Air quality and public health impacts of UK airports. Part I: Emissions

The potential adverse human health and climate impacts of emissions from UK airports have become a significant political issue, yet the emissions, air quality impacts and health impacts attributable to UK airports remain largely unstudied. We produce an inventory of UK airport emissions - including aircraft landing and takeoff (LTO) operations and airside support equipment - with uncertainties quantified. The airports studied account for more than 95% of UK air passengers in 2005. We estimate that in 2005, UK airports emitted 10.2 Gg [-23 to +29%] of NOx, 0.73 Gg [-29 to +32%] of SO2, 11.7 Gg [-42 to +77%] of CO, 1.8 Gg [-59 to +155%] of HC, 2.4 Tg [-13 to +12%] of CO2, and 0.31 Gg [-36 to +45%] of PM2.5. This translates to 2.5 Tg [-12 to +12%] CO2-eq using Global Warming Potentials for a 100-year time horizon. Uncertainty estimates were based on analysis of data from aircraft emissions measurement campaigns and analyses of aircraft operations.The First-Order Approximation (FOA3) - currently the standard approach used to estimate particulate matter emissions from aircraft - is compared to measurements and it is shown that there are discrepancies greater than an order of magnitude for 40% of cases for both organic carbon and black carbon emissions indices. Modified methods to approximate organic carbon emissions, arising from incomplete combustion and lubrication oil, and black carbon are proposed. These alterations lead to factor 8 and a 44% increase in the annual emissions estimates of black and organic carbon particulate matter, respectively, leading to a factor 3.4 increase in total PM2.5 emissions compared to the current FOA3 methodology. Our estimates of emissions are used in Part II to quantify the air quality and health impacts of UK airports, to assess mitigation options, and to estimate the impacts of a potential London airport expansion. © 2011 Elsevier Ltd.

Can, and should, behavioural neuroscience influence public policy?

Recent years have seen enormous demand amongst policy makers for new insights from the behavioural sciences, especially neuroscience. This demand is matched by an increasing willingness on behalf of behavioural scientists to translate the policy implications of their work. But can neuroscience really help shape the governance of a nation? Or does this represent growing misuse of neuroscience to attach scientific authority to policy, plus a clutch of neuroscientists trying to overstate their findings for a taste of power?. © 2012.

Stakeholder challenges in purchasing medical devices for patient safety.

OBJECTIVE: This study identifies the stakeholders who have a role in medical device purchasing within the wider system of health-care delivery and reports on their particular challenges to promote patient safety during purchasing decisions. METHODS: Data was collected through observational work, participatory workshops, and semi-structured qualitative interviews, which were analyzed and coded. The study takes a systems-based and engineering design approach to the study. Five hospitals took part in this study, and the participants included maintenance, training, clinical end-users, finance, and risk departments. RESULTS: The main stakeholders for purchasing were identified to be staff from clinical engineering (Maintenance), device users (Clinical), device trainers (Training), and clinical governance for analyzing incidents involving devices (Risk). These stakeholders display varied characteristics in terms of interpretation of their own roles, competencies for selecting devices, awareness and use of resources for purchasing devices, and attitudes toward the purchasing process. The role of "clinical engineering" is seen by these stakeholders to be critical in mediating between training, technical, and financial stakeholders but not always recognized in practice. CONCLUSIONS: The findings show that many device purchasing decisions are tackled in isolation, which is not optimal for decisions requiring knowledge that is currently distributed among different people within different departments. The challenges expressed relate to the wider system of care and equipment management, calling for a more systemic view of purchasing for medical devices.

Idea Competitions under scrutiny: Acquisition, intelligence or public relations mechanism?

Idea Competitions (ICs) are becoming a popular mechanism chosen by firms to perform Open Innovation. They are a way to engage with external sources of knowledge such as individual entrepreneurs and small firms who are asked to submit ideas and compete for a prize. However, little is known about the success of ICs as acquisition mechanisms. The researchers conducted interviews in five multinational companies to evaluate the effects of using ICs as an acquisition mechanism. Although still preliminary, the results of this study show that the success of ICs as an acquisition mechanism remains uncertain because their output (i.e. the number of ideas acquired) is often low compared to the input (i.e. the number of ideas submitted) and effort required to run them (e.g. to vet ideas). Across the cases observed, ICs appear to be more successful at identifying and acquiring early-stage ideas, particularly those outside the current business focus. The study shows that ICs deliver other functional benefits such as improved intelligence and public relations and that these need to be considered as part of the evaluation of the IC's success. The paper concludes by discussing the conditions in which ICs are implemented and the implications for Open Innovation theory. © 2013 Elsevier Inc.