Developing an agenda to guide forest social science, economics, and utilization research.

BackgroundThe level of funding provides a good proxy for the level of commitment or prioritisation given to a particular issue. While the need for research relevant to social, economic, cultural and behavioural aspects of neglected tropical diseases (NTD) control has been acknowledged, there is limited data on the level of funding that supports NTD social science research.MethodA case study was carried out in which the spending of a major independent funder, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) - was analysed. A total of 67 projects funded between October 1998 and November 2008 were identified from the BMGF database. With the help of keywords within the titles of 67 grantees, they were categorised as social science or non-social science research based on available definition of social science. A descriptive analysis was conducted.ResultsOf 67 projects analysed, 26 projects (39%) were social science related while 41 projects (61%) were basic science or other translational research including drug development. A total of US$ 697 million was spent to fund the projects, of which 35% ((US$ 241 million) went to social science research. Although the level of funding for social science research has generally been lower than that for non-social science research over 10 year period, social science research attracted more funding in 2004 and 2008.ConclusionThe evidence presented in this case study indicates that funding on NTD social science research compared to basic and translational research is not as low as it is perceived to be. However, as there is the acute need for improved delivery and utilisation of current NTD drugs/technologies, informed by research from social science approaches, funding priorities need to reflect the need to invest significantly more in NTD social science research.

This chapter looks at the major challenges the social scientists and social researchers are facing in conducting social research during this COVID-19 pandemic due to their physical inaccessibility to the community. The chapter also provides some alternative ways to reduce these challenges using different techniques within the latitudes of social sciences research. This chapter is based on authors' empirical observations, and some evidence is obtained from the experts' opinions working in different disciplines in social sciences. Results found some practical challenges (i.e., many social researchers stop their research practices due to inaccessibility in the communities; many of them started their research, but could not finish it; some researchers are doing their research using alternative tools and techniques; and research funding has been frizzed due to this pandemic). Findings would be useful to the social sciences researchers, academics, research students, policymakers, and development practitioners.

Social science research in malaria prevention, management and control in the last two decades: An overview

Social Science Research Needs for the Hurricane Forecast and Warning System: An Introduction

The Open Research Area (ORA) for Social Sciences is an international initiative that provides social science research funding and support. It was founded in 2010 by members of the Bonn Group and based on agreement by European social science funding bodies The Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR), France, the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG), Germany, the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), UK, and the Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO), the Netherlands. The Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), Canada, later joined, as well as the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) as an associate member. ORA facilitates collaborative social sciences research by bringing together researchers from participating countries. Researchers from the partner countries who fulfil the eligibility criteria of their national funding organisation apply to the ORA office handling the year's applications and Japanese researchers submit their applications to JSPS Tokyo. ORA accepts applications from all areas of the social sciences and there is a key focus on supporting young researchers at the beginning of their careers, helping them to extend the reach of their work and network on an international scale. Ultimately, ORA exists to drive forward high-quality research and strengthen international collaboration in social sciences research. So far, five rounds of ORA have been successfully completed, with more than 60 international collaborative proposals funded across diverse social sciences fields, including political science, economics, empirical social science, psychology, geography, urban planning and education science.

The Open Research Area (ORA) for Social Sciences is an international initiative that provides social science research funding and support. It was founded in 2010 by members of the Bonn Group and based on agreement by European social science funding bodies The Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR), France, the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG), Germany, the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), UK, and the Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO), the Netherlands. The Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), Canada, later joined, as well as the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) as an associate member. ORA facilitates collaborative social sciences research by bringing together researchers from participating countries. Researchers from the partner countries who fulfil the eligibility criteria of their national funding organisation apply to the ORA office handling the year's applications and Japanese researchers submit their applications to JSPS Tokyo. ORA accepts applications from all areas of the social sciences and there is a key focus on supporting young researchers at the beginning of their careers, helping them to extend the reach of their work and network on an international scale. Ultimately, ORA exists to drive forward high-quality research and strengthen international collaboration in social sciences research. So far, five rounds of ORA have been successfully completed, with more than 60 international collaborative proposals funded across diverse social sciences fields, including political science, economics, empirical social science, psychology, geography, urban planning and education science.

