Explore the vast range of titles available.

While the number of think tanks active in American politics has more than quadrupled since the 1970s, their influence has not expanded proportionally. Instead, the known ideological proclivities of many, especially newer think tanks with their aggressive efforts to obtain high profiles, have come to undermine the credibility with which experts and expertise are generally viewed by public officials. This book explains this paradox. The analysis is based on 135 in-depth interviews with officials at think tanks and those in the policy making and funding organizations that draw upon and support their work. The book reports on results from a survey of congressional staff and journalists and detailed case studies of the role of experts in health care and telecommunications reform debates in the 1990s and tax reduction in 2001.

Familial hypercholesterolaemia is a common autosomal-dominant disorder caused by mutations in three known genes. DNA-based cascade testing is recommended by UK guidelines to identify affected relatives; however, about 60% of patients are mutation-negative. We assessed the hypothesis that familial hypercholesterolaemia can also be caused by an accumulation of common small-effect LDL-C-raising alleles. In November, 2011, we assembled a sample of patients with familial hypercholesterolaemia from three UK-based sources and compared them with a healthy control sample from the UK Whitehall II (WHII) study. We also studied patients from a Belgian lipid clinic (Hôpital de Jolimont, Haine St-Paul, Belgium) for validation analyses. We genotyped participants for 12 common LDL-C-raising alleles identified by the Global Lipid Genetics Consortium and constructed a weighted LDL-C-raising gene score. We compared the gene score distribution among patients with familial hypercholesterolaemia with no confirmed mutation, those with an identified mutation, and controls from WHII. We recruited 321 mutation-negative UK patients (451 Belgian), 319 mutation-positive UK patients (273 Belgian), and 3020 controls from WHII. The mean weighted LDL-C gene score of the WHII participants (0·90 [SD 0·23]) was strongly associated with LDL-C concentration (p=1·4 × 10−77; R2=0·11). Mutation-negative UK patients had a significantly higher mean weighted LDL-C score (1·0 [SD 0·21]) than did WHII controls (p=4·5 × 10−16), as did the mutation-negative Belgian patients (0·99 [0·19]; p=5·2 × 10−20). The score was also higher in UK (0·95 [0·20]; p=1·6 × 10−5) and Belgian (0·92 [0·20]; p=0·04) mutation-positive patients than in WHII controls. 167 (52%) of 321 mutation-negative UK patients had a score within the top three deciles of the WHII weighted LDL-C gene score distribution, and only 35 (11%) fell within the lowest three deciles. In a substantial proportion of patients with familial hypercholesterolaemia without a known mutation, their raised LDL-C concentrations might have a polygenic cause, which could compromise the efficiency of cascade testing. In patients with a detected mutation, a substantial polygenic contribution might add to the variable penetrance of the disease. British Heart Foundation, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Schering-Plough, National Institute for Health Research, Medical Research Council, Health and Safety Executive, Department of Health, National Heart Lung and Blood Institute, National Institute on Aging, Agency for Health Care Policy Research, John D and Catherine T MacArthur Foundation Research Networks on Successful Midlife Development and Socio-economic Status and Health, Unilever, and Departments of Health and Trade and Industry.

Notions of research quality are contextual in many respects: they vary between fields of research, between review contexts and between policy contexts. Yet, the role of these co-existing notions in research, and in research policy, is poorly understood. In this paper we offer a novel framework to study and understand research quality across three key dimensions. First, we distinguish between quality notions that originate in research fields (Field-type) and in research policy spaces (Space-type). Second, drawing on existing studies, we identify three attributes (often) considered important for ‘good research’: its originality/novelty, plausibility/reliability, and value or usefulness. Third, we identify five different sites where notions of research quality emerge, are contested and institutionalised: researchers themselves, knowledge communities, research organisations, funding agencies and national policy arenas. We argue that the framework helps us understand processes and mechanisms through which ‘good research’ is recognised as well as tensions arising from the co-existence of (potentially) conflicting quality notions.

The aim of this study is to provide a discussion on the definitions and conceptual dimensions of Responsible Research and Innovation based on findings from the literature. In the study, the outcomes of a literature review of 235 RRI-related articles were presented. The articles were selected from the EBSCO and Google Scholar databases regarding the definitions and dimensions of RRI. The results of the study indicated that while administrative definitions were widely quoted in the reviewed literature, they were not substantially further elaborated. Academic definitions were mostly derived from the institutional definitions; however, more empirical studies should be conducted in order to give a broader empirical basis to the development of the concept. In the current study, four distinct conceptual dimensions of RRI that appeared in the reviewed literature were brought out: inclusion, anticipation, responsiveness and reflexivity. Two emerging conceptual dimensions were also added: sustainability and care.

