Exploring a biomimicry based approach and key barriers to evolving water infrastructure systems

Access to clean water is essential for human life and a critical issue facing much of modern society, especially as a result of the 21st Century triad of challenges – population growth, resource scarcity and pollution – which contribute to the rising complexity of providing adequate access to this essential resource for large parts of society. As such, there is now an increasing need for innovative solutions to source, treat and distribute water to cities across the globe. This position paper explores biomimicry – emulating natural form, function, process and systems – as an alternative and sustainable design approach to traditional water infrastructure systems. The key barriers to innovations such as biomimicry are summarised, indicating that regulatory and economic grounds are some of the major hindrances to integrating alternative design approaches in the water sector in developed countries. This paper examines some of the benefits of moving past these barriers to develop sustainable, efficient and resilient solutions that provide adequate access to water in the face of contemporary challenges.

Money ruins everything

In the economy of the 21st century, economic and technical innovation is increasingly based on developments that don't rely on economic incentive or public provision. Unlike 20th century innovation, the most important developments in innovation have been driven not by research funded by governments or developed by corporations but by the collaborative interactions of individuals. In most cases, this modality of innovation has not been motivated by economic concerns or the prospect of profit. This raises the possibility of a world in which some of the sectors of the economy particularly the ones dealing with innovation and creativity are driven by social interactions of various kinds, rather than by profit-oriented investment. This Article examines the development of this amateur modality of creative production, and explains how it came to exist. It then deals with why this modality is different from and potentially inconsistent with the typical modalities of production that are at the heart of modern views of innovation policy. It provides a number of policy prescriptions that should be used by governments to recognize the significance of amateur innovation, and to further the development of amateur productivity.

Women's health in the global village

As we stand at the beginning of the 21st century and behold the world before us, it seems that we are living in a time of profound change. Everywhere we look change seems afoot, demolishing our traditional securities and hastily building new ones in their place. Modern medical science has been an integral part of this change. It is not possible to ignore the advances of modern medicine nor the realities of scientific uncertainties for they are part of the shared context of our lives today. I In the past 50 years we have witnessed the discovery of DNA and more recently the mapping of the human genome, the birth of the world's first in-vitro fertilisation baby, followed by thousands worldwide in the period since, the discovery of human stem cells and the birth of Dolly the cloned sheep in Scotland. Furthermore, the processes of globalisation have ensured that an event that occurs on one side of the globe becomes an item on the evening news on the other side, creating the impression that all change takes place on our doorstep. Some of these events have provoked deep angst in the community, sparking public debate over the ethics of science and the boundaries to be imposed by law. All of these developments have changed the realm of the possible. While these advances in medical science spark debate in the developed countries, in less developed countries high rates of infectious diseases and infant and maternal mortality and the challenges of access to adequate food and clean water are priorities, highlighting international differences in health care. This article explores these differences through an analysis of globalisation and reproduction. It seeks to analyse both the meaning of globalisation and the impact of globalising trends on health laws and policies as regulators of women's health within the global village.

The 3rd Knowledge Cities World Summit Proceedings

FROM KCWS 2010 Ch airs and Summit Proceeding Ed ito rs ‘Knowledge’ is a resource, which relies on the past for a better future. In the 21st century, more than ever before, cities around the world depend on the knowledge of their citizens, their institutions and their firms and enterprises. The knowledge image, the human competence and the reputation of their public and private institutions and corporations profiles a city. It attracts investment, qualified labour and professionals, as well as students and researchers. And it creates local life spaces and professional milieus, which offer the quality of life to the citizens that are seeking to cope with the challenges of modern life in a competitive world. Integrating knowledge-based development in urban strategies and policies, beyond the provision of schools and locations for higher education, has become a new ambitious arena of city politics. Coming from theory to practice, and bringing together the manifold knowledge stakeholders in a city and preparing joint visions for the knowledge city is a new challenge for city managers, urban planners and leaders of the civic society . It requires visionary power, creativity, holistic thinking, the willingness to cooperate with all groups of the local civil society, and the capability to moderate communication processes to overcome conflicts and to develop joint action for a sustainable future. This timely Melbourne 2010 – The Third Knowledge City World Summit makes an important reminder that ‘knowledge’ is the key notion in the 21st Century development. Considering this notion, the summit aims to shed light on the multi-faceted dimensions and various scales of building the ‘knowledge city’ and on ‘knowledge-based development’ paradigms. At this summit, the theoretical and practical maturing of knowledge-based development paradigms will be advanced through the interplay between the world’s leading academic’s theories and the practical models and strategies of practitioners’ and policy makers’ drawn from around the world. As chairs of The Melbourne 2010 Summit, we have compiled this summit proceeding in order to disseminate the knowledge generated and shared in Melbourne with the wider research, governance, and practice communities. The papers in the proceedings reflect the broad range of contributions to the summit. They report on recent developments in planning and managing knowledge cities and ICT infrastructure, they assess the role of knowledge institutions in regional innovation systems and of the intellectual capital of cities and regions; they describe the evolution of knowledge-based approaches to urban development in differing cultural environments; they finally bridge the discourse on the knowledge city to other urban development paradigms such as the creative city, the ubiquitous city or the compact city. The diversity of papers presented shows how different scholars from planning cultures around the world interpret the knowledge dimension in urban and regional development. All papers of this proceeding have gone through a double-blind peer review process and been reviewed by our summit editorial review and advisory board members. We cordially thank the members of the Summit Proceeding Editorial Review and Advisory Board for their diligent work in the review of the papers. We hope the papers in this proceeding will inspire and make a significant contribution to the research, governance, and practice circles.

