Possible Conflicts Of Interest Research Articles

Living tissue and organ donation by minors

Whether living tissue and donation by minors is acceptable is the subject of considerable debate. In view of the vulnerable position of minors, the risks involved in the medical procedure, and the possible conflict of interests on the part of the parents, the legal approach in Europe has traditionally been very restrictive. However, this approach may raise concerns when a situation would arise where donation by a minor would still be in that person’s best interests. Moreover, a very restrictive approach may be difficult to reconcile with the requirement to give due weight to the views of minors in accordance with their age and maturity. In the light of these considerations, this article examines whether there is room to improve the way in which living tissue and organ donation by minors is currently regulated across Europe. We first sketch the debate about the acceptability of using minors as living donors and explore its potential clinical need. Subsequently, we assess whether international legal instruments and guidelines offer any guidance to address the issues raised. This is followed by an analysis of the legal situation in the United States. Finally, we examine in detail the legal situation in Europe. To that aim, relevant regulations were compiled, translated, and analyzed in close cooperation with national legal experts. By way of conclusion, we compare the legal approach followed in the great majority of European countries with the one preferred in the United States and make suggestions to amend European transplant regulations to better protect the interests of minors.

Egg Production and Donation: A New Frontier in the Global Landscape of Cross-Border Reproductive Care: Ethical Concerns.

Cross-border reproductive care (CBRC) is a multifaceted phenomenon. It may involve both the movement of patients to undertake assisted reproductive treatment through technologies otherwise denied and the movement of assisted reproduction professionals, egg and sperm donors and surrogates, as well as the importing and exporting of gametes. The reasons for CBRC vary between countries. In this global landscape, the search for donor oocytes is one of the main reasons for patients seeking cross-border reproductive care. The egg market has led to ethical and political concerns about the means of procuring donor oocytes, the possibility of exploiting economically underprivileged women mainly in poor countries, and the issue of the responsibility and accountability of medical doctors and fertility clinics. Ethical concerns relating to international egg donation are discussed with special focus on the issues of compensation/ reimbursement, the health and welfare of women donating eggs, informed consent to donation, the possible conflict of interest for physicians involved in egg donation programmes, and equity in the distribution of economic resources from CBRC. Finally, the need for global solutions to this global issue is underlined.

Child labour and inequality

This paper focuses on the role that inequality plays in shaping political support for child labour regulation policies. We provide a model of the evolution of child labour, fertility and human capital where the heterogeneity between low- and high-skilled workers allows for an endogenous analysis of inequality generated by child labour. Depending on the initial level of inequality, child labour regulation policies can affect the welfare of low- and high-skilled workers in different ways and therefore can have an impact on political support for their introduction. The possible conflicts of interest that may arise between the two groups can help explain the difficulties that many governments have when dealing with the issue of child labour.

Analysis of the Quality of Clinical Trials Published in Spanish-Language Dermatology Journals Between 1997 and 2012

IntroductionThe value of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) undertaken to identify an association between an intervention and an outcome is determined by their quality and scientific rigor. ObjectiveTo assess the methodological quality of RCTs published in Spanish-language dermatology journals. MethodsBy way of a systematic manual search, we identified all the RCTs in journals published in Spain and Latin America between 1997 (the year in which the CONSORT statement was published) and 2012. Risk of bias was evaluated for each RCT by assessing the following domains: randomization sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding of patients and those assessing outcomes, missing data, and patient follow-up. Source of funding and conflict of interest statements, if any, were recorded for each study. ResultsThe search identified 70 RCTs published in 21 journals. Most of the RCTs had a high risk of bias, primarily because of gaps in the reporting of important methodological aspects. The source of funding was reported in only 15 studies. Discussion and conclusionsIn spite of the considerable number of Spanish and Latin American journals, few RCTs have been published in the 15 years analyzed. Most of the RCTs published had serious defects in that the authors omitted methodological information essential to any evaluation of the quality of the trial and failed to report sources of funding or possible conflicts of interest for the authors involved. Authors of experimental clinical research in dermatology published in Spain and Latin America need to substantially improve both the design of their trials and the reporting of results.

