Tag Archives: Copenhagen

Science City: Manchester 2016

Leave a reply

Manchester (UK) is celebrating its designation as the European City of Science concurrently with the European Open Science Forum (ESOF) 2016 which will be held there as I noted in a May 8, 2015 posting, which focused largely on the forum. An Oct. 22, 2015 Manchester: European City of Science announcement reveals early details about the city’s celebration of science,

Be part of the Manchester Science Formula

We’re concocting something special for Manchester for 2016. You might have already heard about Manchester becoming the European City of Science, and we would like to invite you to get involved!

Manchester’s year was started by celebrating alongside the launch 2015 Manchester Science Festival, at the Museum of Science and Industry. We captured everyone’s enthusiasm for science in our pop-up photo booth, where many made a promise to bring science alive in Manchester over the next year.  You can see more pictures and promises here.

We’re inviting everyone to be involved and make the most of the focus on science in Manchester in 2016. If you would like to find out how to join us, please visit manchestersciencecity.com to join our newsletter and you can also discover more about our plans for The Manchester Robot Orchestra and the Big School Science Share, just two of the exciting developments announced at the launch.

The 2015 Manchester Science Festival is still ongoing and once it ends Manchester is hosting a science policy week,

Manchester Science Festival

Running from 22 October – 1 November, the Manchester Science Festival is in its 9th year and promises to be bigger and better than ever before.

Curated by the Museum of Science and Industry, there will be events held city-wide that are suitable for all ages.

Keep an eye on #MSF15 for trending topics and the website for all the available events.

Manchester Policy Week

For five jam-packed days in November, the Manchester Policy Week takes over the University of Manchester. There will be everything from lectures to workshops to films and they’re open to everyone.

This year, Manchester Policy Week has the theme of ‘Science, Technology and Public Policy’ as part of the European City of Science.

Policy week runs from 2-6 November.

I’m quite taken with what they’re doing in Manchester and with how this ‘city of science’ festival has grown. I believe it was introduced by the Irish when they hosted ESOF 2012 in Dublin and later adopted by Copenhagen when they hosted ESOF 2014. Each city has given this festival its own flavour and it is becoming a richer experience each time. Bravo!

Apply for media travel grant to attend EuroScience Open Forum (ESOF) 2014

Leave a reply

The deadline for applications is Friday March 14, 2014 at 13:00 CET. For those who like a little more information or are unfamiliar with the EuroScience Open Forum, here’s a description from the ESOF hub homepage along with a description of the parent organization, EuroScience,

ESOF – EuroScience Open Forum – is the biennial pan-European meeting dedicated to scientific research and innovation. At ESOF meetings leading scientists, researchers, young researchers, business people, entrepreneurs and innovators, policy makers, science and technology communicators and the general public from all over Europe discuss new discoveries and debate the direction that research is taking in the sciences, humanities and social sciences.

EuroScience (ES) is a European non-profit grassroots association open to research professionals, teachers, students, science administrators, policy-makers, etc. and generally to any citizen interested in science and technology and its links with society. EuroScience represents not only European scientists of all ages, disciplines and nationalities but also from the business sector and public institutions such as universities and research institutes.

The 2014 ESOF is being held in Copenhagen, Denmark from June 21 – 26, 2014 with the general theme of ‘Science Building Bridges’ and following on that theme there are eight scientific themes (from the Scientific Themes page),

The Healthy Society

In recent years, scientific and technological developments have contributed to major progress in the health of individuals and for societies at large. What are the future roads to increased health in the world? How will science, technology and innovation contribute to this development? Where are the major challenges and possibilities?

Possible issues: Epidemology; Holistic Medicine; Healthy Workforces and Public Budgets; Ageing; Personalized Medicine; Telemedicine; Obesity; The Globalization of Disease; Diet, Physical Activity and
Health; Biomarkers; Gene Therapy; etc.

A Revolution of the Mind

Brain research and cognitive neuroscience have opened our understanding of the human mind. What should we use the knowledge for? What are the consequences for thinking and practice in academic, political and commercial life? And should new knowledge of the brain change our conception of human beings?

Possible issues: Neurobiology of Disease; Therapeutic Interventions; Mental Health; Arts and Pleasure; Behaviour and Marketing; Cognition and Computation; Animal Modelling; Ageing; Degeneration and
Regeneration; Physical Exercise and Mind; Development of Brain and Learning; etc.