The study is an attempt to explain why Public Relations strategy is an effective avenue to tackle electoral malfeasance in Nigeria. The Nigerian Presidential Campaign of 2015 election with specific reference to the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) candidate presented a ready case study for an analysis. The paper is a public relations analysis aimed at identifying public relations strategy adopted by the PDP’s presidential campaign team and evaluate success and failure including factors responsible for it in the 2015 election. The conceptual framework adopted is SWOT analysis which forms the background for the public relations strategy and method adopted is Analysis, i.e. in-depth study of the Public Relations Strategy. The paper identified that PDP relied on SWOT analysis model instead of detailed social scientific empirical research. The PDP presidential campaign failure arose from over-reliance on strengths and opportunities which resulted to a bunker mentality and dependence on electoral malfeasance. The paper recommends that politicians and political parties rely on experts in social scientific empirical research to direct campaign public relations strategy to avoid reliance on electoral malfeasance among others. The paper demonstrates the weakness and problems arising from sole dependence on SWOT analysis. It is a subjective and depends on individual interpretation. It highlights the need for Nigerian politicians and political parties to rely more on social scientific empirical research to direct public relations strategy in electoral campaign. This paper demonstrates the need for a social scientific research, electoral campaign driven to combat electoral malfeasance in Nigeria.

This article begins to identify high-priority social science research issues focused on the hurricane forecast and warning system. The research agenda was distilled as faithfully as possible from the efforts of a host of scientists. These included a series of white papers; a workshop in Pomona, Calif., in February 2005; several sessions at the 2004 and 2005 Natural Hazards workshops held in Boulder, Colo.; and additional input from the broader social science research community unable to attend these events. Expected results from this effort are (1) a focused applied research agenda designed to generate short-term immediate benefits; (2) a broader, more basic research agenda addressing fundamental theoretical and exploratory research designed to generate long-term improvements; (3) methods to enable the social science research community to gather and further develop research priorities and future agendas; and (4) a concept for a long-term, multidisciplinary, institutional approach to undertaking identified research priorities. This paper is presented as a call to action for the appropriate agencies and organizations to support social science research on the high-priority issues in the hurricane forecast and warning system to meet societal goals of protecting lives and property in the face of the ever-present threat of hurricanes.

Florida International University, Miami, FloridaNational Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, ColoradoConsulting Sociologist, Miami, FloridaTexas A&M University, College Station, TexasCORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Jeff Lazo, NCAR, Box 3000, Boulder, C O 80307, E-mail: lazo@ucar.edu

Use of dimensional analysis in social science research

Commercialisation is mainly seen as the purview of science, technology, and engineering research. The focus of commercialising research is the inherent characteristics, valorisation, and translation mechanisms of science, technology, and engineering. In Australia, the commercialisation of social sciences research is often not considered or is even discouraged despite its benefits. This thesis argues that the often intangible, but no less economically valuable or impactful, social science research also generates insights that may drive business success and social progress.Collaboration is core to the success of research commercialisation, which can be used to supplement university income and disseminate research results. This research investigated how the stakeholders, who collaborated through university entrepreneurship in one Australian university to commercialise research in the social sciences, managed the competing logics that arose during collaboration. The research question asked: How is collaboration in research commercialisation in the social sciences negotiated in view of the institutional logics of universities, government, industry, and research commercialisation offices? Understanding the practices and strategies of research commercialisation embraced by university-based social scientists and their industry collaborators contributes to the fields of scholarship in university entrepreneurship, institutional logics, stakeholder theory, and triple helix studies.This thesis presents four nested studies that draw together insights from university researchers, industry partners, government officials, and the staff of the research commercialisation office involved in the commercialisation of social science research in the context of one Australian university. Study 1 reviewed the literature systematically to address the question: How does government create a favourable university entrepreneurship ecosystem in Australia through its policies? Using interview data from organisations such as a university, industries, and a research commercialisation office, Studies 2 and 3 addressed the questions: What are the characteristics, impediments and impacts of social sciences research for a university? and How does a university include the social sciences in collaboration where commercial interest is the main focus? Study 4 used within- and cross-case analyses of interview data with academics, industry partners, and research commercialisation office (RCO) staff to investigate the question: How do individual stakeholders collaborate amid competing logics in a social sciences context? Studies 2, 3, and 4 thematically analysed individual and organisational levels of collaboration as the micro-level unit ofanalysis (individuals) was embedded in the macro-level unit of analysis (the university). The findings identify and characterise some of the challenges in commercialising social science research generated by the competing logics of those collaborating. The findings reveal, first, the systemic failure of Australian Government policies on university entrepreneurship due to the mismatch between the top-down policies of governments and university policies. To support university entrepreneurship and research commercialisation, a combination of top-down and bottom-up government and universities policies would fill the gap in policy coverage.The second finding is related to the call for action of this thesis. It implores the stakeholders of research commercialisation to question the common perception of the value of social sciences research and reframe the understanding of social sciences research commercialisation in a more balanced and nuanced way, keeping in mind that university missions cover social as well as economic development. During collaboration, when the repertoire of behaviours and initiatives from their logics were not sufficient to achieve goals and sustain the collaboration, organisations and individuals adopted elements from other logics. Institutional logics are not rigid, and behaviours can be modified to reach shared goals. While the challenge of competing logics can be alleviated, the advancement of social sciences research commercialisation is hindered by undervaluing its benefits. This thesis suggests that the values of social sciences research commercialisation are emphasised by the social impacts they create, not by the financial return.The third finding was that competing logics can be alleviated through shared goals and adaptation of others’ culture and practice. Engagement may build the trust and commitment needed to lessen competing logics and thus influence the strategies used by individuals and organisations in addressing the competing logics. Moreover, the research found that the strategies used by the university involved in commercialising social science research adhere to university dominant logics in the organisation. The fourth finding indicates that individuals can influence the logic of organisations by creating new practices and by shaping the culture. The fifth findings show that research commercialisation offices are instrumental in mediating between the clashing cultures andpractices of academic researchers and their industry partners and can be considered as a fourth helix in university entrepreneurship interactions.The thesis extends knowledge regarding university, government, and industry collaboration, particularly about entrepreneurship in universities, adds to the discourse on social sciences research commercialisation, identifies strategies to address competing logics, and proposes that research commercialisation offices could be regarded as a fourth helix. This thesis will assist policymakers and participants in social sciences research commercialisation to manage changes and develop strategies to achieve social, research, and financial universities missions.