Análisis de la calidad de los ensayos clínicos publicados en revistas dermatológicas publicadas en español entre 1997 y 2012

IntroductionThe value of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) undertaken to identify an association between an intervention and an outcome is determined by their quality and scientific rigor. ObjectiveTo assess the methodological quality of RCTs published in Spanish-language dermatology journals. MethodsBy way of a systematic manual search, we identified all the RCTs in journals published in Spain and Latin America between 1997 (the year in which the CONSORT statement was published) and 2012. Risk of bias was evaluated for each RCT by assessing the following domains: randomization sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding of patients and those assessing outcomes, missing data, and patient follow-up. Source of funding and conflict of interest statements, if any, were recorded for each study. ResultsThe search identified 70 RCTs published in 21 journals. Most of the RCTs had a high risk of bias, primarily because of gaps in the reporting of important methodological aspects. The source of funding was reported in only 15 studies. Discussion and conclusionsIn spite of the considerable number of Spanish and Latin American journals, few RCTs have been published in the 15 years analyzed. Most of the RCTs published had serious defects in that the authors omitted methodological information essential to any evaluation of the quality of the trial and failed to report sources of funding or possible conflicts of interest for the authors involved. Authors of experimental clinical research in dermatology published in Spain and Latin America need to substantially improve both the design of their trials and the reporting of results.

Acknowledgment

At times, manuscripts are submitted that present possible conflicts of interest for the editorial team or for the Editorial Panel. On those occasions, we invite a guest editor (usually a former JRME Editor) to manage the editorial process. Their work helps preserve the integrity and quality of the journal while assuring authors that their manuscripts will be reviewed fairly. The editorial team is grateful to the following individuals who have served as guest editors for manuscripts submitted to the journal in 2014.

Conflict of interest and professional ethics

In general terms, we can face a conflict of interest every time that we have to deal with competing goals and responsibilities. In a more specific sense, however, such a conflict is understood as a situation where a personal self-interest could unduly interfere with professional responsibilities. This situation appears particularly blameworthy, when public interest and protection of fundamental individual rights are involved. According to the Italian Code of medical deontology, conflict of interest is in itself a condition that a physician may well happen to experience and not ipso facto a violation of legal or moral rules. As a condition, it entails the necessity to make decisions which should always comply with an unquestionable priority: the best interest of the patient must always come first and professional behaviour can never be conditioned by improper benefits of economic or other nature. Full disclosure is required, whenever conflicts of interest may impinge upon the diagnostic or therapeutic prescriptions or the possible relationships with industries and institutions [1]. It is also worth observing that a physician is very often an employee. The employer's and the patient's interest may not coincide and this can generate a conflict of loyalties. The distinction between external and internal goods, proposed by the philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre, helps clarify this ethical challenge. By external goods, we understand those goods, such as money, power and fame, that can be achieved as a result of the practice, but are not a component of its standard of excellence and tend to be enjoyed exactly as a private property. Internal goods, on the contrary, correspond to the very fundamental goals and essence of the practice and tend to be a good for all those, who are involved in it [2]. In the present “market society”, physicians are frequently faced with possible conflicts of interest in their prescriptions, but paediatricians are particularly vulnerable when they must decide how their patients should be fed. In the case of breast-feeding, the standard on which the internal good of excellence relies has been already set in the WHO's International Code of 1981: «Health workers should encourage and protect breast-feeding» and «no financial or material inducements» should be offered «to health workers or members of their families» nor accepted by them to promote the use of other products beyond their real need [3].

Lobbbyying in the EU - The Cost of a Lack of Transparency

Over the past 20 years, European Union (EU) institutions have expanded their regulatory competences in areas such as competition law, industrial policy, and consumer protection. In consequence, policy proposals have become more complex. This has helped to increase the importance of technical expertise, often provided by outside interest groups, in the legislative process. It has also prompted calls to regulate lobbying practices and to enhance the transparency of EU decision-making. However, criticism of both the balance of interests represented through lobbying and transparency in EU decision-making continues. Concerns relate to the lack of official (and reliable) estimates of the number and type of interest groups, the amount of money spent on lobbying and possible conflicts of interest. It is difficult to calculate the cost of opaque (or under-regulated) lobbying, either in monetary terms or in loss of confidence in EU institutions. It may be argued, however, that lobbying regulation may have a positive impact in both these regards. It can also be argued that greater transparency has the potential to boost economic growth and confidence in the EU, as well as to reduce the EU's administrative costs. Efforts to improve lobbying transparency at EU level are ongoing. A revised European Transparency Register was launched in January 2015. Later that same year, the European Commission published a roadmap for the adoption of a mandatory register, and the Council of the EU initiated discussion on initial steps towards joining the transparency register already established by the Commission and the Parliament.