In politics, ideas matter. They provide the foundation for economic policymaking, which in turn shapes what is possible in domestic and international politics. Yet until now, little attention has been paid to how these ideas are produced and disseminated, and how this process varies between countries.The National Origins of Policy Ideasprovides the first comparative analysis of how \"knowledge regimes\"-communities of policy research organizations like think tanks, political party foundations, ad hoc commissions, and state research offices, and the institutions that govern them-generate ideas and communicate them to policymakers. John Campbell and Ove Pedersen examine how knowledge regimes are organized, operate, and have changed over the last thirty years in the United States, France, Germany, and Denmark. They show how there are persistent national differences in how policy ideas are produced. Some countries do so in contentious, politically partisan ways, while others are cooperative and consensus oriented. They find that while knowledge regimes have adopted some common practices since the 1970s, tendencies toward convergence have been limited and outcomes have been heavily shaped by national contexts. Drawing on extensive interviews with top officials at leading policy research organizations, this book demonstrates why knowledge regimes are as important to capitalism as the state and the firm, and sheds new light on debates about the effects of globalization, the rise of neoliberalism, and the orientation of comparative political economy in political science and sociology.

Background Knowledge creation (KC) produces resources to synthesize policy evidence and contributes to breakthroughs in unresolved health problems by discovering the previously unknown. Nevertheless, few studies have attempted to analyze which factors contribute to KC. This study aims to investigate the factors hindering the active occurrence of KC by using women’s health research as a representative example of an under-researched healthcare field in South Korea. Methods The study adopted a qualitative approach to exploring factors influencing KC from researchers’ perspectives. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 14 experts who have experience in planning women’s health research, research policymaking or conducting research in South Korea. Data were analyzed using a qualitative thematic analysis according to Castleberry and Nolen. Results Factors affecting KC across all three government-funded research processes were identified. Most of the identified factors were found to be barriers to KC, rather than enablers. The key influencing factors included a focus on urgent, politicized societal issues rather than ongoing health concerns, insufficient motivation and support for researchers, weak communication within interdisciplinary research teams, and challenges with expanding research networks. Conclusion To bridge the know–do gap in the health policy-making process, it is essential to produce sufficient high-quality knowledge that can serve as policy evidence. The findings of this study illuminate the conditions faced by under-researched topics and identify the factors necessary to enhance KC. We believe our findings will help reshape and invigorate discourse and research policies on KC in healthcare.

01 02 This book explores heritage from a wide range of perspectives and disciplines and in doing so provides a distinctive and deeply relevant survey of the field as it is currently researched, understood and practiced around the world. Furthermore it establishes and develops through its various sections and chapters an accessible and clearly presented vision of heritage as a cultural process designed for use by students, advance scholars and practitioners alike. This book provides both critical insight and food for thought, directing the reader to key texts in the various aspects of the field and charting a course for future research. 13 02 Emma Waterton is a DECRA Fellow at the University of Western Sydney's Institute for Culture and Society, Australia. Her research explores the interface between heritage, identity, memory and affect. She is author of Politics, Policy and the Discourses of Heritage in Britain (2010, Palgrave Macmillan) and The Semiotics of Heritage Tourism (with Steve Watson; 2014). Steve Watson is Principal Lecturer at York St John University, UK, where he teaches cultural and heritage tourism. His research is concerned primarily with the representation and experience of heritage and he has a particular interest in Spanish travel writing. His most recent book is The Semiotics of Heritage Tourism (with Emma Waterton; 2014). 04 02 Introduction: Heritage as a Focus of Research – Past, Present and New Directions; Emma Waterton and Steve Watson PART I: HERITAGE MEANINGS 1. Heritage Methods and Methodologies; Emma Waterton and Steve Watson 2. Heritage and Discourse; Zongjie Wu and Song Hou 3. Heritage as Performance; Michael Haldrup and Jørgen Ole Bærenholdt 4. Heritage and Authenticity; Helaine Silverman PART II: HERITAGE IN CONTEXT 5. From Heritage to Archaeology and Back Again; Shatha Abu Khafajah and Arwa Badren 6. Heritage and History; Jessica Moody 7. Thinking About Others through Museums and Heritage; Andrea Witcomb 8. Heritage and Tourism; Duncan Light 9. Heritage and Geography; Nuala C. Johnson PART III: HERITAGE AND CULTURAL EXPERIENCE 10. Affect, Heritage, Feeling; David Crouch 11. Heritage and Memory; Joy Sather-Wagstaff 12. Heritage and the Visual Arts; Russell Staiff 13. Industrial Heritage and Tourism: A Review of the Literature; Alfonso Vargas Sanchez 14. Curating Sound for Future Communities; Noel Lobley 15. Heritage and Sport; Gregory Ramshaw and Sean Gammon PART IV: CONTESTED HERITAGE AND EMERGING ISSUES 16. Heritage in Multicultural Times; Cristóbal Gnecco 17. Cultural Heritage and Armed Conflict: New Questions for an Old Relationship; Dacia Viejo Rose and Marie Louise Stig Sørensen 18. Heritage and Globalisation; Rodney Harrison 19. Critical Approaches to Post-Colonial (Post-Conflict) Heritage; John Giblin PART V: HERITAGE, IDENTITY AND AFFILIATION 20. Heritage and Nationalism: An Unbreachable Couple?; Tim Winter 21. Heritage and Participation; Cath Neal 22. Heritage and Social Class; Bella Dicks 23. Of Routes and Roots: Paths for Understanding Diasporic Heritage; Ann Reed 24. Making Feminist Heritage Work: Gender and Heritage; Anna Reading PART VI: HERITAGE AND SOCIAL PRACTICE 25. 'Thinkers and Feelers' a Psychological Perspective on Heritage and Society; John Schofield 26. Heritage and Policy; John Pendlebury 27. Heritage, Power and Ideology; Katharina Schramm 28. Heritage and Economic Development; Steve Watson and María del Rosario González-Rodríguez 29. Heritage in Consumer Marketing; Georgios C. Papageorgiou 30. Heritage and Sustainable Development: Transdisciplinary Imaginings of a Wicked Philosophy; Robyn Bushell PART VII: CONCLUSIONS 31. Contemporary Heritage and the Future; Cornelius Holtorf and Anders Högberg 32. Themes, Thoughts, Reflections; Steve Watson and Emma Waterton 02 02 This book explores heritage from a wide range of perspectives and disciplines and in doing so provides a distinctive and deeply relevant survey of the field as it is currently researched, understood and practiced around the world.

