The Character of Consent: The History of Cookies and the Future of Technology Policy

PurposeScience and technology policy plays an important role in promoting the development of economic and social development in China. At present, the research on science and technology policy is mainly focused on the basic theories and some quantitative research. The analyses for contents of massive science and technology policies are relatively less. This paper makes use of semantic technologies to extract and analyze the relatively important information from massive science and technology policies. The purpose of this paper is to facilitate users to quickly and effectively obtain valuable information from the massive science and technology policies. The key methods and study results are presented in the paper. The study results can provide references for further study and application in China.Design/methodology/approachThe paper presented the analysis model and method for science and technology policy in China. The terms and sentences are the important information in the science and technology policy. The study adopted the technology of natural language processing to analyze the linguistics characteristics of terms and combined with statistical analyses to extract the terms from Chinese science and technology policy. Then, the authors designed an algorithm, calculated and analyzed the important sentences in Chinese science and technology policies. The experiments were run on the Java test platform.FindingsThis paper put forward the analysis model and method for science and technology policy in China. The study obtained the following conclusions: term extraction of science and technology policy: the paper analyzed characteristic of terms in Chinese science and technology policy and designed a method of extracting a term that was suitable for the science and technology policy. The calculation of important sentences for science and technology policy: the paper designed an algorithm and calculated the importance of the sentences to obtain valuable information from the massive science and technology policies.Research limitations/implicationsIn our methods, there are some defects to be improved or solved in the future. For example, the precision of algorithm needs to be improved. The significance of this paper is to propose and use the analysis model to process Chinese science and technology policy; we can provide an auxiliary tool to help policy beneficiaries. Enterprises and individuals can be more effective to extraction and mining information from massive science and technology policy and find the target policy.Practical implicationsTo verify the effectiveness of the method, the paper selected the real policies about the new energy vehicles as experimental data; at the same time, the paper added uncorrelated policies. It used the proposed analysis model of science and technology policy to calculate and find out the relatively important sentences. The results of study showed that the proposed method can obtain better performance. It verified the validity of this method. The model and method have been applied to actual retrieval system.Social implicationsThe proposed model and method in the paper have been applied to actual retrieval system for users.Originality/valueThe paper proposed the new analysis model and method to analyze science and technology policies in China. The presented model and method are a new attempt. According to the experimental results, this exploration and study are valuable. In addition, the idea and method will give a good start for improving information services of massive science and technology policies in China.

There is a body of research that focuses on the examination of long-run relations between energy–environment–economic growth, and there is also a new type of recent research that focuses on the effects of monetary and fiscal economic policies on the environment. There is a research gap that exists due to omitting the effects of technology and energy policies, and this paper addresses this gap, in addition to merging both fields mentioned above, by including the asymmetric effects of fiscal and monetary policies. To explore the relations between fossil fuel and renewable energies, environmental pollution, and economic growth, in addition to including the roles of energy, technology, monetary, and fiscal policies, this paper employs novel NBARDL and NBARDL Granger Causality methods for yearly data assessments in the USA. The empirical findings of the paper point to the asymmetric impacts of monetary and fiscal policies in the short- and long-run. Interestingly, both contractionary and expansionary fiscal policies lead to higher CO2 emissions. Contractionary monetary policies exert a downward pressure on CO2 emissions, and if expansionary, the monetary policy causes environmental degradation. As an important policy, the energy policy emerges as a potent tool for reducing carbon emissions through not only renewable energy, but as a greater impact through energy efficiency and technology. Therefore, this paper highlights the importance of technology policies exhibiting varying relationships with environmental pollution, featuring unidirectional or bidirectional causality patterns. Renewable energy, energy efficiency combined with adequate technology, and energy policies are determined to have pivotal roles in CO2 emissions outcomes. Such policies should focus on cleaner energy sources accompanied by energy efficiency technologies in the USA to curtail environmental impacts; technology policies are vital in fostering innovations and encouraging cleaner technologies. The policy recommendations include an effective combination of monetary, fiscal, technology, and energy policies, backed by a strong commitment to achieving energy efficiency and renewable energy to mitigate environmental pollution and to contribute to sustainable development.