Políticas de declaración de conflictos de interés en revistas biomédicas españolas de orientación clínica

Professional and financial ties between the pharmaceutical industry and persons and institutions carrying out research, conducting medical training, and practicing medicine can lead to individual or corporate interests influencing decision-making and professional judgment. These conflicts of interest threaten the integrity of research, the objectivity of medical education, the quality of patient care and, more generally, public confidence in medicine. A strategy to protect research integrity and maintain public trust is for authors to communicate their possible conflicts of interest in the studies they publish. This paper analyses the editorial policies of the 16 clinically oriented biomedical journals published in Spain that were included in the JCR in 2011, in relation to authors’ conflict of interest declarations. Results show that, in their instructions to authors, most journals mention the need to disclose possible conflicts of interest and offer some sort of description of such situations. However, the definitions are lax concerning which economic relations should be declared and do not specify the extent of personal relationships. In most cases there is no standard form for declaring conflicts of interest; there is no indication of the period of time during which a relationship can be considered likely to generate a conflict; there is no indication of who will evaluate these statements and how they will be evaluated; and there is no indication as to whether these statements will be published in the articles.

REORGANIZATION IN SMES: DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AMONG STAKEHOLDERS

ABSTRACT This paper discusses the interests of stakeholders and the entrepreneur in the course of corporate reorganization as well as their decision-making processes. The research is based on the assumptions of stakeholder theory and the thesis that managing these stakeholder relationships is an essential part of a corporate reorganization. By means of a single case study, the various interests of involved parties and possible conflicts of interest in the reorganization process are illustrated. The main finding of this paper is that successful reorganization requires both sustainable collaboration with stakeholders and the resolution of conflicts of interest. Keywords Reorganization, Stakeholder Management, Case Study, SME

Omissions about the sources of contaminant emissions and depositions – A reply to comments on Taylor, M.P., Davies, P.J., Kristensen, L.J., Csavina, J., 2014. Licenced to pollute but not to poison: The ineffectiveness of regulatory authorities at protecting public health from atmospheric arsenic, lead and other contaminants resulting from mining and smelting operations. Aeolian Research 14, 35–52

[Extract] We would like to thank Dr Wilson for increasing the interest in our 2014 Aeolian Research study along with our other articles that he referred to in his letter to the journal. Before we tackle the specifics of his letter, we would like to inform the readers that our response is inclusive of several other authors whose Mount Isa research was referred to in Dr Wilson’s letter. In our Mount Isa manuscripts we have documented our relevant interests, unlike recent research on Mount Isa by others, see Taylor et al. (2015). In this regard, we believe it is relevant to report Dr Wilson’s former role as Director of the Queensland Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from 1999 to 2009 and then Senior Director of the Queensland Department of Environment and Resource Management from 2009 to 2011 (Wilson, 2015). M.P. Taylor telephoned Dr Wilson in early January 2015 to clarify his role in the Queensland Government Mount Isa Lead Management Report (Queensland Environmental Protection Agency, 2008) because we were aware that he was a Queensland Government spokesperson for matters at Mount Isa for some years (Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 2008a and Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 2008b). Dr Wilson confirmed that although he was not the primary author of the Mount Isa Lead Management Report (no author is listed in the document) (Queensland Environmental Protection Agency, 2008), he was involved with reviewing and editing the report prior to its publication. Dr Wilson also confirmed he had reviewed and edited earlier versions of this report, of which we have obtained copies. These earlier reports are significant because they contain statements and data that reveal the Queensland Government had a well-developed knowledge of the source of the environmental lead problem in Mount Isa. In this reply to his letter, we detail some relevant statements from two draft versions of the Mount Isa Lead Management Report (Queensland Environmental Protection Agency, 2007a and Queensland Environmental Protection Agency, 2007b). In light of the aforementioned information, it is surprising Dr Wilson did not consider his previous role as a Director of the Environment Protection Authority for Queensland as a possible conflict of interest.

The European initiative on low-dose risk research: from the HLEG to MELODI: Table 1.

