/ Full archive

A Boring Train Ride or Research Success & E-Journals

Last week I was sitting on the train, on route to a rather dull meeting in London, and wading through a brief case full of glossy reports and papers that had been accumulating in the in tray for several weeks. Not the sort of reading that usually has the pulse racing or the pages turning. I could at this point make reference to the latest Charles Cumming spy thriller but I will refrain and finish this piece so I can catch a few pages later. Any way in the stack of reading was a report published earlier in the year by the Research Information Network on the use, value and impact of e-journals (www.rin.ac.uk). Apart from a very colourful cover the report did not look that great but in fact was really fantastic, and I mean really fantastic, making an excellent link between investment in e-journals, usage and research bidding success.

As I think I have reported before I have fond memories of the basement stacks of Queen Mary where as an undergraduate I used to spend my days lost in the shelves of geology journals. A few years later I can still remember how as a new academic one would wait for the post every day and the return from review of a cherished manuscripts and the all-important editor’s letter with the verdict; all now things of the past with electronic submission and on-line publishing. The journal names remain the same but I can’t remember the last time I actually set foot in the library in search of a paper yet my weekly reading list grows longer constantly as electronic alerts draw my attention to the productivity of my colleagues. However nostalgic I may feel about paper copy it is a thing of the past as almost all journals these days are provided as e-journals.

As a University we invest substantially each year in maintaining access rights to a huge portfolio of journals and our collective reading habits have changedas access has increased and the sheer volume of material to be read has grown. These changes are all elegantly document in the report by the Research Information Network, but the bit that piqued my interest most was a statistical model which explored the link between investment in e-journals, journal usage (reading) and research success as measured by the number of research bids won. The model clearly demonstrated a link between expenditure, e-journal use and research success and also a positive feedback loop between research success and e-journal usage. Basically the more a university invests in the provision of academic literature for its staff and students the more they read. The more they read the more successful they are which in turn leads to more reading. This is really elegant if rather self-evident but is something that we need to think hard about as a university especially as we bring forward our new research strategy this autumn. E-journals are alreadya priority area for expenditure,but is there value in further investment?  The Research Information Network report suggests that there might be.

Now let’s get serious here, I am not as naive as to believe that we can enhance our research success by simply pouring more money into the library, but BU’s researchers – staff and students – have a right to state of the art tools to do their jobs and we are committed as part our new Vision and Values to providing world class facilities. So further investment in our e-journals portfolio may be very much in order! I would welcome your views? You can find a copy of the report on the Research Information Network here.

Become an EC Evaluator to increase your chances success and earn spondoolies!

Becoming an EC evaluator has many benefits – it can improve your understanding of the funding approval process, strengthen your knowledge of the schemes, enable you to understand what makes a ‘good’ and ‘bad’ proposal and can help you gain further kudos in your subject area.

Being an Evaluator is basically being a peer-reviewer for  the EC, It involves examining proposals for funding against published criteria and providing comments and recommendations to the Commission. You can still apply to the EC for funding if you are registered as an evaluator.

The number of proposals you could review depends very much on your area of expertise and while normally undertaken at home, you can also travel to Brussels to perform a review.  Unlike British funders, you will get paid a day rate (up to € 450) for your time, plus travel and subsistence expenses if these have been incurred. You also do not have to review an application just because you are requested.

So what do you have to lose? Register to become an evaluator today.

Tourism Week – Helping charities use social media

The eTourism Lab, ICTHR , in the School of Tourism at Bournemouth University is supporting Just a Drop– a water charity to spread its word through Social Media and the Internet.

Professor Dimitrios Buhalis and Georgina Sekadakis a Masters student at Bournemouth University work closely with Fiona Jeffery Chairman of World Travel Market & Just a Drop and Ana Sustelo of Just a Drop to demonstrate how charities can use Social Media to benefit their great causes. Just a Drop is a registered water charity raising money to build wells, install boreholes and hand pumps as well as carry out sanitation and health education programmes in some of the poorest parts of the developing world. The mission they are trying to accomplish is to reduce child mortality. Currently a child dies every 20 seconds as a result of water-borne diseases and this must stop. Their main donors are from the Travel and Tourism industry however they are now trying to attract donors from all industries and individuals.