Global Resource Management

Natural resources are essential for sustaining basic human welfare, e.g. drinking water and food. Moreover, for most industries some natural resources are necessary to manufacture products, e.g. metals, rare earths, water and bio-materials. The need for resources is stressing ecosystems and economic development. How can scientific and technological developments secure an effective and timely response for the global need for resources? How can resilience be built in?

Possible issues: Deep Sea Mining; Food Security; Geopolitics; Recycling; Oceanography; Environmental Administration; Ecosystem Services; Space Informatics; Geology; Water Management; Global Engineering; Global Justice; Efficient transport; Etc.

Learning in the 21st Century

Well-educated and knowledgeable citizens are essential for inclusive and vibrant societies. But what are the skills and knowledge needed in the future? And how should we learn them – are the days of national,
educational systems over and does science and technology offer ways to improve our ways of learning?

Possible themes: Early Childhood Learning; Life Long Learning; Assessment and Evaluation; Educational Organization and Leadership; Literacies; Science, Mathematics and Technology; Informal Learning; Mass education; Globalization; Higher Education; New Devices for Learning; Brain Development and Learning; Epigenetics and Learning; etc.

Green Economy

According to key parameters, the climate system is already moving beyond the patterns of natural variability. Many researchers, politicians, businesses and interest groups have responded with a call for a green economy that bridges continued economy growth and a sustainable, global ecosystem. Can science and technology deliver on this transition?

Possible themes: Fossil-based Energy; Forecasting; Future Energy Solutions; Economic Modelling; Renewable Energy; Transportation; Climate change; Climate Adaptation; Public-driven Transformation;
Eco-building; etc.

Material and Virtual World

The fundamental understanding of materials has shifted the borders of engineering and production. Moreover, the breakthroughs in information and communication technologies have altered our perceptions of what constitutes reality. Where will the next scientific breakthroughs take us?

Possible themes: Engineering; Surveillance, Nanotechnologies; Quantum computation; Industrial Virtual Reality; Simulation; Industrial Technologies; Manufacturing, Robotics; Human Enhancement; etc.

Urbanization, Design and Liveability

Forecasts claim that the future will be urbanized. So the grand challenges need to be faced in an urban setting. Moreover, the cities need to sustain and enhance urban areas as a place of vitality, liveability and accessibility – how can science, technology and innovation support the design of solutions?

Possible themes: Migration; Governance; Economic Growth; Rural-urban Transformations; Healthy Cities; Liveability; Demography; Water Management; Urban Planning, Security; Transportation, Welfare Design; Poverty; Regionalization; Waste Management; Sharing Economy; etc.

Science, Democracy & Citizenship

Science and scientists can facilitate, interrupt or enrich democratic decision making. When should science be the privileged provider of knowledge and when are scientists citizens? What should be the division of labour between facts and norms; between science and democracy?

Possible themes: Ethics; GMOs; Knowledge Society; Evidence-based Policy; Policy for Science; Climate Change; Authority; Social Choice; Deliberative Democracy; Trust; Institutionalism; Democratization; etc.

The ESOF 2014 website is easy to navigate and you can find out who has already signed up as a participant and/or speaker, as well as, many other details.

Getting back to the media travel grants,

1. – Purpose

The organisers of Europe’s largest general science event, EuroScience Open Forum, invite journalists from around the world to apply for media travel grants. It is expected that 250 media representatives will be at the science forum in Copenhagen from 21-26 June 2014.

The slogan of EuroScience Open Forum 2014 in Copenhagen (ESOF2014) is ‘Science Building Bridges’. One of the main objectives of the event is to build links between the media and the research community by providing a platform where journalists can discuss and report on the latest scientific developments.

To secure that journalists from a broad range of news organisations take part, EuroScience Open Forum 2014 in Copenhagen has announced its Media Travel Grant Scheme.

2. – The scheme

The ESOF2014 Secretariat offers a lump sum of €750 to help cover the costs of travel and accommodation for journalists who wish to report from ESOF2014.

Please note that all expenses covered must be in accordance with the travel guidelines issued by the Danish Agency for Science and Innovation. This means that all travel must be on economy class only and that accommodation expenses must not exceed €135 per night (February 2014).

3. – Who can apply?

