scholarly journals Custodian Legal Culture - Enabling Multi-Stakeholder Research Collaborations Between Academia and Government in the UK

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stergios Aidinlis
Keyword(s):  
Data Sharing ◽  
Administrative Data ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Driving Forces ◽  
Social Research ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Public Bodies

BackgroundEmpirical studies suggest that some public bodies in England are very reluctant to grant access to administrative data for various purposes. This poster presents the conclusions drawn in my so-far research on the driving forces of administrative discretion in respect of data sharing for social research in the public interest in England. ObjectivesThis poster aims to work towards answering a fundamental question for methodological models for engagement and research co-production between academia and government. This question is: what are the driving forces behind the exercise of data custodian discretion when it comes to deciding whether they will disclose it or not for research purposes? Methods (including data)First, this poster presents the findings of a qualitative case-study involving semi-structured interviews with individuals working for three different public bodies in England, two data providers and a body facilitating administrative data sharing for research. Second, it integrates a pilot survey which will aim to elicit the perspectives of ADR conference attendees, both admin data researchers and other stakeholders, on the crucial questions that revolve around the disclosure of data for research by different providers across the UK. FindingsI propose a distinction between structural (e.g. the law/ infrastructural decision-making models) and cultural (e.g. perceptions of data ownership / trust-distrust in data sharing collaborators) influences, claiming that the latter are more salient in steering custodian discretion to share administrative data for research in practice than the former. I identify five main candidate cultural drivers and elaborate on them. ConclusionsWithout a sound socio-legal understanding of the driving forces of discretionary legal powers to share data on behalf of the providers, building bridges between them and the academic community in the interest of promoting social research in the public interest will remain a resilient challenge.

scholarly journals From a culture of caution to a culture of confidence: facilitating the good governance of administrative data in the UK

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Leslie Stevens ◽  
Graeme Laurie
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
Administrative Data ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
The Public ◽  
Share Data ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Sector Data

ABSTRACT ObjectivesThis talk unpacks the culture of caution surrounding the use and sharing of administrative data in the UK and suggests the adoption of the authors’ novel decision-making tool and organisational strategy based on the public interest, to achieve good governance. Administrative data, which implicate all public sector data, are in constant demand –to be shared for ‘joined-up’ services, used as evidence in Government inquiries and for research purposes. These demands are often made on the basis that they serve ‘the public interest’ but public authorities are without the decision-making tools to make proportionate decisions outwith narrow and risk-averse interpretations of legal requirements. Public authorities are operating within a ‘culture of caution’, fuelled by misperceptions of what the law does or does not require for data to be used/shared ‘in the public interest’; uncertainties regarding incentives for data sharing; perceived controversies if something ‘goes wrong’; and imbalanced assessment of risks without robust assessment of potential public interests to be served or the potential ‘harm’ from not sharing data. ApproachThis discussion is substantiated by reference to major contributions to this field (e.g. Law Commission Report on data sharing in 2014; Thomas and Walport’s data sharing review in 2008 etc.) and to the authors’ engagement with the administrative data community as part of the legal work package to the Administrative Data Research Centre Scotland. ResultsThe research reveals that public authorities exhibit extreme hesitance to undertake data sharing initiatives for reasons including: misperceptions of the law (due to legal complexity, lack of legal precedent and authoritative guidance on data sharing) lack of resources and expertise to manage increasing demands to use/share data  individuals fear reprisal if something ‘goes wrong’ with data handling  senior-management fear public backlash for new uses of data and organisational reputational damage  no understanding of the incentives to share data if there is no ‘direct’ benefit to the public authority in question. ConclusionWe conclude by focussing on how to overcome the culture of caution, to one of confidence. We suggest the adoption of our decision-making matrix to help data custodians distinguish between real versus perceived barriers to data sharing (i.e. dispelling legal myths and identifying areas where changes can be made). We also introduce strategic solutions in our public interest mandate which entails overt commitment to use public sector data when it is in the public interest to do so.

scholarly journals Advancing cross-centre research networks: learning from experience, looking to the future

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerina Jones ◽  
Sharon Heys ◽  
Helen Daniels
Keyword(s):  
Information Sharing ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
Virtual Teams ◽  
Administrative Data ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Research Networks ◽  
The Public ◽  
Information Governance ◽  
The Uk

IntroductionMany jurisdictions have programmes for the large-scale reuse of health and administrative data that would benefit from greater cross-centre working. The Advancing Cross centre Research Networks (ACoRN) project considered barriers and drivers for joint working and information sharing using the UK Farr Institute as a case study, and applicable widely. Objectives and ApproachACoRN collected information from researchers, analysts, academics and the public to gauge the acceptability of sharing data across institutions and jurisdictions. It considered international researcher experiences and evidence from a variety of cross centre projects to reveal barriers and potential solutions to joint working. It reviewed the legal and regulatory provisions that surround data sharing and cross-centre working, including issues of information governance to provide the context and backdrop. The emerging issues were grouped into five themes and used to propose a set of recommendations. ResultsThe five themes identified were: organisational structures and legal entities; people and culture; information governance; technology and infrastructure; and finance and strategic planning. Recommendations within these included: standardised terms and conditions including agreements and contractual templates; performance indicators for frequency of dataset sharing; communities of practice and virtual teams to develop cooperation; standardised policies and procedures to underpin data sharing; an accredited quality seal for organisations sharing data; a dashboard for data availability and sharing; and adequate resource to move towards greater uniformity and to drive data sharing initiatives. Conclusion/ImplicationsThe challenges posed by cross-centre information sharing are considerable but the public benefits associated with the greater use of health and administrative data are inestimable, particularly as novel and emerging data become increasingly available. The proposed recommendations will assist in achieving the benefits of cross-centre working.