Knowledge Based Urban Development

The changing and challenging conditions of the 21st century have been significantly impacting our economy, society and built and natural environments. Today generation of knowledge—mostly in the form of technology and innovation—is seen as a panacea for the adaptation to changes and management of challenges (Yigitcanlar, 2010a). Making space and place that concentrate on knowledge generation, thus, has become a priority for many nations (van Winden, 2010). Along with this movement, concepts like knowledge cities and knowledge precincts are coined as places where citizenship undertakes a deliberate and systematic initiative for founding its development on the identification and sustainable balance of its shared value system, and bases its ability to create wealth on its capacity to generate and leverage its knowledge capabilities (Carrillo, 2006; Yigitcanlar, 2008a). In recent years, the term knowledge precinct (Hu & Chang, 2005) in its most contemporary interpretation evolved into knowledge community precinct (KCP). KCP is a mixed-use post-modern urban setting—e.g., flexible, decontextualized, enclaved, fragmented—including a critical mass of knowledge enterprises and advanced networked infrastructures, developed with the aim of collecting the benefits of blurring the boundaries of living, shopping, recreation and working facilities of knowledge workers and their families. KCPs are the critical building blocks of knowledge cities, and thus, building successful KCPs significantly contributes to the formation of prosperous knowledge cities. In the literature this type of development—a place containing economic prosperity, environmental sustainability, just socio‐spatial order and good governance—is referred as knowledge-based urban development (KBUD). This chapter aims to provide a conceptual understanding on KBUD and its contribution to the building of KCPs that supports the formation of prosperous knowledge cities.

The elaboration likelihood model : review, critique and research agenda

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to review, critique and develop a research agenda for the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM). The model was introduced by Petty and Cacioppo over three decades ago and has been modified, revised and extended. Given modern communication contexts, it is appropriate to question the model’s validity and relevance. Design/methodology/approach: The authors develop a conceptual approach, based on a fully comprehensive and extensive review and critique of ELM and its development since its inception. Findings: This paper focuses on major issues concerning the ELM. These include model assumptions and its descriptive nature; continuum questions, multi-channel processing and mediating variables before turning to the need to replicate the ELM and to offer recommendations for its future development. Research limitations/implications: This paper offers a series of questions in terms of research implications. These include whether ELM could or should be replicated, its extension, a greater conceptualization of argument quality, an explanation of movement along the continuum and between central and peripheral routes to persuasion, or to use new methodologies and technologies to help better understanding consume thinking and behaviour? All these relate to the current need to explore the relevance of ELM in a more modern context. Practical implications: It is time to question the validity and relevance of the ELM. The diversity of on- and off-line media options and the variants of consumer choice raise significant issues. Originality/value: While the ELM model continues to be widely cited and taught as one of the major cornerstones of persuasion, questions are raised concerning its relevance and validity in 21st century communication contexts.

An analytical study revisiting debate on interpretation of Article 38 of the Statute of International Court of Justice

Article 38(1) of the Statute of International Court of Justice (hereinafter ICJ) is today generally seen as a direction to the significant sources of international law, which the world court must consider in resolving disputes; however, the list is not exhaustive nor encompasses all the formal and material sources of the international legal system. Article 38 of the Statute of ICJ was written ninety years ago in a different world, a question is under debate in many states, whether or not sources mentioned in Article 38 of the statute are compatible with needs of 21st century ? In recent decade, many new actors come on the stage which have transformed international law and now it is not only governs relations among states but also covers many International Organizations. Article 38(2) does refer to the other possible sources but does not define them. Moreover, law is a set of rules that citizens must follow to regulate peace and order in society. These laws are binding on both the individual and the state on a domestic and international level. Do states regard this particular rule as a rule of international law? The modern legal system of states is in the form of a specified and well organized set of rules, regulating affairs of different organs of a state. States also need a body of rules for their intercourse with each other. These sets of rules among states are called “International Law.” This article examines international law, its foundation and sources. It considers whether international conventions and treaties can be the only way states can considerably create international law, or there is a need for clarity about the sources of international law. Article is divided into two parts, the first one deals with sources of international law discussed in Article 38 of the statute of International Court of Justice whereas the second one discusses the material and formal sources of law, which still need reorganization as sources of law.