Journalists irrespective of their gender, age, nationality, place of residence and media (newspaper, news agency, magazine, radio, TV or New Media) are welcome to apply. [emphasis mine]

4. – Application procedure

To submit an application, please follow the application procedure here

On submitting the application form for the travel grant, you agree to the full acceptance of the rules and to the decisions taken by the ESOF2014 Media Travel Grant Selection Committee.

The deadline for submitting an application is Friday 14 March 2014 at 13:00 CET.

5. – Selection Committee and decision

The Selection Committee is composed of members of the ESOF2014 Secretariat and the ESOF2014 International Media and Marketing Committee.

The selection of candidates will be based on the applicant’s CV and motivation statement. The Selection Committee will also strive to secure that various countries and types of media are represented in the group of successful applicants.

An e-mail with the decision will be sent in early April 2014 to all applicants stating whether or not their application has been successful.

6. – Payment conditions

Money will be transferred to the grantees after ESOF2014, subject to:

  • Mandatory participation at EuroScience Open Forum 2014 in Copenhagen.
  • Provision of documentation for travel and accommodation expenses up to a total of €750*
  • Completion of a feedback questionnaire regarding the scheme.

…

Good luck and one final comment. The ‘building bridges’ theme reminded me of an Oct. 21, 2010 posting where I was discussing Copenhagen, creativity, and science within the context of then recent research into what makes some cities attractive to scientists,

When the Øresund bridge connecting Copenhagen, Denmark, with Malmö, Sweden, opened in 2000, both sides had much to gain. Sweden would get a physical connection to the rest of mainland Europe; residents of Copenhagen would have access to cheaper homes close to the city; and economic cooperation would increase. But Christian Matthiessen, a geographer at the University of Copenhagen, saw another benefit — the joining of two burgeoning research areas. “Everyone was talking about the transport of goods and business connections,” he says, “and we argued that another benefit would be to establish links between researchers.”

Ten years later, those links seem to be strong. The bridge encouraged the establishment of the ‘Øresund region’, a loose confederation of nine universities, 165,000 students and 12,000 researchers. Co-authorship between Copenhagen and the southernmost province of Sweden has doubled, says Matthiessen. The collaborations have attracted multinational funds from the European Union. And the European Spallation Source, a €1.4-billion (US$2-billion) neutron facility, is on track to begin construction in Lund, Sweden, in 2013.

The region’s promoters claim that it is emerging as a research hub of northern Europe, aided in part by construction of the bridge. For Matthiessen, the bridge also inspired the start of a unique research project — to catalogue the growth and connections of geographical clusters of scientific productivity all over the world. [emphases mine]

You can find the Nature article by Richard Van Noorden describing research about cities and why they are or aren’t attractive to scientists here.

Vancouver: very liveable but not attractive to scientists?

Leave a reply

The journal Nature has an intriguing article by Richard Van Noorden titled, Cities: Building the best cities for science; Which urban regions produce the best research — and can their success be replicated? It’s an attempt to synthesize research on what makes certain cities notable for scientific achievement and ways to duplicate that success elsewhere.

Given the discussion about Canada’s scientific achievements combined with our perceived lack of innovation, I was curious as to whether any Canadian cities (particularly Vancouver) might be mentioned and in what context. First, here’s the story behind the research on ‘scientific’ cities (from the article),

When the Øresund bridge connecting Copenhagen, Denmark, with Malmö, Sweden, opened in 2000, both sides had much to gain. Sweden would get a physical connection to the rest of mainland Europe; residents of Copenhagen would have access to cheaper homes close to the city; and economic cooperation would increase. But Christian Matthiessen, a geographer at the University of Copenhagen, saw another benefit — the joining of two burgeoning research areas. “Everyone was talking about the transport of goods and business connections,” he says, “and we argued that another benefit would be to establish links between researchers.”

Ten years later, those links seem to be strong. The bridge encouraged the establishment of the ‘Øresund region’, a loose confederation of nine universities, 165,000 students and 12,000 researchers. Co-authorship between Copenhagen and the southernmost province of Sweden has doubled, says Matthiessen. The collaborations have attracted multinational funds from the European Union. And the European Spallation Source, a €1.4-billion (US$2-billion) neutron facility, is on track to begin construction in Lund, Sweden, in 2013.

