to AMS: Friday 26 April noon
AMS Deadline for nominated applicants: Open 30th April and close 5th June.
The EOI form can be found here I:\RDS\Public\AMS Springboard.
Please contact Kate Percival (kpercival@bournemouth.ac.uk) if you would like to submit an EOI.
Caroline and Catherine from the Ageing & Dementia Research Centre attended the March dog café at the Potteries Care Home in Poole, Caroline took along her Double Doodle dog called Bailey. It happened to be the same week that Crufts had been on the TV, so it was a special Crufts themed dog cafe. It proved to be the most popular turn out so far with about 15 dogs of all shapes and sizes in attendance – even a human dressed up as a dog! It was lovely to see the ladies from Waggy Tails dog rescue charity and three of their dogs.
The Crufts special dog show included a dog agility course and 3 prize categories
which were:
Best waggy tail
Best in show
Fastest time for the agility course
It proved to be popular with both care home residents and the community alike. Both Caroline and Catherine highly enjoyed the event and formed good contacts to explore further opportunities to develop research around the benefits of animals in dementia care.
The education and research programme, organised by the team at Zürcher Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften (Zurich University of Applied Sciences), involved a workshop with midwives from across Europe ( Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden and Germany) discussing midwife-led care.
Professor Vanora Hundley and Dr Dominique Mylod were also invited to give a lecture on the latent phase / early labour as part of the final Gebstart conference. They presented recently published research that was included in thespecial issue in Women & Birth at the end of last year.
This meeting and collaboration with colleagues from across Europe builds on the work of the International Early Labour Research Group.
Relevant papers:
Mylod DC, Hundley V, Way S, Clark C (2023) Can a birth ball reduce pain perception for women at low obstetric risk in the latent phase of labour? The Ball Assisted Latent Labour (BALL) randomised controlled trial. Women & Birth https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2023.11.008
Grylka-Baeschlin S, Hundley V, Cheyne H et al (2023) Early labour: an under-recognised opportunity for improving the experiences of women, families and maternity professionals Women & Birth https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2023.09.004
We are looking to recruit an impact champion in UOA 20 (the Unit of Assessment for Social Work and Social Policy) to help support preparations for our submission to REF2029. The deadline for expressions of interest is the Tuesday 30th April 2024.
This role is recruited through an open and transparent process, which gives all academic staff the opportunity to put themselves forward. Applications from underrepresented groups (e.g. minority ethnic, declared disability) are particularly welcome.
We are currently preparing submissions to thirteen units (otherwise known as UOAs). Each unit has a leadership team with at least one leader, an output and impact champion. The leadership team is supported by a panel of reviewers who assess the research from the unit. This includes research outputs (journal articles, book chapters, digital artefacts and conference proceedings) and impact case studies.
All roles require a level of commitment which is recognised accordingly, with time to review, attend meetings, and take responsibility for tasks.
This vacancy is for a joint impact champion for UOA 20 Social Work and Social Policy. This role exists as a job share with an existing impact champion, on the basis of a combined total of 0.2 FTE (split to be decided in discussion with the successful applicant).
Undertaking a UOA role can be enjoyable and rewarding, as one of our current impact champions can testify:
“As a UoA 17 impact champion, I work closely with the UoA 17 impact team to encourage the development of a culture of impact across BUBS. I try to pop into Department / research group meetings when I can to discuss impact, and I’ve enjoyed meeting people with a whole range of research interests. Sometimes it can be tough to engage people with impact – understandably; everyone is busy – so it’s important to be enthusiastic about the need for our BU research to reach the public. Overall, the role is about planting the seeds to get researchers thinking about the impact their work might have in the future (as well as the impact they have already had, sometimes without realising!)”
Dr Rafaelle Nicholson – UOA 17 Impact Champion
How to apply
All those interested should put forward a short case (suggested length of one paragraph), explaining why they are interested in the role and what they believe they could bring to it. These should be clearly marked with the relevant role and unit and emailed to ref@bournemouth.ac.uk by Tuesday 30th April 2024.