The issue of climate change raises new requirements for the way our societies work, and in particular how energy is provided. The reductions necessary to reach the internationally agreed target to limit the rise in temperature to 2° C are enormous and require technological and social innovations at several levels. In order to cope with this challenge the incremental improvement of existing technologies will be necessary but probably not sufficient. Therefore radical innovations are required, since the improvement of existing technologies alone will probably not be sufficient to meet the greenhouse gas emission (GHG) reductions considered to be cope with the effects of climate change (UNFCCC 2009; IPPC 2007; Stern 2006). Even though climate policy is regarded as being crucial in most European countries, the coordination of technology and climate policy proves difficult. Sometimes the interaction of climate and technology policy even leads to unintended and undesirable results. In the case of Denmark for instance it has been stated, that the Kyoto process has led to a decrease in technological innovation in the energy sector (Lund 2006). Furthermore recent attempts to policy integration, e.g. the UK Low Carbon transition plan (HM Government 2009) provide interesting examples of how governments try to coordinate different policy fields. The transition plan for instance explicitly aims at the field of technology policy in the domains of offshore wind, marine energy and electric vehicles. This paper will look closer into the challenges and experiences of the coordination between climate and technology policy applying a case study approach focusing on the experiences in the two countries mentioned previously: Denmark and the UK. The aim is to draw lessons learned from coordination efforts of the past and to identify best practices from the case studies. From a theoretical point the study is informed by the literature on the dimensions of policy learning (Nilsson 2005; Jachtenfuchs and Huber 1993) and the findings of innovation and transition studies (Geels et al. 2008; Sanden and Azar 2005).

Certainly no one can claim that the interaction of technology and public policy is a new issue, either in the United States or abroad. Ever since the scientific communities marshalled their expertise during the Second World War (radar and the atomic bomb being only the most pivotal examples), officials in the public arena have been quick to seek out scientific advice on any number of public policy issues; scientists have been no less reticent to insert themselves into the public debate, often in areas far from their areas of scientific competence. Considerable faith has been placed by both of these communities in the capability of science and technology to alleviate the nation's social maladies: nuclear energy would provide cheap and plentiful electricity for all; rapid transit systems would revitalize deteroriating city centers and their ghettos; and medical technology would cure all that ails. Science and technology were held out as examplars; if the United States can send a man to the moon, why can't it cure its urban problems became almost a clich6d call to arms. [1]. Yet, like too many attractive concepts, the applications of science and technology to public policy issues have not borne the consistent fruits its supporters would have hoped or predicted. The putative benefits of nuclear energy are profoundly debated; rapid transit systems have whisked people out of cities as easily as returning them; and medical technology has replaced one set of problems (the sick) with another, perhaps more intractable set of problems (the aged). Some have even doubted that this generation or the next can emotionally or intellectually absorb the rapid societal changes that technology is motivating [2]. And in the wake of the confusion that surrounded the Three Mile Island incident, commentators were asking if Americans still even believed or trusted the scientific community. Yet the rainbow beckons: the Administration's and Congress' emphasis on synthetic fuel production as the means to meet the energy crisis and insure independence from foreign energy sources is a striking example [3]. It is probably safe to assume that technology and public policy have been inextricably conjoined; practically, it would be impossible to separate the two to relegate technology back to the laboratories of private industry nor, given the promise, should that even be a considered option. As Frank Press, President Carter's Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, has phrased it, the choice is

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore technology strategies and policies in the areas of standards, repositioning of technology, and service‐oriented architecture that focus on enabling innovation while retaining coherence and viability.Design/methodology/approachThe paper uses the concepts of shearing layers and Personal Learning Environments to define appropriate boundaries between individual, departmental, institutional, national, and global network control.FindingsEducation systems today can be characterised as a recursive metasystem of separate systems. Each system uses innovation as part of strategic planning to try to realise its potential and release its latency. However, these strategic activities generate friction with the metasystem, which puts the brakes on innovation in its subsystems. The architectural concepts of shearing layers and flexible couplings provide a model for reducing this friction. One way of enabling shearing layers in educational technology is to offer polymodal access to services.Research limitations/implicationsIn managing technology, institutions should actively consider relocating functions to other layers of the education system, including technologies owned by individual learners and teachers. They should think of technology in terms of supporting flexible shearing layers between rapidly changing organisational structures. The concept of polymodal access should be used when looking to deploy services at any level of the organisation. Critical cross‐cutting issues of privacy, identity, and business intelligence need to be designed into the institutional and departmental service infrastructure. Institutions should develop innovation‐oriented technology policies. At the department or course level, policies should also reflect the position of the organisation with regard to the equitable experience of education.Originality/valueThe approach outlined demonstrates that institutions have the capacity to reinvent their technology strategies and policies in such a way as to unlock innovation at the departmental and personal level, without creating a crisis in IT service management. On the other hand, it also shows that the PLE perspective needs to be balanced with a broader view of student disposition and institutional goals to become recognised as part of the institutional technology strategy and policies.