Much of the social science literature on environment is of recent origin and represents the response of the social science research community to a complex societal problem in which technology is a major factor. Energy represents another such problem to which the social science research community is now turning its attention. Because energy problems and environment problems have some similarities and because energy-conversion processes have large effects on the environment, a review of the social science literature on environment was undertaken. The purposes of this review are as follows: (1) to study the possible utility in energy research of some of the concepts developed in social science research on the environment; (2) to study the possible utility in energy research of some of the methodologies utilized in social science research on the environment; and (3) to study the extent to which the results of social science research on the environment have contributed to the development of policy. The first two items above receive major attention in this preliminary literature survey. 50 references.

Research is necessary for development in every country, research is necessary for the social and economic development of the country and also for the personal development of the citizens. Some scientific principles are used for research in social sciences, but in the present, the process of social research has become much more complicated than before. There has been a difference in all the activities from research problem to publishing research. In this research paper, challenges and expectations before social science research have been analyzed and suggestions have been given to make social science research useful to the society and for the country.

The News of the Week article that reports on Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) questioning the need to fund social science research at the National Science Foundation is alarming and shortsighted (“Senate panel chair asks why NSF funds social sciences,” 12 May, p. [829][1]). Social science research is at the fundamental core of basic research and has much to contribute to the economic viability of the United States. Twenty years of direct and jointly funded social and ecosystem science research at Colorado State University's Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory has produced deep insights into environmental and societal impacts of political upheaval, land use, and climate change in parts of Africa, Asia, and the Americas. Beyond greatly advancing our understanding of the coupled human-environmental system, the partnership of social and ecosystem science has brought scientists and decision-makers together to begin to develop solutions to difficult problems. Insights from the social sciences about the vulnerability, sustainability, and resilience of social and environmental systems have greatly increased our understanding of the complex interactions of the world on which we depend. The contributions of social and ecological science for data analyses associated with spatial relationships, transfer of goods and services, valuation, and decision-making processes have improved our understanding of how human activities are altering environmental systems worldwide. These findings have become the core of policy and development decisions used throughout the world. It is critical that the NSF support social science funding and that, as budget decisions are made, the social science allocation should move forward equally with increases as in other basic and applied research. Failure to do so will further hinder U.S. competitiveness in the future and will slow transfer of knowledge and usefulness to the public. [1]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.312.5775.829a

This paper aims to provide researchers and practitioners with an overview of how organisation behaviour research (OBR) helps to understand and resolve patient safety problems in health care. The paper describes psychological, sociological and other social science theories and research which help to understand the causes of patient safety problems, how to implement change effectively and how to create an organisational culture of safety. Social science perspectives and organisational behaviour research are beginning to show why improvements in patient safety are slow, and how to make lasting and effective change. Social sciences and OBR have already helped make healthcare safer, but could make a greater contribution. Progress could be faster with greater awareness of the findings of this research and understanding of social science research paradigms. Better implementation and safer care could result from providing implementers and decision makers with more knowledge and access to social science research. More useful social science research could be developed by research funders and proposal reviewers gaining a greater understanding of social science methods and potential, and by including this research in a field made up largely of traditional experimental medical research methods. This paper provides an overview of the scientific and practical contributions of social sciences to patient safety and shows where future studies could assist understanding of current challenges and speed implementation of change.