While there is agreement that charities nowadays have a greater need for marketing, there is little agreement on how they should be approaching marketing and especially when it comes to the adoption of Social Media; research has shown that they are lagging behind as they are waiting to see how others use this new technology.  Today, charities of any size can take advantage of Social Media tools to showcase their organisation to the world without relying on huge budgets.  Money is no longer the decision factor, creativity is. Getting a head start and expanding your Instagram presence buy choosing to buy Threads shares might be a game-changer in this fast-paced digital environment.

Little research has actually been carried out on marketing from a non-profitable organisation’s point of view.  Bournemouth University is experimenting with Internet and Social Media to try and classify a best practice for charities to help them engage and create awareness about the problem and how people can help make a change.  Facebook and Twitter are primarily used to raise awareness and create story telling.  As relationships are the foundation for Social Media sites they are key for charities in order to engage further with their stakeholders.  So far our attempts have been successful and we have found that followers are engaging with us through Social Media and we are now looking into ways of raising money through the various platforms to help fund new projects around the world. Using social media strategically will be critical for organisations of the future and the expertise of the eTourism Lab will be widely used for all organisations engaging.

Bidding success

Guidance

On Friday last week the RDU organised two bidding workshops with John Wakeford of the Missenden Centre.

John left the groups with some important points to remember when writing funding applications.

Here are John’s top tips for bid writing success……

Top ten rules for readability:

  • think about your audience
  • think how they will read it
  • only use words they will understand
  • plan
  • engaging title and first sentence
  • every word counts
  • avoid -ve words, difficulties, conditionals
  • face problems, but replace with challenges/opportunities
  • short sentences
  • eliminate jargon, and minimise acronyms

 Key features of a good proposal:

  • investigate funders’ current priorities
  • contact CRE Ops, RPRS, identify potential reviewers and book them in
  • read carefully the precise rules for submissions
  • check agreement among your collaborators
  • allow time for multiple drafts

Strategies for success:

  • network, network, network
  • hitch your wagon to a star
  • be in contact with funders
  • why should they want to fund you?
  • ensure you are the world expert
  • guarantee impact
  • clear your diary
  • re-use ideas on different context and try again
  • deliver on title
  • re-read and consider:
  • why should it be funded?
  • how would the world be different if it wasn’t?

If you are thinking about writing a funding proposal please contact Caroline O’Kane and find out about how the RPRS can support your bid.

To find out more about John Wakeford’s sessions please contact Susan Dowdle or Caroline O’Kane.

Education focused EU programmes offering support for collaboration

 There are 7 main Programmes offering support for collaboration related to Higher Education; all which have calls attached to them. These are:
ALFA:To improve the quality, relevance and accessibility of Higher Education in Latin America and to contribute to the process of regional integration in Latin America, fostering progress towards the creation of a joint Higher Education area in the region and exploiting its synergies with the European Union.
EDULINK:Supports cooperation between HEIs in the EU and African, Caribbean and Pacific States (ACP countries). It represents a harmonised approach to the implementation of EU funded programmes in the ACP countries with a view to improving the effectiveness, management, visibility and impact of ACP-EU cooperation in the field of HE.
Erasmus Mundus: A cooperation and mobility programme that aims to enhance the quality of European Higher Education and to promote dialogue and understanding between people and cultures through cooperation with HEIs in third countries. It supports joint programmes, partnerships and the promotion of European HE.
EU – US Cooperation in HE (ATLANTIS): To promote understanding between the people of the EU and the USA and to improve the quality of human resource development. ATLANTIS supports innovative projects for cooperation in HE and VET which are designed to develop and implement double or joint transatlantic degrees for students in the EU and US and other forms or cooperation including mobility and policy oriented measures
ICI Education Cooperation: EU cooperation with Australia, New Zealand, Japan and Republic of Korea includes bilateral cooperation projects in higher education and vocational training (ICI-ECP).
Lifelong Learning: To reinforce the contribution made by education and training to achieving the Lisbon goal of making the EU the most competitive knowledge based economy, with sustainable economic development, more and better jobs, and greater social cohesion.
Tempus: Supports the modernisation of higher education in the Partner Countries of Eastern Europe, Central Asia, the Western Balkans and the Mediterranean region, mainly through university cooperation projects. It also aims to promote voluntary convergence of Partner Country higher education systems with EU developments in the field of higher education such as the Lisbon agenda and the Bologna process.

Tourism comes of age…

Although a major contributor to life at BU, the study of Tourism is often wrongly maligned as being a niche subject on the periphery of more established areas of study such as Business & Management and Geography. Well, in the UK alone over 100 institutions offer HE courses at undergraduate level including “top tier” universities such as Exeter, Surrey, Strathclyde and Stirling with many more competing for students and staff across Europe and beyond with major concentrations of activity in North America, the Middle East, South East Asia and Australia and New Zealand where tourism is not only a significant area of academic interest but also of valuable income, foreign exchange earnings and employment.

Returning to the UK one of the most significant “coming of age” moments has been the explicit inclusion of Tourism for the very first time in a Unit of Assessment in the forthcoming Research Excellence Framework. Unit 26, Sport and Exercise Sciences, Leisure and Tourism is one of only a few new units in the REF, a fact which clearly reflects its growing maturity as an area of academic investigation and the widespread positive recognition with which it is now held across the sector. This recognition really took hold 2 to 3 years ago when the ESRC awarded colleagues at the University of Exeter £1.5 million to set up its research cluster in Sport, Leisure and Tourism, an award which would have been unthinkable only a few years before. Since then, staff from the School of Tourism at BU have been attracting funds from the ESRC, the European Union and the United Nations World Tourism Organization and others while the significant award recently won by colleagues from the School from the EPSRC on sustainable patterns of travel demonstrates the collaborative and inter-disciplinary opportunities offered by Tourism. This latter point was again highlighted recently with the inclusion in the RCUK publication Big Ideas for the Future of a project looking at the fusion between public health and tourism policies at the local level. This was BU’s only entry in this prestigious publication, testament if it were ever needed that the industry that is widely acclaimed as the world’s largest has now also come of age in the academic arena!

Tourism Week – highlighting stories from BU’s School of Tourism

Tomorrow, Tuesday 27th September 2011, is World Tourism Day and to celebrate this week on the research blog is Tourism Week.  Every day the research blog will be highlighting stories about the excellent work going on in Bournemouth University’s School of Tourism.

World Tourism Day was instigated by the United Nations World Tourism Organisation to foster awareness among the international community of the importance of tourism and its social, cultural, political and economic values.

“The message on this World Tourism Day is that, thanks to tourism, millions of people from different cultures are being brought together around the world like never before,” said UNWTO Secretary-General, Taleb Rifai. “This interaction between people of different backgrounds and ways of life represents an enormous opportunity to advance tolerance, respect and mutual understanding”.

In 2010, 940 million tourists travelled to a different country, coming into direct contact with tangible – art, monuments – and intangible – music, food, traditions – culture. World Tourism Day 2011 is a celebration of this unique interaction and aims at furthering understanding of the values of cultural diversity.

Leading Academic encourages UK government to adopt German model of Innovation

David Payne, Professor of Photonics and Director of the Optoelectronics Research Centre at the University of Southampton has warned in a comment in the Daily Telegraph that substantial and sustained investment is necessary if the UK government wants to restore the country’s manufacturing base. After assessing the challenges faced in converting excellent research into commercial successful products, Professor Payne welcomed the Government’s support for 6 Technology Innovation Centres which will nurture links between academia and industry. However more funds are needed as the £200 million pledged to date is tiny compared with the £1.45 billion a year provided for the network of Fraunhofer centres in Germany which form the blueprint for the proposed UK network. “It would be a shame if this led to distributed ‘virtual centres’ of expertise to appease regional political interests with the consequent management headaches, rather than the single-centred and single-minded Fraunhofer model…I fear we are about to repeat the British thing and spread the money so everyone gets a prize,” he said.

BU internal peer-review scheme for your research proposal

Funding opportunities, Guidance

Why is the internal peer review of research proposals important?

  • The competition for research funds is high and is likely to increase.  Research Council funding presents a particular challenge – with the ESRC having one of the lowest success rates.
  • In recent years funders have expressed their growing concern over the number of poor quality research proposals they receive, with the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) taking the action to implement a ban on submissions from unsuccessful candidates who fail repeatedly and requesting evidence on steps institutions take to improve academic skills in producing research proposals.
  • Internal peer review has been credited with producing higher quality research proposals and increased success rates and is a process encouraged by the Research Councils.

Who reviews the applications?

  • The Peer Reviewers are a selection of BU academics who have a considerable track record in successfully gaining research funding, who sit on funding panels and who review research proposals for funders.
  • We select two reviewers to review your proposal.

Who can apply to the RPRS?

  • The service is open to anyone at BU and for any type of research funding.

What kind of feedback can I expect?

  • Peer reviewers will provide feedback on the proposed research in terms of topic selection, novel value, clarity of ideas proposed and advise on how the proposal can be further strengthened. They may also provide the names of potential collaborators where applicable.
  • Feedback will be delivered within 3 weeks of submission – often before.

Will the RPRS help with unsuccessful applications?

  • Yes, if you have a unsuccesful proposal, the RPRS will provide feedback on your submission on how you could potentially improve the style of the proposal, advise on other possible funders and provide other useful information.   The system works as for as yet unsubmitted drafts.

How do I submit an application?

  • Contact RKEO Funding Development Team to obtain a rough costing for your proposal. RKEO FDT will guide you through the process
  • Send in a Word or PDF version of your electronic submission draft (such as Je-S) and submit to Jo Garrad and Dianne Goodman/Giles Ashton.
  • The RKEO FDT will undertake review of the proposal and forward to 2 experts
  • You will receive feedback within 2-3 weeks

Remember

  • Please allow sufficient time in your proposal development to allow for the  mandatory internal deadline of five working days for the submission of Research Council bids via the Je-S system. This internal deadline also applies to applications made via the E-Gap2 and Leverhulme Online e-submissions systems (affecting applications made to the British Academy, the Royal Society and the Leverhulme Trust).

Who can I ask for further help?

  • Jo Garrad and Dianne Goodman/Giles Ashton  in the Research and Knowledge Exchange Development team look after the RPRS and will answer any questions you have.

Humanities focused EU Programmes offering support

There are 14 main Programmes offering support for collaboration related to Higher Education; all which have calls attached to them. These are:

Civil Justice: To improve contacts, exchange of information and networking between legal, judicial and administrative authorities and the legal professions. There is some scope to support judicial training.

Competitiveness & Innovation: To enhance competitiveness and innovation capacity in the EU, to advance the knowledge society and to ensure secure, sustainable energy for Europe.  3 Sub-programmes i) Entrepreneurship and Innovation Programme (EIP) ii) ICT Policy Support Programme (ICT-PSP) iii) Intelligent Energy Europe (IEE).

Criminal Justice: To promote judicial cooperation; compatibility in rules applicable in the Member States; improve contacts and exchange of information and best practices and improve mutual trust with a view to ensuring protection of rights of victims and of the accused.

Culture: To enhance the cultural area shared by Europeans, which is based on a common cultural heritage, through the development of cooperation activities among cultural operators, with a view to encouraging the emergence of European citizenship.

DAPHNE:To prevent and combat violence against children, young people and women and to protect victims and groups at risk.

Drug Prevention & Information: To prevent and reduce drug use, dependence and drug related harms; contribute to the improvement of information on the effects of drug use; support the implementation of the EU Drugs Strategy

EU – Canada Transatlantic Partnerships: To promote mutual understanding between the peoples of Canada and the EU including broader knowledge of their languages, cultures and institutions and to improve the quality of human resources in Canada and the EU by facilitating the acquisition of skills required to meet the challenges of the global knowledge-based economy.

Fundamental Rights & Citizenship: To promote the development of a European Society based on respect for fundamental rights; strengthen civil society; to fight against racism, xenophobia, and anti-semitism and to promote legal, judicial and administrative authorities and the legal professions, including support of judicial training.

Health: To improve citizens’ health and security; promote health, including the reduction of health inequalities and generate and disseminate health information and knowledge.

LIFE+: To contribute to the implementation, updating and development of EU environmental policy and legislation by co-financing pilot or demonstration projects with European added value.

Media: Focuses on activities before and after production in the audiovisual sector, offering support for training, project development, distribution and promotion. The Programme will also fund measures aimed at supporting digitisation and the changes it is making to the sector.

Prevention of & Fight Against Crime: As part of the general programme ‘Security and Safeguarding Liberties’ this Programme contributes to a high level of security for citizens by preventing and combating terrorism and crime, organised or otherwise.

Progress: Designed to work alongside ESF it supports the EU’s efforts to deliver growth and more jobs whilst fighting poverty and social exclusion.

Youth in Action: To promote young people’s active citizenship in general and their European citizenship in particular; to develop solidarity and promote tolerance among young people; to foster mutual understanding between young people in different countries; to contribute to developing the quality of support systems for youth activities and the capabilities of civil society organisations in the youth sector and to promote European cooperation in the youth sector.

New speaker confirmed for the BU Open Access Fund Launch Event

Following on from the previous blog post about the launch of BU’s Open Access Publishing Fund, we’re now pleased to confirm that Willow Fuchs from the Centre for Research and Communications at Nottingham University is coming to speak about the SHERPA open access projects as part of the FREE launch event for BU staff on 26 October 2011.

The two projects of most relevance for open access publishing are SHERPA RoMEO, which covers publishers’ copyright & archiving policies, and SHERPA JULIET, which includes research funders archiving mandates and guidelines. So book your place now by sending an email to Anita Somner in the Research Development Unit.

In a slight change to the previously published line-up, Professor Peter Thomas, Director of the Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit, will share his experiences of publishing in open access journals. Dr Alma Swan will give a keynote speech on the benefits of open access publishing, how it can make research findings more visible both inside and outside of academia, and dispel some of the common myths that surround it.

The event will be held on 7th floor of the Executive Business Centre on Lansdowne Campus between 10.00-12.30. Refreshments and lunch will be provided. We look forward to seeing you on the day!

Comment on copyright term extension

Publishing

The deed is done. Copyright term extension for sound recordings from 50 to 70 years was adopted yesterday (12 September 2011) by qualified majority in the European Council. The remaining opposition came from Belgium, the Czech Republic, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Sweden. Austria and Estonia abstained.

The chorus of approval has been led by aging artists, masking the fact that for more than a decade the lobby for copyright extension has been resourced by the multinational record industry (see related BBC news item). Labels do not want to lose the revenues of the classic recordings of the 1960s which are reaching the end of their current 50 year term. Rather than innovating, right holders find it much easier to exclude competition. Europe is in danger of locking away her music heritage just as digital technology is enabling the opening of the archives.

It is not surprising that many performers’ organisations and collecting societies support the Directive. They do not have to carry the costs – which will exceed EURO 1 billion to the general public (based on the Commission’s own figures – see calculations in Joint Academic Statement issued by Centre for Intellectual Property Policy & Management (CIPPM, Bournemouth University), the Centre for Intellectual Property & Information Law (CIPIL, Cambridge University), the Institute the Institute for Information Law (IViR, University of Amsterdam), and the Max Planck Competition and Tax Law (Munich).

72 percent of the financial benefits from term extension will accrue to record labels. Of the 28 percent that will go to artists, most of the money will go to superstar acts, with only 4 percent benefiting those musicians mentioned in the European Council press release as facing an “income gap at the end of their life times” (New rules on term of protection of music recordings, Council of the EU, 12/09/11). Many performers also do not appear to understand that the proposal would lead to a redistribution of income from living to dead artists.

In an interview with the NY Times yesterday, I said: “This is a dreadful day for musicians and consumers. Policymakers are schizophrenic, speaking a language of change and innovation, but then respond to lobbying by extending the right which gave rise to the problem in the first place. This only entrenches a cynical attitude toward copyright law and brings it into further disrepute.”

Sweden and Belgium issued dissents after the vote in the Council. They are worth quoting in full: Interinstitutional File: 2008/0157 (COD)

Declaration by Sweden

Throughout the negotiations, Sweden has had strong reservations regarding the commission’s proposal to extend the term of protection for sound recordings.

As regards copyright regulation in general Sweden has always stressed the importance of taking all relevant aspects and involved interests into account, in order to maintain a fair balance in the copyright system. We believe this to be essential if we are to successfully uphold respect for the copyright system in the future.

Extending the term of protection for sound recordings as proposed is neither fair nor balanced. It therefore risks undermining the respect for copyright in general even further. Such a development is very unfortunate for all those who depend on copyright protection to make a living.

Sweden believes there to be good reasons for measures aiming at improving the situation for those professional musicians and other artists who often operate under economically difficult conditions. Extending the term of protection will however not primarily be of benefit to this group.

Against this background Sweden regrets the decision to adopt the proposal amending Directive 2006/116/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights.

Belgian declaration

With regard to the proposal for a directive on the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights, Belgium believes that a term extension is not an appropriate measure to improve the situation of the performing artists. Furthermore, we believe that the negative consequences the proposal entails do not outweigh the advantages it brings. We can therefore not support this proposal.

It seems that the measure will mainly benefit record producers and not performing artists, will only have a very limited effect for most of the performing artists, will have a negative impact on the accessibility of cultural material such as those contained in libraries and archives, and will create supplementary financial and administrative burdens to enterprises, broadcasting organisations and consumers. Therefore, the overall package of the proposal appears, as demonstrated by a large amount of academic studies [1], unbalanced.

Finally, one has to observe that several initiatives which have clear links with and impact on the proposal, have recently been adopted or announced by the Commission in its Communication of 24 May 2011 [2]. These initiatives include for example a proposal for a directive on orphan works, a new initiative on collective management, and a new initiative on online distribution of audiovisual works. Taking into account this global approach of copyright issues in the internal market, we think that it would only be reasonable to re-examine the merits of this proposal in the context of this global approach.

Notes

[1] See e.g. “The Proposed Directive for a Copyright Term Extension – A backward-looking package” Centre for Intellectual Property Policy & Management (CIPPM, Bournemouth University), the Centre for Intellectual Property & Information Law (CIPIL, Cambridge University), the Institute the Institute for Information Law (IViR, University of Amsterdam), and the Max Planck Competition and Tax Law (Munich); N. HELBERGER, N. DUFFT, S. VAN GOMPEL, B. HUGENHOLTZ, ‘Never forever: why extending the term of protection for sound recordings is a bad idea’, EIPR 2008, 174; S. DUSOLLIER, ‘Les artistes-interprètes pris en otage’, Auteurs & Media 2008, 426.

[2] Communication from the Commission of 24 May 2011, A Single Market for Intellectual Property Rights Boosting creativity and innovation to provide economic growth, high quality jobs and first class products and services in Europe, COM (2011) 287

EuropeAid Development & Cooperation Funding

EuropeAid is responsible for designing EU development policies and delivering aid through programmes and projects across the world. Funding is provided as a grant or a contract focusing on designing EU development policies; governance and human rights; human development; food and natural resources; economy and trade. Grants fall into two categories:
1. Grants for Actions: aim to achieve an objective that forms part of an external aid programme.
2. Operating Grants: finance the operating expenditure of an EU body that is pursuing an aim of general European interest or an objective that forms part of an EU policy

Grant calls can be found on the EuropeAid webpage. You can also perform a criteria-based search, using the ‘Advanced Search’ tab and subscribing to the RSS feed will ensure you are kept up to date of calls being released. Contracts are launched as procurements by an organisation wanting to purchase a service, goods or work Contract calls can also be found on the EuropeAid webpage or through a criteria based search, using the ‘Advanced Search’ tab.

Previously awarded grants and contracts can be viewed on this EuropeAid search page which should help familiarise you with the types of project funded.

Methodology Training – Building Momentum in the School of Tourism

With many of the leading journals in the field of Tourism and related studies now recording rejection rates in excess of 90%, the pressure is on all of us with an interest in publishing in such journals to enhance our level of engagement with the variety of alternative research methodologies available to us and to deepen our level of knowledge of those deemed most appropriate; as well as to improve the level of rigour with which we apply them in our work! In addition to constructive criticism from panel members of the level of conceptual and theoretical engagement in many papers reviewed for RAE2008, feedback from reviewers points to methodological weaknesses in papers submitted and a sense of frustration over the a lack of rigour and an apparent unwillingness to try contemporary approaches. 

In response, the School of Tourism has invested much time in developing the methodological expertise of its staff and for 2011-12 is launching a new programme of Research Methods on Wednesday mornings throughout the year. Available to all School staff and PhD students, the new programme, being led by Professor Roger Vaughan and Dr Lorraine Brown, explores both quantitative and qualitative approaches to research, a number of emerging methods of contemporary interest, with the programme concluding with sessions on the use of “voice” and “trustworthiness” on the writing up of qualitative research and the presentations of quantitative findings.