Urban transformations form a central challenge for enabling global pathways towards sustainability and resilience. However, it remains unclear what kind of capacity is needed to deliver urban change that is actually transformative. Against a backdrop of current claims and efforts to achieve urban transformations, this special issue reviews the relational concept of urban transformative capacity and how it can inform novel approaches in research, policy, and practice. Drawing on seven papers analyzing diverse empirical contexts, we identify four requirements that should guide future action: (1) foster inclusion and empowerment as prerequisites, (2) close the intermediation gap and strengthen the role of local academia, (3) challenge and reinvent urban planning as a key arena, and (4) enhance reflexivity through novel self-assessment techniques. Overall, current levels of urban transformative capacity are assessed as very low, making its development a high-priority objective for all stakeholders, but for planning and research policy in particular.

With the growing number, complexity, and importance of environmental problems come demands to include a full range of intellectual disciplines and scholarly traditions to help define and eventually manage such problems more effectively. Decision Making for the Environment: Social and Behavioral Science Research Priorities is the result of a 2-year effort by 12 social and behavioral scientists, scholars, and practitioners. The report sets research priorities for the social and behavioral sciences as they relate to several different kinds of environmental problems.

People who self-harm have an increased risk of premature death. The aim of this study was to investigate cause-specific premature death in individuals who self-harm, including associations with socioeconomic deprivation. We undertook a cohort study of patients of all ages presenting to emergency departments in Oxford, Manchester, and Derby, UK, after self-poisoning or self-injury between Jan 1, 2000, and Dec 31, 2007. Postcodes of individuals' place of residence were linked to the Index of Multiple Deprivation 2007 in England. Mortality information was supplied by the Medical Research Information Service of the National Health Service. Patients were followed up to the end of 2009. We calculated age-standardised mortality ratios (SMRs) and years of life lost (YLL), and we tested for associations with socioeconomic deprivation. 30 950 individuals presented with self-harm and were followed up for a median of 6·0 years (IQR 3·9–7·9). 1832 (6·1%) patients died before the end of follow-up. Death was more likely in patients than in the general population (SMR 3·6, 95% CI 3·5–3·8), and occurred more in males (4·1, 3·8–4·3) than females (3·2, 2·9–3·4). Deaths due to natural causes were 2–7·5 times more frequent than was expected. For individuals who died of any cause, mean YLL was 31·4 years (95% CI 30·5–32·2) for male patients and 30·7 years (29·5–31·9) for female patients. Mean YLL for natural-cause deaths was 25·9 years (25·7–26·0) for male patients and 25·5 years (25·2–25·8) for female patients, and for external-cause deaths was 40·2 years (40·0–40·3) and 40·0 years (39·7–40·5), respectively. Disease of the circulatory (13·1% in males; 13·0% in females) and digestive (11·7% in males; 17·8% in females) systems were major contributors to YLL from natural causes. All-cause mortality increased with each quartile of socioeconomic deprivation in male patients (χ2 trend 39·6; p<0·0001), female patients (13·9; p=0·0002), and both sexes combined (55·4; p<0·0001). Socioeconomic deprivation was related to mortality in both sexes combined from natural causes (51·0; p<0·0001) but not from external causes (0·30; p=0·58). Alcohol problems were associated with death from digestive-system disease, drug misuse with mental and behavioural disorders, and physical health problems with circulatory-system disease. Physical health and life expectancy are severely compromised in individuals who self-harm compared with the general population. In the management of self-harm, clinicians assessing patients' psychosocial problems should also consider their physical needs. Department of Health Policy Research Programme.