Biodiversity Evaluation: From Endorsed Indexes to Inclusion of a Pollinator Indicator

There is increasing interest in evaluating biodiversity to preserve ecosystem services. Researchers can sustain policymakers by providing tools, such as indexes and indicators, that need constant implementation to become accepted standards. Implementation may vary from re-evaluation of existing indicators to introduction of new ones based on emerging threats to biodiversity. With the aim of contributing to the compelling need to estimate and counterbalance pollinator loss, we screened existing bioindicators. We first selected indexes/indicators applied to agricultural contexts and concurrently endorsed by a regulatory agency. We then extended our analysis to indexes/indicators based on arthropod taxa and formally recognized at least by national bodies. Our procedure identified a combination of surveys of various animal taxa and remote landscape analyses (e.g., using a GIS and other cartographic tools). When the animals are arthropods, most indexes/indicators can only address confined environments (e.g., grasslands, riversides). Indicator strength was improved by the simultaneous inclusion of biotic and abiotic components. Pollinator sensitivity to changes at micro-habitat level is widely appreciated and may help distinguish agricultural practices. A biodiversity index based on pollinators, including a wide monitoring scheme supplemented by citizen science, is currently fostered at the European level. The results obtained using such an index may finally enable focusing of strategic funding. Our analysis will help to reach this goal.

A critical evaluation of the National Innovation Accelerator programme: comparing eHealth and medical device-based innovations

Background/Aims The National Innovation Accelerator was developed in 2014 to increase the uptake of innovation across the NHS by providing strategic funding to candidates. This study aimed to critically evaluate the success of the National Innovation Accelerator in supporting innovation in the NHS. Methods Innovations that were supported by the National Innovation Accelerator were categorised into ‘eHealth’, ‘healthcare centre medical devices’, ‘mobile medical devices’ and ‘other’. Peer-reviewed literature was used to assess all innovation types. For eHealth innovations, organic website traffic and app store reviews were also used to assess patient engagement and popularity. Results The majority of innovations supported by the programme were categorised as eHealth; however, these were also more likely to be unsuccessful in terms of patient engagement. Meanwhile, healthcare centre and mobile medical devices were likely to be supported by peer-reviewed studies and clinical trials. Conclusions The success of the National Innovation Accelerator in supporting healthcare innovation varies depending on the type of innovation, with innovations in medical devices achieving greater success than eHealth innovations.

The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research Strategy to Advance Therapeutic Development of PINK1 and Parkin

The role of mitochondria in Parkinson’s disease (PD) has been investigated since the 1980s and is gaining attention with recent advances in PD genetics research. Mutations in PRKN and PTEN-Induced Putative Kinase 1 (PINK1) are well-established causes of autosomal recessive early-onset PD. Genetic and biochemical studies have revealed that PINK1 and Parkin proteins function together in the same biological pathway to govern mitochondrial quality control. These proteins have also been implicated in the regulation of innate and adaptive immunity and other mitochondrial functions. Additionally, structural studies on Parkin have delineated an activation mechanism and have identified druggable regions that are currently being explored by academic and industry groups. To de-risk therapeutic development for these genetic targets, The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research (MJFF) has deployed a strategic funding and enabling framework that brings together the research community to discuss important breakthroughs and challenges in research on PINK1-Parkin biology, supports collaborative initiatives to further our understanding within this field and develops high-quality research tools and assays that are widely available to all researchers. The Foundation’s efforts are leading to significant advances in understanding of the underlying biology of these genes, proteins and pathways and in the development of Parkinson’s therapies.

The roads of ‘excellence’ in Central and Eastern Europe

The aim of the article is to explore the impact of excellence as a powerful policy idea in the context of recent and contemporary developments in three selected Central and Eastern European countries, namely, the Czech Republic, Poland and Ukraine. More specifically, we explore how excellence as a ‘global script’ was translated by policy makers into local contexts with institutionalized practices. It shows that the translation of the idea of excellence involved the rise of a series of novel policy measures such as long-term strategic funding and the establishment of various pertinent schemes (e.g. flagship universities, centres of excellence). By doing so, the analysis – which is comparative by nature – focuses on exploring major differences and similarities in the conceptualization and implementation of the idea of excellence in the three local contexts of science.

The Mundane Politics of ‘Security Research’

Since the late 20th century, Germany’s federal science policy has shifted towards an emphasis on commercialization and/or applicability of academic research. University researchers working within such strategic funding schemes then have to balance commitments to their government commission, their research, and their academic careers, which can often be at odds with each other. Drawing on an ethnographic study of the development of a ‘smart’ video surveillance system, I analyze some of the strategies which have helped a government-funded, transdisciplinary group of researchers to navigate conflicting expectations from their government, academia, and the wider public in their everyday work. To varying degrees, they managed to align conflicting expectations from the government and their departments by tailoring research problems which were able to travel across different social worlds. By drawing attention to work practices ‘on the ground’, this article contributes ethnographic detail to the question of how researchers construct scientific problems under pressures to make their work relevant for societal and commercial purposes.