scholarly journals Trust, security and public interest: Striking the balance

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Waind
Keyword(s):  
Administrative Data ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Public Attitudes ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Minimum Standard ◽  
Privacy And Security ◽  
The Public ◽  
Core Conditions ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Very High

This literature review explores previous work in relation to the UK public’s attitudes towards the sharing, linking and use of administrative data for research. It finds the public is broadly supportive of administrative data research if three core conditions are met: public interest, privacy and security, and trust and transparency. None of these three conditions is sufficient in isolation; rather, the literature shows public support is underpinned by a minimum standard of all three. However, it also shows that in certain cases where the standard of one condition is very high – for example, public interest – this could mean that of another – for example, privacy and security – may, if necessary, be lower. An appropriate balance must be struck, and the proposed benefit must outweigh the potential risk. Broad, conditional support for the use of administrative data in research has not only been found consistently, but has also been held over time, with data collection for the 16 studies included spanning more than a decade from 2006-2018. It is therefore, at this time, appropriate to move beyond widescale, general consultation on the use of administrative data for research and build upon existing knowledge by delving into specific areas of research. The purpose of such an approach would not be to consult on whether research using administrative data should be done – as has been the focus of previous literature – but rather to guide how, why and when it is done. Nevertheless, it is important to continue to monitor and respond to any changes to public attitudes and adapt approaches if necessary.

scholarly journals The ADRN and the public’s voice: making administrative data available for research while gaining public trust

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilse Verwulgen
Keyword(s):  
Administrative Data ◽  
Research Council ◽  
Social Research ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Public Consultation ◽  
Research Network ◽  
Economic Research ◽  
Scientific Integrity ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Uk

ABSTRACT BackgroundThis paper presents the way the Administrative Data Research Network (ADRN) has incorporated the results of public consultation into the core of its operations and policies. Administrative data are a rich source of information, but underused in social and economic research. In the past it has been very difficult to gain access to these datasets. The ADRN is a UK-wide initiative, funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) in 2013. The Network facilitates secure research access to linked, de-identified administrative data to enable real-world analysis that can benefit society. Administrative data research can provide a solid evidence base for policy makers to evaluate the results of active policies or uncover new ways to tackle social problems. ApproachUsing government data for research is still a sensitive topic for the public, and rightly so. Amidst growing concerns about privacy and data security, the use of administrative data is a potentially controversial move. At the beginning of the project, the ESRC commissioned a nation-wide public consultation to gauge understanding of social research and reactions to the use of administrative data in research. ResultsThe ADRN used the results of this consultation to incorporate mechanisms for lay participation as well as accountability towards the public into its governance, and makes a case for engaging the public without compromising the scientific integrity of the research it supports. Funded by the Economic & Social Research Council, the Administrative Data Research Network, set up as part of the UK Government’s Big Data initiative, is a UK-wide partnership between universities, government bodies, national statistics authorities and the wider research community. www.adrn.ac.uk

scholarly journals A Mixed-Methods Investigation into Barriers for Sharing Geospatial and Resilience Flood Data in the UK

Water ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (9) ◽  
pp. 1235
Author(s):  
Luke Waterman ◽  
Mónica Rivas Casado ◽  
Emma Bergin ◽  
Gary McInally
Keyword(s):  
Data Sharing ◽  
Local Politics ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Third Sector ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Average Temperature ◽  
Third Sector Organisations ◽  
Data Points ◽  
The Uk

With increases in average temperature and rainfall predicted, more households are expected to be at risk of flooding in the UK by 2050. Data and technologies are increasingly playing a critical role across public-, private- and third-sector organisations. However, barriers and constraints exist across organisations and industries that limit the sharing of data. We examine the international context for data sharing and variations between data-rich and data-sparse countries. We find that local politics and organisational structures influence data sharing. We focus on the case study of the UK, and on geospatial and flood resilience data in particular. We use a series of semi-structured interviews to evaluate data sharing limitations, with particular reference to geospatial and flood resilience data. We identify barriers and constraints when sharing data between organisations. We find technological, security, privacy, cultural and commercial barriers across different use cases and data points. Finally, we provide three long-term recommendations to improve the overall accessibility to flood data and enhance outcomes for organisations and communities.

