Search

Since the late 1970s, over 140 global environmental assessments (GEAs) have been completed. But are they any longer fit for purpose? Some believe not. Compelling arguments have been advanced for a new assessment paradigm, one more focussed on problem-solving than problem-identification. If translated into new assessment practices, this envisaged paradigm could prevail for the next several decades, just as the current one has since the late 1970s. In this paper, it is contended that the arguments for GEAs 2.0 are, in fact, insufficiently bold. Solutions-orientated assessments, often associated with a ‘policy turn’ by their advocates, are undoubtedly necessary. But without a ‘politics turn’ they will be profoundly insufficient: policy options would be detached from the diverse socio-economic explanations and ‘deep hermeneutics’ of value that ultimately give them meaning, especially given the very high stakes now attached to managing human impacts on a fast-changing planet. Here we make the case for GEAs 3.0, where two paradigmatic steps forward are taken at once rather than just one. The second step involves the introduction of political reasoning and structured normative debate about existential alternatives, a pre-requisite to strategic decision-making and its operational expression. Possible objections to this second step are addressed and rebutted. Even so, the case for politically-overt GEAs faces formidable difficulties of implementation. However, we consider these challenges less a sign of our undue idealism and more an indication of the urgent need to mitigate, if not overcome them. In a world of ‘wicked problems’ we need ‘wicked assessments’ adequate to them, preparatory to so-called ‘clumsy solutions’. This paper is intended to inspire more far-reaching debate about the future of GEAs and, by implication, about the roles social science and the humanities might usefully play in addressing global environmental change.

Background Pain management is a global priority as the costs to society through health provision and the loss of productivity are significant. It affects approximately one fifth of the population of whom half record chronic pain. Chronic pain is complex, often accompanied by co-morbidities and is difficult to manage. Pain management requires a holistic approach that involves multiple health professionals and pain sufferers working together. There is a requirement for health professionals to understand pain, and how it is best managed so that they can confidently work together and with pain sufferers to support a holistic approach. Increased education relating to pain correlates positively with changes in attitudes to pain, and improves health professionals decision making. However, hours spent engaged in undergraduate pain education is limited and most of the time delivered uniprofessionally. There is a limited understanding of the attitudes and beliefs of undergraduate health professionals to pain management. The aim of this study was to explore attitudes and beliefs to pain management among undergraduate health care students using a short 10 item questionnaire Methods The study sample consisted of students (n=217) from a Faculty of Health and Social Sciences in a University in the UK. After University Ethics approval was obtained students received an invitation email to take part in an online survey. A total of 537 second year students were invited of whom 40% responded by completing a questionnaire from the following programmes; midwifery, nursing, operating department practice, occupational therapy, physiotherapy and paramedic science. Programmes were reviewed to explore current shared learning around pain management. The questionnaire consisted of 10 items with a 6 point Likert scale, divided into 3 factors relating to attitudes and beliefs about; 1 ‘Chronic pain’; 2 ‘Living and working with chronic pain; 3 ‘Sedation and pain relief’. SPSS v23 was used for the data analysis which included demographic characteristics, Mann Whitney U was used to explore differences between the scores and of students in different professional programmes. Results: Student participants consisted; midwifery (n=32) 15%; nursing (n=55) 25%; occupational therapy (n=13) 6%; Operating department practice (n=7) 3%; paramedic science (n=58) 26%; Physiotherapy (n=52) 24%. The average ages of the participants ranged from 24-31 years in the programmes of whom 75% were female. There was no evidence of planned shared learning around pain management. The total scores for the 10 items ranged from 37 to 41. There were no significant differences between professions for the total scores. The three factors were analysed. 1.‘Chronic pain’; there were no significant differences between professions; 2.‘Living and working with chronic pain’; physiotherapy students scored significantly higher than midwifery students (U=667.50, r=0.13, P

