How can crowdsourcing foster innovations in science? In general, the crowd’s diversity and the sheer number of (potential) contributors have been found to increase the likelihood of finding a novel solution (e.g., Jeppesen & Lakhani, 2010) and the chances of finding the best solution (e.g., Boudreau, Lacetera & Lakhani, 2011) to an innovation-relevant problem.
In an influential series of opinion pieces published in early 2014 (see introductory comment by Macleod et al., 2014), the medical journal The Lancet tackled the issue of “increasing value, reducing waste” in biomedical research. This series laid out in detail the issues that had led Chalmers & Glasziou to conclude in 2009 that 85% of investment in biomedical research was wasted.
As the initiator of the movement “Scientists for future,” could you give us a “peek behind the scenes”: How did you come up with the idea and how did the concept evolve? Like many others, I was concerned by the slow progress of the sustainability agenda. That is, not just climate change, but also, for example, biodiversity loss, loss of soils, food security, and questions of human rights and justice.
You are offering workshops where researchers can learn how to achieve more impact with their work outside of academia. Why is this important? I have been providing training on knowledge translation, otherwise known as impact pathways, and research impact for the last five years to build the capacity of researchers and research support staff.
Why should prevention of power abuse and supervision conflicts be considered as a matter of good scientific practice? The application of good scientific practice aims to ensure that science is, without exception pursued in accordance with the highest standards of the respective scientific field. Thereby a sustainable evolution of the science ecosystem should be achieved and its credibility and reputation in society maintained.
Can ethics in science be global and why is this topic relevant currently? One of the main recurrent debates in the Global Ethics research team (GEST) has been whether ethics can be at all “global”. My opinion is that not only it could but it should. Notwithstanding the significant differences that we easily witness in cultural, social norms and behaviour, we are faced with a strongly interconnected and interdependent world.
Doing research and getting paid for it is fantastic, but how to do that sustainably and maintain the interest of research funders? Even funders themselves cannot give a definite answer, but some trends can be pointed out. Admittedly, there are still universities and academic systems where nepotism and feudal-like arrangements rule, and the points made here do not concern them.
In September you are organizing the conference “Divergent values in sustainability assessments: love them, leave them, or change them?”. A core theme of the conference is “ethics in scientific policy advice”. Why do you think the topic of ethics in scientific policy advice is important now? Martin Kowarsch, expert on Scientific Assessments, Ethics and Public Policy Scientific expertise is important for informing politics about
Between 2016 and 2021, the UK government is channelling £1.5 billion of aid funds through the Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF) the beneficiaries of which are primarily UK researchers. They are in turn expected to work in partnership with their counterparts and other stakeholders in the ‘global south’ and in so doing, contribute to improvements in development outcomes.
Why do we need scientific advice for cities based on urban research? Why is it not only a local, but also a global matter? Scientific advice for cities cannot be seen as a local issue, particularly because sustainable development is a global matter itself and needs a common approach.