This book analyzes the possibilities for effective global governance of science in Europe, India and China. Authors from the three regions join forces to explore how ethical concerns over new technologies can be incorporated into global science and technology policies. The first chapter introduces the topic, offering a global perspective on embedding ethics in science and technology policy. Chapter Two compares the institutionalization of ethical debates in science, technology and innovation policy in three important regions: Europe, India and China. The third chapter explores public perceptions of science and technology in these same three regions. Chapter Four discusses public engagement in the governance of science and technology, and Chapter Five reviews science and technology governance and European values. The sixth chapter describes and analyzes values demonstrated in the constitution of the People’s Republic of China. Chapter Seven describes emerging evidence from India on the uses of science and technology for socio-economic development, and the quest for inclusive growth. In Chapter Eight, the authors propose a comparative framework for studying global ethics in science and technology. The following three chapters offer case studies and analysis of three emerging industries in India, China and Europe: new food technologies, nanotechnology and synthetic biology. Chapter 12 gathers all these threads for a comprehensive discussion on incorporating ethics into science and technology policy. The analysis is undertaken against the backdrop of different value systems and varying levels of public perception of risks and benefits. The book introduces a common analytical framework for the comparative discussion of ethics at the international level. The authors offer policy recommendations for effective collaboration among the three regions, to promote responsible governance in science and technology and a common analytical perspective in ethics.

PurposeThe issue of climate change raises new requirements for the way our societies work. Even though climate policy is regarded as being crucial on the way to a low carbon society, the coordination of technology and climate policy proves difficult. The purpose of this paper is to look closer into the challenges and experiences related to the coordination between climate and technology policy in order to draw lessons for the future integration of both policy fields.Design/methodology/approachIn this paper a case study approach is applied to the policy coordination efforts in two countries: Denmark and the UK. From a theoretical point the study is informed by the literature on the dimensions of policy learning and the findings of innovation and transition studies.FindingsThe case studies provide important lessons how important flexibility and continues policy learning and its institutionalization will be on the way towards a low carbon society. However, it becomes clear that the price of this flexibility is the risk of “symbolic action”, respectively, postponing emission reduction measures.Research limitations/implicationsThe findings are drawn from two countries, however it remains not fully clear in how far the instruments and approaches from countries like Denmark and the UK can be applied in a similar way in other countries.Originality/valueThe paper provides an important discussion of contradictions between climate and technology policy from the perspective of the literature in innovation studies and policy learning.

This paper uses both descriptive and comparative approaches to discuss science, technology and innovation policies in Sudan. Differing from the studies in Sudanese literature, a novel element of our analysis is that we examine innovation, science and technology policies after integrating recent secondary and primary data. We examine the main factors hindering and those contributing towards the promotion of research and development (R&D), innovation, science and technology (S&T) in Sudan. We find that insufficient financial and human resources, weak cooperation between universities and the productive sector, lack of management and organization ability, lack of R&D culture, lack of favourable conditions and necessary facilities hampered the potential role of R&D to contribute towards the development of local technologies, promotion of innovation and science, technology and innovation (STI) policies and economic development in Sudan.

Due to many differences in presumptions and theoretical foundations within neoclassical and evolutionary economics, policy-makers are always confronted with the dilemma of selecting one of these two central models for technology and innovation policy. In light of widely institutionalised ineffectiveness in the field of market and systematic coordination – in Iran as well many other countries – the present investigation presumes that reliance on any of the above doctrines alone is ineffective. An intermediate concept of policy rationales to achieve a comparative structure of policy implications is proposed. Policy rationales (in innovation and technological policy) for neoclassical and evolutionary economics were derived based on a thematic analysis. A spectrum of policy implications of both doctrines was designed and completed in the form of a questionnaire for, together with theoretical foundations and policy rationales by specialists of the field of innovative and technological policy in Iran. Given the institutional conditions and structural frameworks which actually exist, and in spite of wide dissimilarities within the theoretical foundations of neoclassical and evolutionary economics, Clustering of respondents and subsequent test trials show that policy implications of the economics doctrines in the field of innovative and technological policy in Iran are complementary and convergent.

The case for government intervention via technology policy in the UK in the later 20th century was typically justified by « market failure » arguments. In this paper I argue firstly that an analysis of technology trends indicates that non-market failures, mainly systemic and dynamic in nature, were a more basic source of British technological shortcomings. Secondly, an analysis of trends in technology policy suggests that narrowly economics-based views too often hampered good intentions to reform policy along more appropriate lines, and restricted development of any serious capabilities for « policy learning » in the field. The main line of argument represents an application of the Richardson-Sen model of capabilities and networking to the government/policy field. There follows a discussion of policy learning in a context of network misalignment and systemic failure over the longer term of British technology policy, although there have been more encouraging efforts to overcome some of these problems in recent times. The paper concludes that « market failure » is at best a gross simplification of the issues confronting British technology policy in this era, and often an obstruction in the way of applying more constructive network-oriented policies.