The region’s promoters claim that it is emerging as a research hub of northern Europe, aided in part by construction of the bridge. For Matthiessen, the bridge also inspired the start of a unique research project — to catalogue the growth and connections of geographical clusters of scientific productivity all over the world. [emphases mine]

It’s not hard to believe that other cities and regions are eager to emulate the Copenhagen/Malmö experience. Van Noorden’s article synthesizes Mathiesson’s research with research done for Nature by Elsevier to find some similar results, for example, Boston scores high while Beijing’s scientific output is increasing.

As for Vancouver,

Moreover, cities generally held to be the most ‘liveable’ in surveys — Vancouver and various urban centres in Canada and Australia — are often not associated with outstanding creativity [scientists are included as ‘creatives’ as defined by academics such as Richard Florida at the University of Toronto], says Peter Hall, a geographer at University College London. [emphases mine]

Van Noorden does not explore the question of why the most  ‘liveable’ cities “are often not associated with outstanding creativity.”

I’m reminded of the excitement over the recruitment of the Canada Excellence Research Chairs (my May 20, 2010 posting) and am suggesting that, like liveability, attracting world class researchers does not necessarily lead to the creative scientific and technological results hoped for so dearly.

As the article points there are many factor influencing why the rise and fall of ‘science’ cities,

Many factors are out of the hands of urban planners and local policy- makers, however, and more sophisticated spatial scientometrics studies into why and where scientists cluster geographically could help to explain the influence of these factors. The evolution of a metropolitan region such as Øresund [Copenhagen/Malmö] was shaped by national and international policies and economics. National policies, for example, have largely determined the evolution of science cities in France, Spain, Portugal, South Africa and Russia in the past few decades by pushing money, and by extension scientists, into smaller cities in need of a boost.

Researchers such as Michel Grossetti at the University of Toulouse (France), are attempting sophisticated analyses to get at the heart of why scientists do or do not cluster in certain regions as Van Noorden’s article notes.

I’m not sure what to make of this research simply because there’s been a lot of talk about how the internet and being online has obliterated geography (by working online, you can live wherever you choose as physical proximity is no longer necessary). This research suggests otherwise, i.e., physical or face to face contact is very important.

Science shenanigans made visible; a surprising (or not) appointment to CIHR; announcing a wee holiday

Leave a reply

Human nature, even scientists have it. They recently reasserted their human nature with the climate change controversy over possibly suppressed and/or distorted data. According to the Globe and Mail article by Doug Saunders (Breach in the global-warming bunker rattles climate science at the worst time), even scientists who agreed with the group at the University of East Anglia were not given access let alone people who were perceived as hostile to the cause. Note that word, cause.  From the article,

Unusually, even sympathetic scientists and some activists have concluded that the credibility of climate science has been seriously harmed.

“We should not underestimate the damage caused by what has happened, either for the science or for the politics of climate change, and potentially it could have some very far-reaching consequences,” said Mike Hulme, a climate scientist at East Anglia whose e-mails were among those included in the pirated files and who has been critical of the secrecy and lack of impartiality in his colleagues’ work.

Independent scientists are quick to point out that the actions described in the e-mails do not describe anything like a fabrication of global-warming evidence, and that two other major sets of historical data drawn from the same sources, both held by NASA institutions in the United States, also show a historical warming trend.

…

While such insinuations of poor scientific practice have drawn the most attention, more damaging for climate scientists are e-mails which reveal the hostile, partisan, bunker-like atmosphere at the lab, which goes to ridiculous lengths to prevent even moderate critics from seeing any of the raw data.

In one e-mail, Prof. Jones [head of the CRU] wrote that climate skeptics “have been after the CRU [Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia] station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I’ll delete the file rather than send it to anyone.”

Jones demonstrates the kind of behaviour and communication (or lack of) that we associate with a wrongdoer trying to cover something up or with a fanatic determined to convince you at all costs. Unfortunately, human beings, even with the best of intentions, can take a wrong turn and it would seem that Jones stopped being a scientist and became a true believer.

Some of what’s being discussed in view of the public eye is the usual back and forth amongst scientists as they dispute each other’s findings in sometimes less than genteel tones and cast aspersions on each other’s methodologies. The more high profile the work, the more bitter the fight.