The importance of low-dose risk research for radiation protection is now widely recognised. The European Commission (EC) and five European Union (EU) Member States involved in the Euratom Programme set up in 2008 a 'High Level and Expert Group on European Low Dose Risk Research' (HLEG) aimed at identifying research needs and proposing a better integration of European efforts in the field. The HLEG revised the research challenges and proposed a European research strategy based on a 'Multidisciplinary European LOw Dose Initiative' (MELODI). In April 2009, five national organisations, with the support of the EC, created the initial core of MELODI (http://www.melodi-online.eu) with a view to integrate the EU institutions with significant programmes in the field, while being open to other scientific organisations and stakeholders, and to develop an agreed strategic research agenda (SRA) and roadmap. Since then, open workshops have been organised yearly, exploring ideas for SRA implementation. As of October 2014, 31 institutions have been included as members of MELODI. HLEG recommendations and MELODI SRA have become important reference points in the radiation protection part of the Euratom Research Programme. MELODI has established close interactions through Memorandum of Understanding with other European platforms involved in radiation protection (Alliance, NERIS and EURADOS) and, together with EURADOS, with the relevant medical European Associations. The role of Joint Programming in priority setting, foreseen in the forthcoming EU Horizon 2020, calls for keeping MELODI an open, inclusive and transparent initiative, able to avoid redundancies and possible conflicts of interest, while promoting common initiatives in radiation protection research. An important issue is the establishment of a proper methodology for managing these initiatives, and this includes the set-up of an independent MELODI Scientific Committee recently extended to Alliance, NERIS and EURADOS, with the aim of identifying research priorities to suggest for the forthcoming Euratom research calls.

Conflicts of Interest: Setting the Limits

The declaration of conflict ofinterest is an important tool helping to understand the results of studies andopinions expressed by authors of scientific publications. In recent years it has become obligatory todeclare any conflict of interest in publications as well as for oralpresentations at scientific meetings. The idea is excellent yet the form which is currently used for thedeclaration is faulty: it is usuallyrequired and sufficient to declare connection with (in various forms – fromhonoraria to share ownership) in pharmaceutical companies. There are however many other conflicts ofinterest that have to be taken into account when interpreting presentations. In the contribution to thissymposium various possible conflicts of interest will be discussed andsuggestions will be made about ways to improve the declaration.

The tobacco industry, researchers, and ethical access to UK Biobank: using the public interest and public good.

We have asked whether the strategic purpose of the tobacco industry is something that a public resource, such as UK Biobank, should support. Tobacco industry health research has been known to work irreconcilably with the purposes of such institutions, which can be surmised as for the public good and defined to improve the provision, diagnosis, and treatment of illness and the promotion of health throughout society. We have isolated possible conflicts of interest that underlie vested research agendas of the tobacco industry and that may extend to tobacco industry-funded researchers. With respect to research, we find that the tobacco industry is entirely at odds with the purposes of public biobanking.

Scholarly Tweets: Measuring Research Impact via Altmetrics

Last spring a faculty member asked me to find theirh-index, collect the Impact Factor (IF) for all the journalsin which they were published, and compile the numberof citations each of their articles had received. WhenI presented the results, they insisted their work was moreinfluential than what the metrics suggested. I explainedwhy IFs for specialized journals were lower than moregeneralized publications such as Science or Nature, andwhy citation counts for recent articles need time to grow.I introduced the topic of altmetrics, or alternative metrics,and how they could help this faculty member build a morecomplete picture of their research impact.Altmetrics measure research impact by includingreferences outside of traditional scholarly publishing [1].These social web metrics were first proposed in 2010as a response to scholars moving their work online [2].Altmetrics analyze tweets, blogs, presentations, newsarticles, comments, or any social commentary about adiverse group of scholarly activities that are captured onthe web [2].As librarians have been explaining for years, there arelimits to what IF and h-index figures can tell us. A juniorfaculty member may have created and shared hundreds ofcaptivating lectures online but only published a fewarticles. That teaching is not reflected in their h-index.They may author a widely followed blog in which theyengage with an audience of academic peers, but there is noIF for the blog. As numbers of Twitter followers orFacebook friends quantify social media activity, altmetricsmeasure and rank researcher output, impact, and influencefrom the social web.Before continuing, I should declare any possible con-flicts of interest. I have been a tester for Altmetric.comsince September 2013, and I have enjoyed free access to theAltmetric.com Explorer. Aside from that association, I ama health librarian working in an academic research centrewithout any financial interest in altmetric products. I amwriting from the perspective of an information specialistwho uses altmetrics to track research publications, toassess the impact of my centre’s social media communica-tion strategy, and to plan future knowledge disseminationprojects.I first heard about altmetrics at the Medical LibraryAssociation conference in 2013. The topic of this intriguingnew cross-section of social media and article metricswas heard at numerous sessions. Altmetric start-ups werepushing products that measured research in a differentway, and librarians were excited to learn more.The obvious caveat about altmetrics is that they are onlyvalid and valuable for the most recent publications [3, 4].A 2013 publication in Annals of Internal Medicine on lifestyleinterventions for diabetes [5] received a score of 148 by theAltmetric.com Explorer. The score was calculated basedon 128 Twitter users sharing the publication, two bloggersciting the article, and seven Facebook users mentioning it.In context, the article was amongst the highest ever scoredin Annals of Internal Medicine, (ranked 37 out of 2470). Incontrast, a 2005 publication from the same journal oncoronary artery disease [6] received no score. Social mediamentions are rare for articles published prior to 2011 [4, 7],and altmetric products often exclude older datasets in theiranalysis [8].Some altmetric tools, such as Altmetric.com in theaforementioned example, tell us about individual articlesand others tell us about researchers. Researcher-focusedproducts, such as ImpactStory and ResearchGate, resem-ble familiar social networking sites in that they rely oncontributors creating and maintaining personal profiles.The evolution from Facebook to LinkedIn to ImpactStorymakes logical sense. User-contributed profiles becameonline re´sume´s and then dynamic curricula vitae withembedded metrics for research products. For researcher-focused altmetric tools, older publications, presentations,and products can be manually added. These products thattell us about researchers are more likely to includecontributions prior to 2011, and for that reason they arebetter for analyzing research output over time than article-focused altmetric tools.Because different altmetric tools tell different stories, thelandscape is full of start-ups positioning themselves as