During the 1992 Presidential election campaign, candidates Bill Clinton and Albert Gore emphasized their commitment to a new U.S. technology policy. Nevertheless, Clinton Administration technology policy in fact carries forward many of the policies that emerged under the Reagan and Bush administrations. These policies were developed in response to changes in the international economic and technological environment that have reduced U.S. technological dominance and have deepened the technological and economic interdependence of the U.S. and foreign economies. Nevertheless, these conditions create persistent dilemmas for the design and implementation of technology policies. One enduring dilemma is the tension between technology and trade policies. A second dilemma concerns the relationship between defense-related R&D programs and civilian technology development. This article reviews the efforts of the Clinton Administration and its immediate predecessors to deal with these policy conflicts.

Scientists gathered in Mill Valley [CA] Thursday as part of a fact-finding mission to determine what effect the Drakes Bay Oyster Co. has on the ecology of Drakes Estero. The company’s lease allowing it to grow and harvest oysters in Drakes Estero ends in 2012, and the Point Reyes National Seashore wants to turn it into a wilderness area thereafter. But owner Kevin Lunny said the operation causes no harm and may help the ecosystem. He wants to stay. The National Research Council—an arm of the National Academy of Sciences—was tapped by the National Park Service to examine the issue at the request of Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D.-Calif. That process began Thursday as the nine members of the committee—including experts in agriculture, disease, marine sciences and oceanography—heard from a variety of people connected to the issue in what had the feel of a courtroom at the Aqua Hotel . . .

Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy: Opportunities and Challenges for the Knowledge Economy: edited by Pedro Conceicao, David Gibson, Manuel Heitor and Syed Shariq, Quorum Books, Westport, Connecticut, USA, 2000

Most of the developed and developing nations, including BRICS countries, have been devoting considerable attention to ST BILAT-USA in Analysis of ST Gassler et al in Priorities in science & technology policy—an international comparison. Project report commissioned by the Austrian Council for Research and Technology Development, 2004; Gokhberg et al in Deploying foresight for policy and strategy makers: creating opportunities through public policies and corporate strategies in science, technology and innovation. Springer International Publishing Switzerland, Netherlands, 2016; Grebenyuk et al in Priority setting in the EU countries and the Russian Federation: The best practices, M.: National Research University Higher School of Economics, 2016; Cagnin in Foresight-Russ 8(2):46–55, 2014; Kuwahara et al in Foresight in Japan. The Handbook of Technology Foresight Concepts and Practice. 2008; Li in Research priorities and priority-setting in China. Vinnova Analysis, Vinnova, 2009; Pouris and Raphasha in Foresight STI Gov 9(3):66–79, 2015). Relevant efforts are mainly focused on solving strategic socio-economic problems, and making efficient use of national competitive advantages (OECD in Meeting global challenges through better governance. International Co-operation in Science, Technology and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2012; European Forum on Forward Looking Activities in How to design a European foresight process that contributes to a European challenge driven RI Meissner et al. in Science, technology and innovation policy for the future. Potentials and limits of foresight studies. Springer, New York, Dordrecht, London, Heidelberg, 2013; Poznyak and Shashnov in Foresight-Russ 5(2):48–56, 2011; Sokolov and Chulok in Futures 80:17–32, 2016). S&T priorities are currently being set through a comprehensive assessment of their possible contribution to achieving sustainable socio-economic development, and strengthening the country’s competitiveness.

The world's maritime countries are competing for the strength of marine science and technology. Throughout the world, the systematic construction of marine strategic scientific and technological strength has become a decisive factor in marine scientific and technological competition, and it is an inevitable choice for China to cope with marine scientific and technological competition. As far as science and technology policy is concerned, the efficiency of policy supply directly affects the effect of science and technology implementation. Therefore, it is urgent to clarify the mechanism of policy diffusion that influences the development of marine strategic scientific and technological forces. This paper employs a case study approach to examine the diffusion characteristics of China's marine science and technology policies. The analysis is based on the marine science and technology policies issued by the Chinese government at the central, provincial and municipal levels since 2002. The study employs an LDA model and text-mining techniques in the R language to construct a comprehensive understanding of the diffusion process. The study reveals that China's marine science and technology development policies exhibit a top-down diffusion trend. Furthermore, the implementation intensity and responsiveness of lower-level governments to higher-level policies are increasing. The diffusion of policy themes displays clear temporal characteristics, with policies undergoing continual refinement in the context of top-down content diffusion. However, there is less interaction between bottom-up policies. In this regard, we should improve the overall effectiveness of the marine strategic scientific and technological strength policy system, optimize the policy diffusion mechanism of marine strategic scientific and technological strength, and strengthen the construction of a public participation consultation system to strengthen the overall play of China's marine strategic scientific and technological strength.