Further details on the impact champion role, the process of recruitment and selection criteria can be found here:
Some more optimistic takes on what might be in the party manifestos for HE: the sort of commitments being asked for seem somewhat optimistic: later in this update I look at some detailed proposals on maintenance finance, a call to scrap the REF (which might have more take-up in the manifestos), the KEF via a HE- BCI survey (might someone suggest scrapping the KEP?), apprenticeship results are out and numbers on international education. Amongst all that I also look at a speech from Susan Lapworth.
Manifesto for HE
You’ve seen the UUK one, here is the one from MillionPlus. (Policy update from February: The UUK manifesto sets out a wish list for the sector. It all looks very expensive and so while ambitious, unlikely to be replicated in anyone’s actual manifesto. We can expect to see more of these over the next few months. Research Professional have the story here.)
Scrap REF and save money
Iain Mansfield says that Labour should ‘scrap REF and save half a billion’, Research Professional reports. Not because there is any problem with a metric for research: just a strong feeling that it shouldn’t include a metric for environment and culture. RP add: Speaking at Research Professional News live last week, Labour’s shadow science minister, Chi Onwurah, said she was “concerned about some of the bureaucracy associated with the REF” and stopped short of committing to retaining it in its current form. I don’t think that means stopping the culture and environment part, but it is hard to know. These debates will run for a while.
HE-BCI review
The HE-BCI survey is used in the Knowledge Exchange Framework. Just how much difference the KEF makes to anything and how interested anyone except the sector really is in it, is still, for me, an open question that I have asked since KEF was just a glint in Jo Johnson’s eye (the third leg of the HE stool etc…). Of course if they started using KEF to allocate HEIF it would matter a lot more, but the KEF data doesn’t really lend itself to that. As a reminder, it uses a different comparison group (clusters) to everything else, three of its “perspectives” are self-assessed and all it tells you is whether engagement with the perspective is deemed to be low, medium or high. In a highly technical presentation format.
But as the (only real) metrics behind the (incomprehensible) KEF wheels (just take a look here and see what you learn), HE-BCI data does have some influence. And HESA did a survey on some bits of it which closed in January. There will be another consultation at some point.
The regulator speaks
It is always interesting to hear or read a speech by the head of the OfS, so here is one.
After a friendly introduction telling the Association of Colleges what good work their members do, it is straight in on quality:
Although, of course, not every college higher education student is in that position, the college sector should collectively be very proud that so many who are get the guidance and support they need in further education settings.
But, sadly, we know that in too many parts of the system, students’ interests are not always being well-served
…[Students] have serious questions about:
the amount of teaching they receive,
the frequency and usefulness of feedback provided to them, and
the level of support, both academic and pastoral, they can access.
Talking about the ongoing quality assessments, there are some changes coming:
Updating some of the language we use. So we might talk more about assessments or compliance assessments, rather than investigations.
We think there’s scope for additional training for assessment teams, for example, focusing on welfare to ensure staff are appropriately supported during visits and the wider process.
And we know the sector would like us to publish more information about how institutions are selected for assessment and how the process unfolds from there
A defensive approach to the big effort on freedom of speech? You decide
Defining more clearly and coherently the student interest will also support another area where our regulation is developing: freedom of speech and academic freedom.
As that work has progressed, we have sometimes been told, including by some students, that students do not consider this a priority. But we know that the National Student Survey found that one in seven students in England felt unable to freely express their views.
… the collective act of debate and dissection of ideas, old and new, is what allows us to be confident that what and how students are learning represents the best knowledge we currently have. If students don’t recognise this, we need to understand why. Is it an artefact of who speaks loudest in our current systems? Or that cost-of-living worries and the associated challenges have reduced the scope for considering these broader issues? Or that students today have a fundamentally different conception of what freedom of speech and academic freedom ought to entail?
And some new areas of focus:
For example, although access to accommodation appears in our Equality of Opportunity Risk Register, we’ve been cautious about stepping into that arena in regulatory terms. But it is clear that students are increasingly concerned about the cost, quality and uneven availability of accommodation for their studies. It’s the most frequently mentioned issue in discussions with students in my visits to institutions.
Likewise, while we’ve taken steps to encourage stronger working links between those we regulate and the organisations that provide health services to students, particularly to support their mental health, we’re not the regulator of those services, and much of the most critical care can’t be provided by universities and colleges directly…. we are open to the view that, as a regulator framed and formed in relation to the interests of students, it may fall to us to take action, or to seek to better co-ordinate the activity of others, or to just talk about them because they matter to students.
And there is a new strategy consultation coming for the OfS.
Apprenticeships
Achievements rate update: a update published by the DfE. The Minister for Skills, Apprenticeships and Higher Education, Robert Halfon has written an open letter to the apprenticeship sector celebrating the latest achievement rates and setting out some developments.
While the government are very keen to encourage more apprenticeships, there is a stern approach to providers here: not dissimilar to the rhetoric on HE, there will be student number controls linked to quality as defined by outcomes. While “training not being as good as hoped” is a factor in the list above, as is “poor organisation” of the programme, that is in the context of all the other reasons linked to employers and jobs. However, the government can’t do much about those, and is not in the business of discouraging employers from participating. But this will put more pressure on providers who are already finding apprenticeships bureaucratic and hard and expensive to deliver.
Anyway, the ideas for future development in the Minister’s letter are:
Apprenticeship Standards. IfATE will be looking closely at apprenticeship standards that are not producing good outcomes for employers or the economy – especially where they are underused or too many learners are dropping out without completing – and speed up action to either improve them or remove them where it is clear the apprenticeship standard is not working.
Quality of Training. We know that the quality of training is a major factor in whether apprentices complete. Through the apprenticeship accountability framework, we have assessed provider performance against a range of measures to give an overall picture of their quality of delivery. ….. In future performance assessments, we will not hesitate to robustly challenge providers showing insufficient improvement. We will deploy appropriate support, where providers demonstrate a capacity to improve in a timely manner, and we will continue to consider factors outside of providers’ control, where these can be evidenced. However, we will also use contractual measures including potential limitations on growth, stopping delivery of standards with low apprenticeship achievement rates and removal from the market where this is necessary to protect apprenticesand employers and ensure they have access to high quality training. Concurrently we will also seek to enrich the market by making it easier to enter for providers that can deliver to our priorities – for example to increase participation from SMEs and young people.
Employer improvement. We now want to give employers better access to information and data to help manage their own apprenticeship programme and benchmark against others to help drive up improvements across the programme. We will test options for the information we could use to support this and work with Top 100 employers to identify how to make the information available. This will be in addition to the support offered to employers through resources, best practice sharing, and events to support self-improvement.
End-Point Assessment. We continually review the assessment process for apprenticeships to make sure it is proportionate, supports achievement and is fit for the future. Working with IfATE, the providers engaged with the Expert Provider pilot and the FE Funding Simplification pilot, we will identify further options to improve the assessment model, making it more efficient for the whole sector…
Expert Provider Pilot and SME engagement. … As a result of the pilot we are developing a new, simple one step approval for SMEs engaging with apprenticeships for the first time. This new flexibility is being developed with colleges and training providers and will be available later this year. …
Student finance
Oh dear, another negative story about student debt that will discourage potential applicants (and as always, their parents). This time it is the BBC who revealed that the UK’s highest student debt was £231k. Quite how they managed to rack up that much is unclear: by doing lots of courses, it seems (although surely there are limits on that – apparently there are exceptions to those rules). The highest level of interest accumulated was around £54,050. The student interviewed is a doctor: the length of medical programmes means that, along with vets and dentists, doctors tend to accumulate the highest student loans.
The Sutton Trust have published a report on reforming student maintenance ahead of the general election.
There are suggestions about how to address the challenges.
The analysis covers three potential systems, all of which would increase the amount of maintenance students would have available to them day to day, rising from the current level of £9,978 to £11,400. This is the level that recent Sutton Trust research has found is the median spending on essentials for students living away from home outside of London for 9 months of the year,… This would also set maintenance support at a similar level to what they would receive if paid the National Living Wage while studying, a method the Diamond Review in Wales used to set maintenance levels.
Scenarios include
Scenario 1 – Increasing overall maintenance levels, with equal loans for all students and maintenance grants making up the difference.
Scenario 2 – Increasing overall maintenance levels, with variable loans and with maintenance grants focused on the poorest students.
David Kernohan from Wonkhe has some analysis, always worth checking out for the nuances, including:
2021 was a long time ago
It’s also notable that all these figures are based on exports only – there is no adjustment at all for costs incurred in delivering a service overseas.
pathway provider income (programmes that help to prepare overseas students for study at a UK university) is estimated based on a survey of six large providers (CEG, INTO, Kaplan, Navitas, Oxford International, Study Group) conducted by one of the participants (Kaplan)
Dr Peter Howard-Jones delivers an AFE BUBS research seminar with the title “The United Kingdom Productivity Paradox: Myth or Reality,” at 2.00-3.15pm, Tuesday 26 March, Bournemouth Gateway Building 113 (first floor), Lansdowne, Bournemouth University.
Abstract
“Whilst the financial crisis was a catastrophic event in the global economy and in particular the UK with its pre-eminent banking sector, there are historical key events that may hold THE KEY TO CURRENT TRENDS TO UK PRODUCTIVITY AND THE LABOUR MARKET. The infrastructure changes in the 1980’s, poor regulation of the financial sector from 1986 to the present day, the 30 years experiment in private finance initiatives and the privatisation of national infrastructure now in the hands of foreign investors, may well be more important catalysts than the financial crisis itself. Following on from the financial crash came Brexit wielding a further blow to an economy already in crisis with key infrastructure under significant pressure as politicians from all parties claimed the solution lies in economic growth. Whilst this is a truism this relies on investment spending and the United Kingdom’s record in both public and private sectors is lamentable. Couple this with increasing inequality and reducing social mobility and a pattern of economic and societal decline is established. The reality lies in a new paradigm which needs introducing into the economic lexicon which includes human and social capital. THE GOAL OF IMPROVING UK PRODUCTIVITY IN THE LABOUR MARKET lies in a sense of place (regionalisation) and the creation of distributive mechanisms that provide a platform for WORKFORCE INCENTIVISATION and in turn affordable GOVERNMENT REVENUE collection.”
“The abstract above represents some productivity research that I did some years ago (at BU) which was published in The Journal of Economic Perspectives. What I want at the seminar is a robust discussion about an extension to this work which Conor and I are discussing involving the whole gamut of the UK economy and the effect on productivity. So, some key words in no particular order: Neoliberalism, populism, inequality, income distribution, taxation, infrastructure, investment, social capital, human capital, and the elephant in the room or not as is the case for the two main political parties, Brexit. Please feel free to come with your own key words.” Dr Peter Howard-Jones.
Dr Peter Howard-Jones recognised long-term contributions at BU are as: an ECR, a research award (2021) links with LSE, institutional economist, inspiring historical economics context, exceptional analytical thinking; lectures and highly engaging facilitative debating seminars, who is contactable about or after this lecture or with ideas on the above stated discussion on ‘an extension to this work’ research. Email phowardjones@bournemouth.ac.uk
RSVP organiser (if not done so) Professor Davide Parrilli
dparrilli@bournemouth.ac.uk
M. Davide Parrilli, PhD (B’ham), MPhil (Sussex), SFHEA, FeRSA
Professor of Regional Economic Development
BUBS PhD Programme Coordinator
BUBS Output Champion
Professorial Member of BU Senate
Bournemouth University Business School
AACSB Accredited; SBC Accredited; EFMD Member
& Editorial Board/AE of “European Planning Studies”
Note: A welcome independent posting/photo by FV for AFE BUBS
‘Globalisation, integration, cooperation – what is at stake in the current turbulent times? The title of the 6th Conference in cooperation with the European Association for Comparative Economic Studies 22-23 March 2024 hosted in South-East Europe, Szeged University.’ An EACES member from Bournemouth University, joined in via the host hybrid liaison of an ‘economic constraints online’ distance free option in parts recorded. This conference was a cauldron of many research talks, many directly from SE Europe – within ‘geo-economic fragmenting’ (EACES terminology), presenting multi-factorial pathways for alternative futures.
The conference keynote plenary presentations were by leading European research institutes: Marzenna Anna Weresa, Professor of Economics (Warsaw School of Economics): European Competitiveness in Turbulent Times: Focus on Innovation. Nicolaas Stijn Groenendijk, Professor of Public Policy, Organisation and Innovation (Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences): Global resources and the EU’s strategic autonomy role (EU, he stated is small relating to global spaces which should be protected not controlled: satellites, security economics, governance and environment including outer space, cyberspace, weapons, instruments in interplay with geo-economics geopolitics).”
Professor Weresa, Poland, emphasised the importance of using “innovative competitiveness to survive turbulence changing behaviours, attitudes, experimenting” with the “ability to improve productivity through use of relational capital, resources; ability to create evolving new relationships (collaborations, alliances) in providing a stable framework for multidimensional co-operation in arenas of social, ecological, economic, that must ultimately lead to sustainability, building human and social capital to transform labour market and environment with need of competitiveness support from new policies to meet the challenges in 20th anniversary year of EU integration in this zone.”
FOR INTRIGUED READERS, MORE RARE INSIGHTS: Demands for extra finance economic investment were identified by some presenters as divided into a ‘never-ending goal of closer convergence by the most advanced Eastern European transition economies, or deterioration even instability has occurred’ (where constrained not received). Alongside improving financial models, financial digitalisation and green transition research, where ‘large investment is needed mainly for SMEs’ (small medium enterprises are the majority of firms in Eastern Europe). Alternatives to beneficial FDI (foreign direct investment) were highlighted, with some potential FDI kept for ‘national home issues’ by others, alternatively benefits of keeping ‘productivity and trading boundaries’ closer together within Eastern Europe. Research into ‘Roundtripping FDI,’ academically ‘defined as onshore corruption and offshore secrecy for starting-up businesses or mitigating figures is reports progress for this complex to measure indirect FDI, transmission shipment via a hidden host intermediary economy. Reality challenges stated in geo-economics and geo-policies to achieving either ‘strength’ from co-operation, integration and finance economic strategies within more heterogeneity (differences) and increasing ‘potential vulnerability’ from dissipation, stasis, fragmenting debated. One South-East Europe researcher described ‘as wishing to help the EU as currently it is like a parent struggling not coping very well in relation to Eastern Europe matters.’ A new finance economic societal era change called ‘Zeitenwende’ is gaining momentum in academia and popular media.
NOTE: Professor Michael Landsmann, The Vienna Institute, REGRETTED BEING UNABLE TO VISIT AND LEAD OPEN THE CONFERENCE KEYNOTE DUE TO LAST MINUTE CIRCUMSTANCES BUT HIS RESEARCH CONTRIBUTION IN THIS ARENA IS: ‘importance of understanding economics from a global perspective and multiple view-points.’ Coincidentally, the previous week, the UK defence secretary returned from a visit to Ukraine and Poland NATO exercises, with a satellite signal jamming of his plane’s navigation system, near Kaliningrad; stressing “increased 3% GDP spend on defence” and “support for Ukraine,” according to the Times, “it was a wake-up call,” as he saw a different ‘East-West’ in engagement mode perspectives instead of ‘West-East.’
Notably, Michael Landsmann co-authored ‘Russia’s invasion of Ukraine: assessment of the humanitarian, economic, and financial impact in the short and medium term’ in International Economics and is ‘the Economist winner of the Rothschild Prize 2022’. Michael Landsmann published research states: ‘how can the geo-economic and geopolitical challenges of our time be classified and understood, and how is the West and East integration proceeding?’ “Economic policy issues are not purely factual questions, but involve – as Kurt Rothschild emphasised” – “questions of power, interests and the goals of various social groups”. ‘With his analytical approach, Michael Landesmann has made these power constellations, interests and goals visible. In his lectures, he concretises this approach using three developments: Russia’s war against Ukraine, energy and inflation crisis, and global multipolarity. He relates it to the title of his lectures revolving around conceptual ‘centrifugal and centripetal forces in the European integration process,’ and ‘the need for flexible and experimental economic policy in turbulent times.’
BU: An independent report on topical critical latest Eastern European Matters in research by Fiona Vidler MBA MSc MLIBF, member of EACES, with BUBS AFE quantitative research theme: Impacts of Corruption, Financial Constraint and Firm Productivity. Global Crisis Times – SME Evidence from European Transitional Economies – historical roots in comparative economics past hundred years: focus on over thirty years ago, fall of the Berlin Wall (1989) and Independence (1991), with empirical regression analyses interpretations (using prior advanced statistics econometrics research training by USA specialists) in global financial crisis turbulence timeframes for SMEs (small medium enterprise) firms; exploring economic trading alliance influences relationships; endogenous (internal causes) effects beyond exogenous crises (a resurgence interest in visionary post-Keynesian on economic consequences from the 1930s, elements now reoccurring). (PDF) Poster 2023 Fiona Vidler AFE BUBS (researchgate.net)
Prof Huseyin Dogan from the Department of Computing and Informatics organised a workshop with Stephen Giff (User Experience Manager, Google US) and Reno Barsoum (UX Strategist and Leader, Admiral) on Wednesday 13th March at Google’s London King’s Cross office. The workshop is a continuation of the UX research between BU and Google.
The workshop is based on the CHI case study paper titled “User Experience Research: Point of View Playbook” that is co-authored by Prof Dogan and a sensemaking workshop paper titled “User Experience Research Play Card in Augmented Reality” that is co-authored by Dr Sha Liang and Prof Dogan. CHI (pronounced “kai”) is the premier international conference of Human-Computer Interaction. Prof Dogan received a donation from Google to present these papers in May 2024, and the research is likely to lead to future collaborations with Google.
Dr Sha Liang who participated in this workshop stated that “we had the incredible opportunity to visit Google and dive into the world of User Experience (UX) research, thanks to the warm invitation from Huseyin Dogan, Stephen Giff, Chloe Ng, and Reno Michel Barsoum. It was an experience that not only broadened our horizons but also left us inspired to push the boundaries of our work at Bournemouth University”.
Hosted at Google’s London office, the workshop was a deeply insights into UX research, led by UX and Human Factors experts like Dr Gustavo Berumen and Dr Eylem Thron. Through engaging sessions, we explored the latest in UX point of view pyramid and discussed the future of UX play card in Human-Computer Interaction (HCI). The workshop emphasized the importance of UX strategies and building blocks and gave us fresh ideas for our future research.
Learning from leaders in the field, we’re now more equipped to integrate empathy and user-focused methodologies into our future research and projects. A big thank you to our hosts and speakers for such a productive experience.
Dr Mili Shrivastava received an Outstanding Women Researcher Award for her impactful research and contribution to policy briefings on women entrepreneurship and technology for sustainable business and society.
Dr Mili Shrivastava’s research delves into pivotal inquiries concerning gender dynamics, specifically focusing on women’s entrepreneurship and their presence in the tech industry. Driven by a passion for fostering sustainable business practices and societal progress, her work sheds light on pressing issues in these domains.
She has made contributions to the UK Parliament Committee’s examination of enhancing diversity in STEM fields, drawing on insights from her research.
The VIWA Awards Foundation honours and spotlights exceptional women researchers from across the globe.
Expressing her gratitude, Dr Mili Shrivastava remarked, “I’m deeply honoured and energised to see the impact of my research initiatives and endeavours in the realm of women and technology, as they serve to inspire and empower other women.”
Introduction to BRIAN – Monday 29th April, 10.00-11.00 Talbot campus
BRIAN (Bournemouth Research Information And Networking) is BU’s publication management system.
This introductory session is aimed at those who are new to BU, or have not updated their staff profile for a while. It will cover the basics of BRIAN, including how to use BRIAN to manage your research outputs, biography and research interests, professional activities and more.
By the end of the session, attendees will have an understanding of BRIAN and how it relates to Staff Profile Pages, how to create and update items and activities, how to claim/create/import publications, as well as how to upload full text articles to BURO (Bournemouth University Research Online).
Book your place here by selecting ‘Introduction to BRIAN – 29/04/24’ in the drop down menu. Please note, attendees will need to bring their laptops.
Yesterday my co-author Dr. Orlanda Harvey received an email from a sociology journal informing her that “The below co-author name is not matching with the separate title page provided and in the submission. If Van is the middle name please update the name in the author’s account. Name in separate title page appears as Prof Edwin van Teijlingen….Name in site appears as vanTeijlingen, Edwin Please address the above issue before resubmitting the manuscript.”
If you have an odd name in English you will have to get used to this kind of misunderstanding. This is the second time this is happening when submitting a paper this month! Interestingly with a different variant of my name. A migration and health journal argued to me co-author that my name on ORCID was ‘Edwin van Teijlingen’ but on Scopus ‘van Teijlingen, Edwin Roland’. the journal then asked that we change it.
To add more example on the inflexibility of online systems, my greatest surprise a few years ago was that I could not add my Dutch family name ‘van Teijlingen’ with a small ‘v’ on the online booking web pages of the Dutch airline KLM.
What’s In A Name? A name is but a name, and to quote Shakespeare: A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
If you’d like to apply to be part of this year’s ESRC Festival of Social Science, and stand the best possible chance of being accepted, come to our online information session. You’ll get essential tips on applying, find out what the ESRC are looking for, and hear from researchers who have previously run successful festival events.
This session is being run jointly by BU’s Public Engagement with Research (PER) team and the University of Southampton’s Impact Funding Team. For more information about what being an event holder involves, have a look at the Event Leader Guidance. You can also contact publicengagement@bournemouth.ac.uk.
The annual Family Science Day in Dorchester on Sunday, 17th March 2024, was a vibrant celebration of the British National Science Week. This free event aims at making science accessible and engaging for families, providing a platform for learning and discovery in a fun and interactive way. With an attendance of 800 enthusiastic visitors, the event showcased 20 hands-on science stalls. BU was represented by staff, undergraduate and postgraduate students, and postdoctoral researchers. Contributors included Demetra Andreou (Fish Through Time), Amanda Korstjens (Voices in the Jungle), and Genoveva Esteban (Hidden World of Microbes), alongside Kirthana Pillay (postdoctoral researcher) and undergraduate students Dan Stevens and Jacob Tate from the Department of Life and Environmental Sciences. Xun He (Head of MINE Research Cluster, Psychology) and Fred Charles (Head of Department for Creative Technology) led a stall on Measuring Social Behaviour with VR & Brainwaves, with assistance from PhD student Damla Kuleli, research assistant Charlie Lloyd-Buckingham, and BU alumnus Rianna Green. BU Student Ambassador Lily Bater provided exceptional support throughout the day.
Prof Genoveva Esteban annually organises this event in collaboration with Dorchester Town Council, Dorset County Museum, and the Institute of Physics. The success of this event was made possible through sponsorship from the Royal Society of Biology, Dorchester Town Council, the Institute of Physics, and Pilot Regional Funding from Research England. Special thanks are extended to Dr Blanca Pérez-Uz from the Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain, for her valuable contribution to the “Hidden World of Microbes” activity. The assistance and support provided by BU’s Marketing & Communications (Hollye McKenzie and Sabine Turner), along with Events and Communications (Beverly Allen), are also gratefully acknowledged.
Professor Katherine Appleton and Danielle Guy write for The Conversation about the simple food swaps that have the greatest benefits environmentally and for your health…
Four ways to eat less meat that are better for the planet, your health and your bank balance
Do I choose the meat in my local store or drive out of town for tofu instead? Shall I add honey to my winter porridge or would strawberries or mango be better? Should I choose to drink oat milk or organic goat’s milk?
Most people are familiar with the idea that food consumption will affect their health. But food consumption also contributes between 20% and 30% of the environmental footprint from daily life, with impacts from production, processing, transport and retail. For many of us, our diet could be healthier and more sustainable, but it can be hard to know which options will have the biggest positive effect.
As part of our research into healthy and sustainable eating, interviews with predominantly young adults found that UK consumers are willing to make small changes that would improve the health and environmental footprint of their diet, if these changes will have some benefit and are of little cost to them. Small dietary changes tend to be easier to maintain in the longer term than larger changes, but the small changes to make for greatest benefit, for health and the planet, are not well known.
To provide this advice, we compared the health-related, environmental and financial effects of a number of sustainable dietary actions that have previously been proposed. We applied 12 sustainable actions to the dietary data of 1,235 UK adults in the National Diet and Nutrition Survey.
We investigated differences between the new diet and the original diet for six dietary markers (protein, saturated fat, sugars, salt, iron, calcium), three environmental markers (greenhouse gas emissions, freshwater withdrawals, land use), and dietary cost. There were some limitations – we couldn’t quantify the impacts of reducing food waste, for example.
But our research showed that four simple switches resulted in the greatest benefits for your diet, the planet and for your pocket. These changes won’t be small or simple for everyone, but you don’t need to try them all. Every switch will benefit both your health and our home, and lots of small changes will soon add up.
1. Replace meat items with pulses
Beans, chickpeas and lentils are high in protein, fibre and are low in fat. They have low environmental impacts and can even benefit the growth of other crops, plus they are very inexpensive. Barriers that prevent people consuming pulses tend to focus around their taste or texture. And pulses can be perceived as inconvenient, effortful or difficult to cook.
Start with houmous – a tasty pre-prepared chickpea spread or dip. Including more pulses in your diet is made easier and quicker by using pre-prepared and canned pulses or by batch cooking dishes and freezing portions for another day. Try incorporating canned beans into your favourite soups and stews. Add lentils to your bolognese sauce. If you’re feeling more adventurous, experiment with some tasty new recipes from cultures that traditionally use pulses, such as Mexico, the Middle East or India.
Replacing the meat in your diet with a diverse array of pulses is good for your health as well as for the planet. Nopparat Promtha/Shutterstock
2. Replace meat items with eggs
Eggs, like pulses, are highly nutritious. They provide protein and many micronutrients, have low environmental impacts, and are good value for money. Choose free-range eggs for added animal welfare benefits.
Eggs can be easy to prepare. They are soft and can be easier to eat for those who may have difficulties chewing, swallowing or cutting up foods. Eggs can add taste and flavour to your diet. Eggs can be consumed at any meal. Poached or scrambled, they make a great high-protein breakfast, hard-boiled eggs are a filling on-the-go snack, and sous-vide (slow-cooked) eggs can impress guests at dinner parties.
3. Replace meat items with hard or soft cheeses
Cheese is another nutritious food, full of calcium and other micronutrients, good for strong bones and teeth. Often considered a food with high environmental impacts, cheese typically has a lower environmental footprint than meat, even more so for soft cheeses.
The environmental impact of dairy foods increases with the processing needed, predominantly as a result of the waste created at each stage of manufacture. Milk has the lowest environmental impact, yoghurt slightly higher, soft cheeses, such as cream cheese, slightly higher again, and hard cheeses such as Cheddar are higher still.
Try switching your pepperoni pizza for four cheeses pizza, replace the meat in pasta dishes for soft blue cheese to retain flavour, and use soft cheeses in sandwiches.
4. Reduce meat consumption by 20%
Meat production, particularly for beef and lamb, has high environmental impacts. Consuming a lot can be unhealthy, but meat consumption in small amounts can offer a valuable source of protein and micronutrients, including iron, zinc and B vitamins. Try consuming smaller portions, increase the quality of meat you buy to gain the health benefits while eating less, or aim to have regular vegetarian days, such as meat-free Mondays. Choose the meat option when you’re eating out, make it a treat for special occasions, and eat more plant-based dishes at home.
Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?
The next round of the 
They presented recently published research that was included in the
A fantastic opportunity to showcase your social science research!
The annual Family Science Day in Dorchester on Sunday, 17th March 2024, was a vibrant celebration of the British National Science Week. This free event aims at making science accessible and engaging for families, providing a platform for learning and discovery in a fun and interactive way. With an attendance of 800 enthusiastic visitors, the event showcased 20 hands-on science stalls. BU was represented by staff, undergraduate and postgraduate students, and postdoctoral researchers. Contributors included Demetra Andreou (Fish Through Time), Amanda Korstjens (Voices in the Jungle), and Genoveva Esteban (Hidden World of Microbes), alongside Kirthana Pillay (postdoctoral researcher) and undergraduate students Dan Stevens and Jacob Tate from the Department of Life and Environmental Sciences. Xun He (Head of MINE Research Cluster, Psychology) and Fred Charles (Head of Department for Creative Technology) led a stall on Measuring Social Behaviour with VR & Brainwaves, with assistance from PhD student Damla Kuleli, research assistant Charlie Lloyd-Buckingham, and BU alumnus Rianna Green. BU Student Ambassador Lily Bater provided exceptional support throughout the day.
Apply now to take part in the 2025 ESRC Festival of Social Science
Photo exhibition happening now at Talbot Campus – Ageing in a digital world
A compassionate approach to Simulation: new national blog post published
The Future of Surface Protection: Nanocomposite Coatings Explained
MSCA Postdoctoral Fellowships 2025
Horizon Europe info days 2025
Update on UKRO services
European research project exploring use of ‘virtual twins’ to better manage metabolic associated fatty liver disease