Comments on the dilemma in the May issue: ‘Financial incentives’

The dilemma in the May issue dealt with the appropriateness of financial incentives, based solely on turnover, due to the possible conflict of interest that could arise between a practice's...

Editorial: Special Issue on Active and Interactive Methods in Computer Vision

While traditional computer vision research aims to replace humans in visual analysis tasks, in many emerging applications there is a need for vision algorithms that instead assist humans or cooperate with them to accomplish recognition and learning tasks. Interactive vision methods allow a human-in-the-loop to inject high-level expertise, while the system carries out low-level processing and/or leverages its own sophisticated statistical models, thereby improving with each iteration. Meanwhile, active learning approaches have the potential to limit the human involvement in such systems to only where it is most crucial. For both types of techniques, recent developments in crowdsourcing, large-scale datasets, and social networks have led to new opportunities and technical challenges. This special issue provides a snapshot of a number of interesting developments in the last few years for active and interactive vision methods. The topics solicited included: methods to actively minimize human effort, human-in-the-loop interactive systems, crowdsourcing issues relevant to vision, and ways to instill human input for machine learning beyond traditional labels. Submissions to the special issue closed in Spring of 2013. All submissions were reviewed by at least three reviewers. Three of these manuscripts (including two on which a guest editor was an author) were handled by other IJCV editors to avoid possible conflicts of interest. We have selected a set of nine papers for the special issue.

A critical examination of recent industrial surveys on agile method usage

ContextPractitioners and researchers often claim that agile methods have moved into the mainstream for the last few years. To support this claim they refer to recent industrial surveys which tend to report high rates of agile method usage. However many of these industrial surveys are conducted by agile consultants, tool vendors, professional societies and independent technology and market research organizations. This raises some important concerns about the possible conflict of interest and the overall trustworthiness of these studies. ObjectiveIn response to the above concerns, a secondary study was carried out. Its objective was to examine industrial surveys published in 2011 and 2012, determine the extent to which we could trust their reported high rates of agile method usage and provide recommendations on how quality of research could be improved in the future. MethodFollowing a rigorous search procedure, nine industrial surveys on agile method usage published in 2011 and 2012 were extracted from both academia and industry. Their thoroughness in reporting and trustworthiness were evaluated using a newly proposed assessment framework based on Guba's four attributes of trustworthiness (truth value, applicability, consistency and neutrality) and a number of methods for assessing survey research in related fields as information, communication and management studies. ResultsThe careful examination of the reviewed surveys shows that most of the studies have insufficient thoroughness in reporting and (subsequently) low trustworthiness. Only one (out of nine) study is considered as a scientific contribution in determining the current 2011/2012 rate of agile method usage. ConclusionsThe obtained results support our initial considerations about the trustworthiness of recent industrial surveys on agile method usage and suggest a number of recommendations for increasing the quality and value of future survey research in this regard.