Background Pain management is a key public health problem costing over £10 billion per annum and involves complex multi-professional perspectives in the provision of care. Pain sufferers however often perceive that management of their pain is not effective. Pain sufferers want to be partners in their pain management and to have confidence in the people managing their pain. To achieve a gold standard there needs to be meaningful interprofessional engagement in pain education. . Currently few Higher Education institutions engage in shared pain education between health professions and time spent on content is considered inadequate. Understanding different professional attitudes to pain management, starting at undergraduate level, may provide a basis from which to support the future education of students and promote a more holistic confident approach. There is a requirement to establish students’ attitudes and beliefs in order to focus education resources appropriately. Aim: To show the development and exploration of the validity and reliability of a short questionnaire to assess attitudes and beliefs about pain management in undergraduate professional health programmes. Method: A literature search was undertaken to find attitudes to pain questionnaires for health professionals and seven validated questionnaires were identified. University Ethics approval was obtained. The items from the questionnaires were collated and duplicates removed. These were then reviewed by health professionals for content and face validity using the Delphi method, leaving a total of 30 questions. A total of 537 second year students were invited to participate, 217 completed (40% response rate) from midwifery, nursing, operating department practice, occupational therapy, physiotherapy and paramedic science programmes. A group of 22 students answered the questionnaire twice. Item consistency response was reviewed. Cronbach’s alpha was used to measure internal consistency, factor analysis with varimax rotation was used to identify groupings of items, the Bland and Altman method and inter correlation coefficient (ICC) were used for test re-test reliability. Results: Results for all 30 items were obtained from; 32 midwifery, 55 nursing, 13 occupational therapy, 7 operating department practice; 56 paramedic science and 52 physiotherapy students. Items that represented consistent knowledge were removed, leaving 22/30 items. Factor analysis was performed and items relating with a factor loading threshold of 0.4 and an Eigen value of > 1.0 were kept. Ten items were kept. Factor analysis identified 3 groupings of items which related to attitudes and beliefs about: ‘Chronic Pain’; Living and working with chronic pain; Sedation and pain relief. For the three groupings overall Alpha’s ranged from 0.719 to 0.610 indicating good internal consistency. The test-retest ICC for each of the items ranged from 0.542 to 0.962 and the Bland and Altman method revealed 95% of the points lay within the limits of agreement. Conclusion This research contributes to knowledge relating to attitudes and beliefs to pain management by students on health profession programmes. It reports on the development and initial validation of a short questionnaire to capture these attitudes and beliefs. This questionnaire can be used to assess students’ understanding across multiple health programmes and will contribute to the development of education materials. to enhance education of students as they seek to become to holistic confident practitioners.

We consider the problem of selecting the most influential members within a social network, in order to disseminate a message as widely as possible. This problem, also referred to as seed selection for influence maximization, has been under intensive investigation since the emergence of social networks. Nonetheless, a large body of existing research is based on the assumption that the network is completely known, whereas little work considers partially observable networks. Yet, due to many issues including the extremely large size of current networks and privacy considerations, assuming full knowledge of the network is rather unrealistic. Despite this, an influencer often wishes to distribute its message far beyond the boundaries of the known network. In this preliminary study, we propose a set of novel heuristic algorithms that specifically target nodes at this boundary, in order to maximize influence across the whole network. We show that these algorithms outperform the state of the art by up to 38% in networks with partial observability.

Proposed ways of governing climate engineering have most often been supported by narrowly framed and unreflexive appraisals and processes. This article explores the governance implications of a Deliberative Mapping project that, unlike other governance principles, have emerged from an extensive process of reflection and reflexivity. In turn, the project has made significant advances in addressing the current deficit of responsibly defined criteria for shaping governance propositions. Three such propositions argue that (1) reflexive foresight of the imagined futures in which climate engineering proposals might reside is required; (2) the performance and acceptance of climate engineering proposals should be decided in terms of robustness, not optimality; and (3) climate engineering proposals should be satisfactorily opened up before they can be considered legitimate objects of governance. Taken together, these propositions offer a sociotechnical framework not simply for governing climate engineering but for governing responses to climate change at large.

Le critiche riguardanti il deficit democratico dell'UE si sono concentrate sull'assenza di un demos europeo e sui limiti intrinseci degli assetti istituzionali comunitari. Recentemente il dibattito è stato rinvigorito da due approcci al problema che sfidano le basi su cui poggiano queste argomentazioni convenzionali. Quello che io chiamo la versione 'orientata ai diritti' suggerisce che sebbene un modello di democrazia a livello europeo può funzionare, richiede comunque come fondamento una qualche forma di identità europea. All'opposto abbiamo la versione che io chiamo 'orientata all'interesse pubblico' la quale ritiene che nell'operare di molti stati la responsabilità democratica riveste un ruolo di secondaria importanza. Inizio il lavoro con l'esplicazione della natura del disaccordo esistente su diritti ed interesse pubblico e sul ruolo che le pratiche democratiche possono avere nel risolverlo. Discuto poi brevemente se le pratiche democratiche a livello europeo posseggono le qualità normative necessarie a svolgere i ruoli che ricoprono a livello di stati membri. Successivamente considero in dettaglio i meriti della concezione democratica europea nella prospettiva post-nazionale orientata ai diritti e quelli della democrazia delegata suggerita dagli approcci basati sull' interesse pubblico. La mia conclusione è che risultano entrambi insoddisfacenti e ciò contribuisce a lasciare il deficit democratico una questione aperta.