scholarly journals Fraud in overseas aid and the challenge of measurement

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 184-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Button ◽  
Chris Lewis ◽  
David Shepherd ◽  
Graham Brooks
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
International Development ◽  
Local Context ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the challenges of measuring fraud in overseas aid. Design/methodology/approach – The research is based on 21 semi-structured interviews with key persons working in the delivery of aid in both the public and voluntary sectors. It uses the UK Department for International Development as a case study to applying more accurate measures of fraud. Findings – This paper shows there are significant challenges to using fraud loss measurement to gauge fraud in overseas aid. However, it argues that, along with other types of measures, it could be used in areas of expenditure in overseas governments and charities to measure aid. Given the high risk of such aid to fraud, it argues helping to develop capacity to reduce aid, of which measuring the size of the problem is an important part; this could be considered as aid in its own right. Research limitations/implications – The researchers were not able to visit high-risk countries for fraud to examine in the local context views on the challenges of measuring fraud. Practical implications – The paper offers insights on the challenges to accurately measuring fraud in an overseas context, which will be useful to policy-makers in this context. Social implications – Given the importance of as much aid as possible reaching recipients, it offers an important contribution to helping to reduce losses in this important area. Originality/value – There has been very little consideration of how to measure fraud in the overseas aid context, with most effort aimed at corruption, which poses some of the same challenges, as well as some very different challenges.

Policy-based Implied Bare Licences

2021 ◽  
pp. 196-230
Author(s):  
Poorna Mysoor
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Step Test ◽  
The Public ◽  
Policy Goals ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Copyright Enforcement ◽  
Prior Relationship

This chapter addresses policy-based implied bare licences. Unlike in the previous chapter, there is no contract in existence and no voluntariness on the part of the copyright owner, and indeed in some cases, no prior relationship between the parties. Historically, English common law has recognised an open-ended power of the courts to restrict or prevent copyright enforcement in the public interest, which has been acknowledged under section 171(3) of the UK Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act 1988. The chapter considers how a successful invocation of this provision implies a bare licence to achieve policy goals. Although there is no statutory equivalent of this provision in other common law jurisdictions considered here, the chapter explores if the power has nevertheless been exercised by the courts based on their inherent powers. Since policy-based implied bare licences produce the same effect on copyright owners as the statutory limitations or exceptions, the framework for implying this type of licence draws inspiration from the three-step test and the fundamental rights regime.

The Role of the Directors

2021 ◽  
pp. 125-194
Author(s):  
Eva Micheler
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Company Law ◽  
Economic Interests ◽  
Financial Reports ◽  
The Public ◽  
Company Directors ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Uk

This chapter describes the role of the directors. The duties of the directors are owed to the company and while the shareholders are the primary indirect beneficiaries of those duties, the law integrates the interests of creditors and also of wider society. The law is primarily focused on ensuring compliance with the Companies Act and the constitution rather than with the enhancement of economic interests. The Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 serves as a mechanism through which the public interest is integrated into company law, while the UK Corporate Governance Code adds a further procedural dimension to the operation of the board of directors. The chapter then looks at how the idea of designing remuneration in a way that guides the directors to act either for the benefit of the shareholder or for the benefit of the company is flawed and has served as a motor justifying increasing rewards without bringing about commensurate increases in performance. It also analyses the duties of the directors to keep accounting records and to produce financial reports.

Yelling ‘Fire’ in a Crowded Occupation: Cynical Fire Hazard Claims and the Technocratic Containment of Dissent

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 549-573
Author(s):  
Honor Brabazon
Keyword(s):  
Public Space ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Fire Hazard ◽  
Research Literature ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
The Uk

While the privatisation of public space has been the subject of considerable research, literature exploring the shifting boundaries between public and private law, and the role of those shifts in the expansion of neo-liberal social relations, has been slower to develop. This article explores the use of fire safety regulations to evict political occupations in the context of these shifts. Two examples from the UK student occupation movement and two from the US Occupy movement demonstrate how discourses and logics of both private and public law are mobilised through fire hazard claims to create the potent image of a neutral containment of dissent on technical grounds in the public interest – an image that proves difficult to contest. However, the recourse to the public interest and to expert opinion that underpins fire hazard claims is inconsistent with principles governing the limited neo-liberal political sphere, which underscores the pragmatic and continually negotiated implementation of neo-liberal ideas. The article sheds light on the complexity of the extending reach of private law, on the resilience of the public sphere and on the significance of occupations as a battleground on which struggles over neo-liberal social relations and subjectivities play out.

Regulating Research and Experimentation: A View from the UK

2004 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 604-612 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheila A.M. McLean
Keyword(s):  
Medical Care ◽  
Preventive Care ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Scientific Inquiry ◽  
Medical Profession ◽  
The Public ◽  
Current State ◽  
Freedom Of Research ◽  
The Uk

A medical profession which did not seek improved means to conquer disease would be condemned for dereliction of its duty, Members of the public will not accept the current state of the medical arts as finite but feel justified in expecting the development of more effective therapies for illness, and the promotion of improved means of preventive care.With this assertion, the distinguished academic, Bernard Dickens, places research firmly in the domain of the public interest. Foster agrees, saying that, “[t]o improve medical care as much as we can, if not to perfect it, means that we have to accept the need for research.” Giesen adds a further emphasis to the search for medical advancements, saying that “freedom of research and scientific inquiry is, in itself, an important aspect of open societies.“

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document