Very quickly, I want to direct you to Rob Annan’s latest postings on a CIHR [Canadian Institutes of Health Research] appointment, a representative from Pfizer, to their governing council and science policy in Europe. If you’re interested in science policy and the implications of some of the new decisions being made and/or taking view of science policy discussions elsewhere, please do check these postings out. Plus I just (5 minutes ago at 9:45 am PST) received this email from the folks who organized the 2009 Canadian Science Policy Conference,

We have just made the entire content of the CSPC publicly available for all Canadians at our website (http://sciencepolicy.ca), including:

  • video of keynote addresses and plenaries
  • audio of all conference sessions
  • video interviews with opinion leaders, conducted on-site at the CSPC by The Mark News
  • written report of all sessions

We are working towards the production of a comprehensive evaluation of CSPC 2009, including detailed performance measures and outcomes of the conference. To that end, we would greatly appreciate your input.

I look forward to viewing the material from the conference (thank you, organizers) when I settle down a bit. I am currently in the throes of a major transition and may not be blogging again until Dec. 17, 2009 or after.

Patenting and copyrighting intellectual property; the role of technical innovation; more on London’s digital cloud

Leave a reply

I keep expecting someone to try patenting/copyrighting/trademarking a nanoparticle or some such nanoscale object. If you believe that to be unthinkable, I suggest you read this (from TechDirt’s  Mike Masnick’s news item here),

We’ve seen a few ridiculous cases whereby local governments claim copyright on a law [emphasis mine], but it’s still stunning to see what’s going on in Liberia. Tom sends in the news that no one knows what the law covers in Liberia, because one man, leading a small group of lawyers, claims to hold the copyright on the laws of the country and won’t share them unless people (or, rather, the government of Liberia) is willing to pay. Oh, and did we mention that the US government paid for some of this?

Masnick’s article provides a link to more information in the story, He’s got the law (literally) in his hands, by Jina Moore and Glenna Gordon. While I find the situation extreme what strikes me first in Masnick’s piece is that it’s not unusual. So if people are actually going to try and copyright a law, why not a nanoparticle?

Coincidentally, China and India have made a proposal to eschew intellectual property rights with regard to green/clean technologies prior to the big climate talks during December (2009) in Copenhagen.  From the news item on Nanowerk,

As world leaders prepare for climate talks in Copenhagen next month, developing nations have tabled a controversial proposal which would effectively end patent protection for clean technologies.
China and India have floated the idea of making new green technology subject to ‘compulsory licensing’, which critics say amounts to waiving intellectual property rights.
The idea of adapting or liberalising patent rules for crucial new inventions which can help reduce carbon emissions is not new, but the EU and US are unhappy with compulsory licensing, fearing it would dramatically reduce the incentive for businesses to innovate and stifle green job creation.
Compulsory licensing has to date only been used in emergency situations where patent-protected pharmaceuticals were seen as prohibitively expensive. The Thai government used the mechanism to allow local medicines factories [to] produce HIV drugs at a fraction of the cost.

I’m guessing the reason that this item was posted on Nanowerk is that nanotechnology is often featured as an enabler of cleaner/greener products.

On a related theme, Andrew Maynard has posted his thoughts on the World Economic Forum that he attended last week in Dubai (from his Nov.22.09 posting),

Developing appropriate technology-based solutions to global challenges is only possible if  technology innovation policy is integrated into the decision-making process at the highest levels in government, industry and other relevant organizations.  Without such high-level oversight, there is a tendency to use the technology that’s available, rather than to develop the technology that’s needed.  And as the challenges of living in an over-populated and under-resourced world [emphasis mine] escalate, this will only exacerbate the disconnect between critical challenges and technology-based solutions.

The importance of technology innovation – and emerging technologies in particular – was highlighted by Lord Malloch-Brown in his closing remarks at this year’s Summit on the Global Agenda.  Yet there is still a way to go before technology innovation is integrated into the global agenda dialogue, rather than being tacked on to it

Maynard provides an intriguing insight into some of the international agenda which includes a much broader range of discussion topics that I would have expected from something called an ‘economic’ forum.  You can read more about the World Economic Forum organization and its latest meeting here.

I wasn’t expecting to find out more about London Olympics 2012”s digital cloud proposed project on Andy Miah’s website as I tend to associate him with human enhancement, Olympic sports, post humanism, and nanotechnology topics. I keep forgetting about his media interests. Here’s his latest (Nov.22.09) posting on the Digital Olympics (title of his new book) where he includes images and a video about the architectural project.