Follow the Pathfinders: a Case Study Approach to Production, Use, and Readership on Scalar

This born-digital article examines the multimodal academic publication Pathfinders (Moulthrop and Grigar). Through a combination of interviews with readers and the author, textual analysis of the book, and literature review of Scalar, I trace the affordances of the platform, appropriation by scholars, the media text, and readership of Pathfinders. I distill themes that are key in the multimodality of the book, including platform adoption, institutional embedding, technological context and research values. Throughout the article, which is also written on Scalar, I reflect on my own use of Scalar and the various considerations that come with it in terms of software sustainability, accessibility, and transparency of research context. I conclude with a reflection on the media specificity of Scalar as an academic platform.

Trapped in a Blind Spot: The Covid-19 Crisis in Nursing Homes in Italy and Spain

This article investigates the delay in implementation and inadequacy of specific policy actions in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic in nursing homes. The analysis focuses on Lombardy and Madrid, the two wealthiest regions in Italy and Spain. These were the most severely affected by the onset of the pandemic, both country-wise and at the European level. We compare the chronology of policy decisions that affected nursing homes against the broader policy responses related to the health crisis. We look at structural factors that reveal policy legacy effects. Our analysis shows that key emergency interventions arrived late, especially when compared to similar actions taken by the national health services. Weak institutional embedding of nursing homes within the welfare state in terms of ownership, allocation of resources, regulation and coordination hindered a swift response to the onset of the crisis.

Bridging Privacy and Solidarity in COVID-19 Contact-tracing Apps through the Sociotechnical Systems Perspective

The COVID-19 pandemic confronts people with moral uncertainty, where they balance daily the individual values, rights, and needs with the collective perspective. COVID-19 contact-tracing apps offer digital media to correlate the movement of people with COVID-19 cases with the help of integrated date from public health organizations. This helps to notify people when they come in proximity with carriers of the disease. Regardless of the differences in the technical setup and manner of introduction globally, the values of privacy and solidarity are often pitted against each other when discussing COVID-19 apps. In this paper, I reframe the COVID-19 tracking apps from being neither a messiah nor a destroyer of pandemic management, but as a localized and complex sociotechnical system helping to shape and qualify moral concerns. This will allow to not only expand the scope of discussion beyond privacy and solidarity, but demonstrate how the two can be bridged under careful consideration of the technical, sociocultural, and institutional embedding.

Translatie als filosofisch programma

Translation as philosophical program: An explorative reviewWhat does the concept of translation mean in the expression ‘translational neuroscience’? What are the different steps, or components, in the translation of neuroscientific findings to psychiatry? There are serious concerns about the validity and productivity of the traditional idea of a translational pipeline, starting in the fundamental sciences (chemistry, molecular and cellular biology) and ending in the practice of clinical medicine, including psychiatry. The article defends the thesis that the difficulties in the traditional approach result, at least partially, from insufficient reflection on the philosophical premises upon which the concept of translation is based. The linear pipeline model is strongly determined by the traditional biomedical approach to disease. The translation crisis signifies some of the limitations of this approach, especially in the realm of clinical practice and patient experience. The biomedical model suggests that illness manifestations should be conceived as causally determined expressions of an underlying biological derailment or dysfunction. This model lacks the language and conceptual tools to address the role of contextual and person-bound factors in the manifestation of illness. It is only recently that personalized and context-sensitive approaches to psychopathology have gained scientific attention. In the wake of this conceptual and practical reform, network-like approaches to translation have emerged. These network approaches are based on a different conception of transdisciplinarity. They address all stakeholders, by asking them what kind of translation they need. Stakeholders are not only scientists and clinicians, but also patient- and family support groups; and parties that are responsible for the institutional embedding, the financial and logistic infrastructure, and the legal frameworks that support psychiatric care. It is the interaction between science (as producer of knowledge) and the contexts that are supposed to benefit from this knowledge, that should be put at the centre of conceptual reflection. The degree and fruitfulness of this interaction will be decisive for the future of both psychiatry and clinical neuroscience. Philosophy can play an important role in this interaction, by making explicit underlying logical and practical tensions and ambiguities in this interaction.

Using a co-innovation approach to support innovation and learning: Cross-cutting observations from different settings and emergent issues

Co-innovation has gained interest in recent years as an approach to tackle issues in agriculture and natural resource management. Co-innovation requires new roles for researchers supporting these processes and enabling settings in the programs they work in and the organizations they pertain to. The contributions to this special issue explore experiences with co-innovation in different settings from different angles. The special issue presents several studies on co-innovation in a large program in New Zealand, a study based on an EU Horizon 2020 project in the Czech Republic, The Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom as well as co-innovation experiences from Uruguay and Tanzania. Cross-cutting findings and emergent issues include (i) the need to consider the issue of simultaneously scaling both co-innovation project results and the co-innovation practice, (ii) the issue of flexibility in pace of co-innovation to allow different participants to converge and the flexibility in learning space needed to enable reflection, (iii) the issue of changing the dominant logics of the innovation systems in which co-innovation is embedded and (iv) the need for reflexive monitoring to support processes of co-innovation and their institutional embedding.

From Democratic Consultation to User-employment: Shifting Institutional Embedding of Citizen Involvement in Health and Social Care

Policies of citizen involvement in health and social care have given rise to a variety of organisational forms, which address citizens in different capacities and differ in their demands as to the representativeness, performance and competence of those involved. Apparently, the policies draw on different institutional logics. Based on extant studies, partly the author's own research from Norway, this article sheds light on three purposefully selected cases of citizen involvement. Two models of democratic consultation encompass a dominant model of involvement in Norway (advisory bodies of service users) and a model more prevalent in UK (panels of the general public). These are both embedded within a logic of democracy. A third emergent model of involvement is one in which citizens with experience as service users are engaged as workers in service providing organisations. This model resembles an idea of co-production. However, when involvement is organised as user-employment and paid work, the model rather seems rooted within the logic of the market – the labour market of service workers. The rise of this model suggests a shift in institutional embedding of citizen involvement. The analysis of these models provides a framework of distinguishing dimensions between different models of involvement.

Research and innovation futures: exploring new ways of doing and organizing knowledge creation

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of research and innovation futures, sketch the landscape of recent findings in this field with a focus on new ways of doing and organizing knowledge creation and position the contributions to this special issue within that landscape. Design/methodology/approach This paper includes a review of literature on the embedding of research and innovation in society, outlines the main domains of current drivers of change and summarises the contributions to the special issue. Findings Recent controversies about the future of research and innovation draw on a long-standing trajectory of debate about the role of science, technology and innovation in society, and the balance between autonomy in striving for scientific excellence on the one hand and the quest for social and economic relevance on the other. Six major domains of current and expected future changes in research and innovation are identified, and serve as the backdrop for positioning the more specific contributions to this special issue. Originality/value The main value of this contribution is to provide a condensed and original look at emerging directions of change in research and innovation practices and their organisational and institutional embedding in society.