Administracinė ir tarnybinė (drausminė) atsakomybė už viešųjų ir privačių interesų derinimo valstybės tarnyboje pažeidimus: Kai kurie probleminiai aspektai

The aim of this article is to analyse the administrative and official (disciplinary) responsibility for violations of the Republic of Lithuania Law on the Adjustment of Public and Private Interests in the Civil Service. It is shown that the regulatory failures preconditions to abuse with apply the law norms defining the administrative and official (disciplinary) responsibility for violations of the requirements of that law or altogether avoid this responsibility. This argument is supported by the analysis of the said law norms in the context of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania official constitutional doctrine, the Supreme Court of Lithuania, the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania and the Chief Official Ethics Commission practices. In order to ensure implementation of the principle of inevitability of administrative responsibility, it is advisable to do the following: to set the obligation for the COEC to apply to the court for administrative penalties for persons who violate the Law on the Adjustment of Public and Private Interests in the Civil Service; to unify terms of imposition of administrative penalties and ivestigation of possible conflicts of interests; to determine the administrative responsibility of the COEC for failure to comply with legal requirements. For tThe purposes of official (disciplinary) responsibility is often the substance of the procedural irregularities that may have a decisive influence on official inspection results and the legitimacy of the penalties. In order to ensure the control of the self-regulatory mechanism of the implementation of that law, the rational use of material, human resources, avoid duplication of functions, it is advisable to set the state and municipal institutions and agencies to pursue independently (at no additional investigation of COEC) and apply official responsibility for said law violations. Official (disciplinary) responsibility directly impacts the frame of the civil service, improves the image and gives people’s trust. Taking into account the above stated, it is advisable to set the obligation for the COEC to offer a collegial state or local authority, state or municipal agency, or the head of a superior state or municipal institution or agency to apply official (disciplinary) sanctions for persons who violate the Law on the Adjustment of Public and Private Interests in the Civil Service.

Industry–academia partnership

Effective industry–academia partnership is crucial to the advancement of the science and engineering of deployable technologies that ultimately contribute to our well being and security. This was featured in a Panel Discussion, ‘‘Academia–Industry Collaboration in Sustainable Development’’ at the 8th Conference on Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems (SDEWES 2012) held in Ohrid, Macedonia. The author reflected on the discussion in the panel session and have had some additional thoughts on this issue. The relationship between academia and industry has been examined at various fora, panel, and strategic discussions. A quick search through Google Scholar revealed approximately 170,000 publications containing those words. The most common interactions of academia with industry have been described as relationship, partnership, technology and know-how transfer, collaboration, synergy, innovations, challenges, reconciliation, opportunities, perspectives, and even cross fertilization. The search for the exact phrase ‘‘Industry–academia relationship’’ provided about 80 results from very wide range of activities. To sum up: a lot of assessment, description, and recommendation is available. However, let us consider this partnership from a little more relaxed angle. This has always been like a marriage, and like most marriages, the relationship can sometimes be somewhat uneasy. Both industry and academia need each other for their successful existence and growth. However, their interests and priorities are by definition different in a number of ways. One of the aims of this contribution is to point out and suggest possible solutions on situations where the two partners have identical interests and where sources of possible conflicts of interest exist. The industrial ventures need to maximise profit by producing useful, low cost products demanded by the market, i.e., customers. Well running and commercially successful production is a priority to most production managers. A potential innovation is in many cases undertaken only when there is no option to extending or keeping the commercially successful process. It usually carries some extra cost and possible complications for changing a well-managed production. The industry needs rather specific and well-targeted research leading to an optimal level of the innovation. The level of innovation varies in different branches of industry. In branches such as microelectronics the innovation cycle has been accelerating and products need to be continually improved for keeping or growing their market share sometimes even after a few months. Fast innovation cycle is a sign of highly successful research and innovation policy. However, this can trigger problems leading to creation of a considerable amount of waste, which is created by the fast obsolescence of products. The industrial partners have usually have only a limited number of academic institutions with whom to partner. Initial interactions are fraught with pitfalls. It requires time to develop mutual confidence. The industrial partner needs a reasonable assurance that the academic research has a good chance to be successful. Longer time relationship offers better chances of success and maintenance of confidentiality. J. J. Klemes (&) Process Systems Engineering Centre (PROSPECT), Faculty of Chemical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia