Africa and Asia need a rational debate on GM crops

Policy-makers in developing countries should not be swayed by the politicized arguments dominant in Europe

Spiritual capital: the co-evolution of an ethical framework based on Abrahamic religious values in the Islamic tradition

Purpose – The aim of this paper is to investigate how values from within Abrahamic religions could be adopted to improve liberal market economies’ (LMEs’) corporate governance business practices. Design/methodology/approach – The concept of spiritual capitalism is explained from an Islamic perspective by adopting three universal Abrahamic values to critically analyse LMEs and offer an ethical alternative to current capitalism concerns. Findings – It is found that LMEs can be improved by considering all stakeholders, putting ethics before economics, and introducing shared risk/reward plus lower debt. Originality/value – The paper compares LMEs/Co-ordinated market economies (CMEs)/Islamic countries economies (ICEs) within an ethical framework for LMEs.

Secondary school teachers' perspectives on teaching about topics that bridge science and religion

The question of where to locate teaching about the relationships between science and religion has produced a long-running debate. Currently, Science and Religious Education (RE) are statutory subjects in England and are taught in secondary schools by different teachers. This paper reports on an interview study in which 16 teachers gave their perceptions of their roles and responsibilities when teaching topics that bridge science and religion and the extent to which they collaborated with teachers in the other subject area. We found that in this sample, teachers reported very little collaboration between the curriculum areas. Although the science curriculum makes no mention of religion, all the science teachers said that their approaches to such topics were affected by their recognition that some pupils hold religious beliefs. All the RE teachers reported struggling to ensure students know of a range of views about how science and religion relate. The paper concludes with a discussion about implications for curriculum design and teacher training.

Rerum cognoscere causas: part I - How do the ideas of system dynamics relate to traditional social theories and the voluntarism/determinism debate?

This is the first half of a two-part paper which deals with the social theoretic assumptions underlying system dynamics. The motivation is that clarification in this area can help mainstream social scientists to understand how our field relates to their literature, methods and concerns. Part I has two main sections. The aim of the first is to answer the question: How do the ideas of system dynamics relate to traditional social theories? The theoretic assumptions of the field are seldom explicit but rather are implicit in its practice. The range of system dynamics practice is therefore considered and related to a framework - widely used in both operational research (OR) and systems science - that organises the assumptions behind traditional social theoretic paradigms. Distinct and surprisingly varied groupings of practice are identified, making it difficult to place system dynamics in any one paradigm with any certainty. The difficulties of establishing a social theoretic home for system dynamics are exemplified in the second main section. This is done by considering the question: Is system dynamics deterministic? An analysis shows that attempts to relate system dynamics to strict notions of voluntarism or determinism quickly indicate that the field does not fit with either pole of this dichotomous, and strictly paradigmatic, view. Part I therefore concludes that definitively placing system dynamics with respect to traditional social theories is highly problematic. The scene is therefore set for Part II of the paper, which proposes an innovative and potentially fruitful resolution to this problem.

Rerum cognoscere causas: part II - opportunities generated by the agency/structure debate and suggestions for clarifying the social theoretic position of system dynamics

This is the second half of a two-part paper dealing with the social theoretic assumptions underlying system dynamics. In the first half it was concluded that analysing system dynamics using traditional, paradigm-based social theories is highly problematic. An innovative and potentially fruitful resolution is now proposed to these problems. In the first section it is argued that in order to find an appropriate social theoretic home for system dynamics it is necessary to look to a key exchange in contemporary social science: the agency/structure debate. This debate aims to move beyond both the theories based only on the actions of individual human agents, and those theories that emphasise only structural influences. Emerging from this debate are various theories that instead aim to unite the human agent view of the social realm with views that concentrate solely on system structure. It is argued that system dynamics is best viewed as being implicitly grounded in such theories. The main conclusion is therefore that system dynamics can contribute to an important part of social thinking by providing a formal approach for explicating social mechanisms. This conclusion is of general significance for system dynamics. However, the over-arching aim of the two-part paper is to increase the understanding of system dynamics in related disciplines. Four suggestions are therefore offered for how the system dynamics method might be extended further into the social sciences. It is argued that, presented in the right way, the formal yet contingent feedback causality thinking of system dynamics should diffuse widely in the social sciences and make a distinctive and important contribution to them. Felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas Happy is he who comes to know the causes of things Virgil - Georgics, Book II, line 490. 29 BCE

Beyond the environmentalist's paradox and the debate on weak versus strong sustainability

Environmentalists generally argue that ecological damage will (eventually) lead to declines in human well-being. From this perspective, the recent introduction of the “environmentalist’s paradox” in BioScience by Raudsepp-Hearne and colleagues (2010) is particularly significant. In essence, Raudsepp-Hearne and colleagues (2010) claimed that although ecosystem services have been degraded, human well-being—paradoxically—has increased. In this article, we show that this debate is in fact rooted in a broader discussion on weak sustainability versus strong sustainability(the substitutability of human-made capital for natural capital). We warn against the reductive nature of focusing only on a stock–flow framework in which a natural-capital stock produces ecosystem services. Concretely, we recommend a holistic approach in which the complexity, irreversibility, uncertainty, and ethical predicaments intrinsic to the natural environment and its connections to humanity are also considered.

The Italian academies 1525-1700: networks of culture, innovation and dissent

The intellectual societies known as Academies played a vital role in the development of culture, and scholarly debate throughout Italy between 1525-1700. They were fundamental in establishing the intellectual networks later defined as the ‘République des Lettres’, and in the dissemination of ideas in early modern Europe, through print, manuscript, oral debate and performance. This volume surveys the social and cultural role of Academies, challenging received ideas and incorporating recent archival findings on individuals, networks and texts. Ranging over Academies in both major and smaller or peripheral centres, these collected studies explore the interrelationships of Academies with other cultural forums. Individual essays examine the fluid nature of academies and their changing relationships to the political authorities; their role in the promotion of literature, the visual arts and theatre; and the diverse membership recorded for many academies, which included scientists, writers, printers, artists, political and religious thinkers, and, unusually, a number of talented women. Contributions by established international scholars together with studies by younger scholars active in this developing field of research map out new perspectives on the dynamic place of the Academies in early modern Italy. The publication results from the research collaboration ‘The Italian Academies 1525-1700: the first intellectual networks of early modern Europe’ funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council and is edited by the senior investigators.

What does current generative theory have to say about the explicit-implicit debate?

Taking a generative perspective, we divide aspects of language into three broad categories: those that cannot be learned (are inherent in Universal Grammar), those that are derived from Universal Grammar, and those that must be learned from the input. Using this framework of language to clarify the “what” of learning, we take the acquisition of null (and overt) subjects in languages like Spanish as an example of how to apply the framework. We demonstrate what properties of a null-subject grammar cannot be learned explicitly, which properties can, but also argue that it is an open empirical question as to whether these latter properties are learned using explicit processes, showing how linguistic and psychological approaches may intersect to better understand acquisition.

How students view the boundaries between their science and religious education concerning the origins of life and the universe

Internationally in secondary schools, lessons are typically taught by subject specialists, raising the question of how to accommodate teaching which bridges the sciences and humanities. This is the first study to look at how students make sense of the teaching they receive in two subjects (science and religious education) when one subject’s curriculum explicitly refers to cross-disciplinary study and the other does not. Interviews with 61 students in seven schools in England suggested that students perceive a permeable boundary between science and their learning in science lessons and also a permeable boundary between religion and their learning in RE lessons, yet perceive a firm boundary between science lessons and RE lessons. We concluded that it is unreasonable to expect students to transfer instruction about cross-disciplinary perspectives across such impermeable subject boundaries. Finally we consider the implications of these findings for the successful management of cross-disciplinary education.

Stakeholder perceptions of event attribution in the loss and damage debate

In 2013 the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) for loss and damage (L&D) associated with climate change impacts was established under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). For scientists, L&D raises ques- tions around the extent that such impacts can be attributed to anthropogenic climate change, which may generate complex results and be controversial in the policy arena. This is particularly true in the case of probabilistic event attribution (PEA) science, a new and rapidly evolving field that assesses whether changes in the probabilities of extreme events are attributable to GHG emissions. If the potential applications of PEA are to be considered responsibly, dialogue between scientists and policy makers is fundamental. Two key questions are considered here through a literature review and key stakeholder interviews with representatives from the science and policy sectors underpinning L&D. These provided the opportunity for in-depth insights into stakeholders’ views on firstly, how much is known and understood about PEA by those associated with the L&D debate? Secondly, how might PEA inform L&D and wider climate policy? Results show debate within the climate science community, and limited understanding among other stakeholders, around the sense in which extreme events can be attributed to climate change. However, stake- holders do identify and discuss potential uses for PEA in the WIM and wider policy, but it remains difficult to explore precise applications given the ambiguity surrounding L&D. This implies a need for stakeholders to develop greater understandings of alternative conceptions of L&D and the role of science, and also identify how PEA can best be used to support policy, and address associated challenges.