For further information please contact Dr Lorraine Brown at lbrown@bournemouth.ac.uk

Got a burning question on biodiversity?

Live, interactive UN webcast: The UN Decade on Biodiversity 2011-2020.

On Tuesday 20th September there will be a live and interactive web TV programme from New York, where two of the key figures driving the response to the planet’s loss of biodiversity will be answering your questions about the UN Decade on Biodiversity (UNDB).  You can submit questions to the panel before the programme here. 

The panel will be Ahmed Djoghlaf, who is Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and Monique Barbut who is CEO and Chair of the Global Environment Facility (GEF), whose funding will be vital in assisting developing countries to implement the CBD’s Strategic Plan.  They will discuss the CBD’s bold plans and the importance of taking action now to avert even more serious loss of biodiversity; how the entire UN system is driving to make the UNBD a lasting success, and the role of the GEF.

Biodiversity is of vital importance to us all. It is the basis for a wide range of ecosystem services on which we depend for food security, human health, clean air and water. Biodiversity contributes to local livelihoods and economic development and is essential in the fight against poverty. 

Despite its huge importance, the planet’s biodiversity is being lost at an unprecedented rate.  The main causes, including habitat and climate change, overexploitation and pollution, are constant or increasing in their intensity. As a result ecosystems such as forests, coral reefs and the rivers of our world are declining in most parts of the world and many species moving closer to extinction. The earliest and most severe impacts of biodiversity loss are felt by the poor, but ultimately all societies and communities will suffer.

Faced with this reality, in May 2010 the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) urged that concerted and effective action was needed if we were to avoid reaching irreversible global ecological tipping points. Five months later the CBD adopted the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 to inspire and drive change by every country.

In support of this Plan, the United Nations General Assembly declared 2011 – 2020 as the UN Decade on Biodiversity (UNDB). Through the Decade, the entire UN system will work to support implementation of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity and its 20 ambitious yet achievable targets, collectively known as the Aichi Targets.  The UNDB will encourage every government, business and individual to take biodiversity into account in all their planning and actions. 

Ahmed Djoghlaf, Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and Monique Barbut, CEO and Chair of the Global Environment Facility (GEF) will be live online at http://www.studiotalk.tv/show/live-interactive-un-webcast-the-un-decade-on-biodiversity-20112020  at 5pm UK time (12.00 EST / 16.00 GMT / 18.00 CET) on Tuesday 20th September.

For more information visit: www.cbd.int/2011-2020

EC proposes a mammoth €80 billion for Horizon 2020

The EC has made a proposal for the EU budget for the next programme period (2014-2020). Horizon 2020 is proposed to have a whopping budget of €80 billion – a significant increase on the FP7 budget which stands at €52 billion.
The proposal calls for the fields of education and vocational training to be strengthened and it is proposed to overcome current fragmentation in the area by creating a new integrated programme for education, training and youth. The budget earmarked for this is €15.2 billion, and the aim is to have a clear focus on developing skills and mobility.
It is also proposed to increase spending on environmental and climate change issues, with spending on climate-related issues to increase by at least 20% compared to current levels.

Institute for European Environmental Policy aren’t happy with Horizon 2020 proposals

The Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP)has published a report on what the implications of Horizon 2020 on research into environmental issues. In the report, they express concerns over the lack of attention given to biodiversity in particular, also resource efficiency and suggest that the scale of funding proposed for infrastructure projects is likely to have adverse effects on the environment.

It’s official – FP7 has competetive success rates

FP7 has unfairly gained a reputation as being extremely difficult to obtain. The latest figures released from the EC show that FP7 actually had a success rate of 21% last year (a massive €3.9 billion of research funding was distributed through 63 calls for proposals). Our recent blogpost on Research Councils show that the EC is actually higher than many of our home funders.

The statistically greater chance of success, coupled with the added benefits of gaining EU funding as testified by BU academics such as Sherry Jeary and Dimitrios Buhalis shows that we should all be looking to the EU for funding. If you are a BU member of staff and have an idea for EU funding you want to discuss, drop me an email.