A new pathway for the regulation and governance of health research

The Academy's review, 'A new pathway for the regulation and governance of health research' was published in January 2011. The report was prepared by a working group, chaired by Professor Sir Michael Rawlins FMedSci, convened in response to an invitation from Government to review the regulation and governance of UK health research involving human participants, their tissue or their data.The report proposes four key principles that should underpin the regulation and governance framework around health research in the UK, and makes recommendations to:Create a new Health Research Agency (HRA) to rationalise the regulation and governance of all health research. Include within the HRA a new National Research Governance Service to facilitate timely approval of research studies by NHS Trusts. Improve the UK environment for clinical trials.Provide access to patient data that protects individual interests and allows approved research to proceed effectively. Embed a culture that values research within the NHS.

The Emergence and Governance of Euroregions: The Case of the Euregio on the Dutch-German Border

Amb una història que data de la dècada de 1950, la EUREGIO és un de les més antigues euroregions a Europa. Es pot considerar com un cas exitós d'una regió transfronterera (CBR) en el sentit que s'ha establert fermament com una agència de fronteres dins del seu tram de la frontera holandesa-alemanya. L'EUREGIO també ha estat una de les protagonistes principals darrere de l'Associació de Regions Frontereres Europees (ARFE), que en les últimes dècades va actuar per difondre el model d'euroregió a tot el territori europeu. Aquest capítol té diversos objectius. En primer lloc, es presenta el cas de la EUREGIO i presenta evidència sobre la seva història, estructura orgànica i polítiques. En segon lloc, s'analitzen les condicions del context en què la EUREGIO ha sorgit i les estructures de govern que es van crear com a resultat. Es fa especial èmfasi en la posició i el paper de l'Euroregió en el context més ampli del marc de governança europea multinivell generat per la política de cohesió de la UE. El capítol conclou amb un intent d'avaluar l'èxit i l'impacte de la EUREGIO i una discussió dels reptes relacionats amb la doble funció de l'EUREGIO com a representant dels interessos de les autoritats locals i les agències de cohesió de la UE posada en pràctica de les polítiques.

Towards Integrated Governance of Landscape Development : The Swiss Model of Regional Nature Parks

Coherent regulation of landscape as a resource is a major challenge. How can the development interests of some actors (eg cable car operators and property developers) be reconciled with those of others (agriculture, forestry) and with conservation of biodiversity and scenic value? To help understand how the newly introduced Regional Nature Parks (RNPs) can improve the coherence of the regulation regime in Switzerland, we highlight current direct mechanisms for regulation of landscape as a resource (bans, inventories, subsidies) as well as indirect mechanisms (taking place through the regulation of the physical basis of landscapes, eg forest, land, and water planning policies). We show that RNPs are fundamentally innovative because they make it possible to manage and coordinate indirect strategies for appropriate regulation of resources at a landscape scale. In other words, RNPs enable organization of governance of landscape as a resource in a perimeter that is not necessarily restricted to administrative boundaries.

Do PES Improve the Governance of Forest Restoration?

Payments for Environmental Services (PES) are praised as innovative policy instruments and they influence the governance of forest restoration efforts in two major ways. The first is the establishment of multi-stakeholder agencies as intermediary bodies between funders and planters to manage the funds and to distribute incentives to planters. The second implication is that specific contracts assign objectives to land users in the form of conditions for payments that are believed to increase the chances for sustained impacts on the ground. These implications are important in the assessment of the potential of PES to operate as new and effective funding schemes for forest restoration. They are analyzed by looking at two prominent payments for watershed service programs in Indonesia-Cidanau (Banten province in Java) and West Lombok (Eastern Indonesia)-with combined economic and political science approaches. We derive lessons for the governance of funding efforts (e.g., multi-stakeholder agencies are not a guarantee of success; mixed results are obtained from a reliance on mandatory funding with ad hoc regulations, as opposed to voluntary contributions by the service beneficiary) and for the governance of financial expenditure (e.g., absolute need for evaluation procedures for the internal governance of farmer groups). Furthermore, we observe that these governance features provide no guarantee that restoration plots with the highest relevance for ecosystem services are targeted by the PES

A Three-Dimensional Framework to Analyse the Governance of Population Registers

In June 2006, the Swiss Parliament made two important decisions with regards to public registers' governance and individuals' identification. It adopted a new law on the harmonisation of population registers in order to simplify statistical data collection and data exchange from around 4'000 decentralized registers, and it also approved the introduction of a Unique Person Identifier (UPI). The law is rather vague about the implementation of this harmonisation and even though many projects are currently being undertaken in this domain, most of them are quite technical. We believe there is a need for analysis tools and therefore we propose a conceptual framework based on three pillars (Privacy, Identity and Governance) to analyse the requirements in terms of data management for population registers.

Governance of Universities and Scientific Innovation

In this chapter the tension between the tendency of scientific disciplines to "diversify" and the capacities of universities to give new scientific fields an institutional "home" is tackled. The assumption is that new scientific fields must find support among scientists and cognitive units of universities in order to be included. As science is a strongly competitive social field, inclusion often meets resistance. It is argued in this chapter that opportunities for new scientific fields to be included depend on the kind of governance regimes ruling universities. A comparison of the former bureaucratic-oligarchic governance model in most European universities with the existing new public management governance model demonstrates that the propensity of universities to include new scientific fields has increased though there might be a price to pay in terms of which fields stand a chance of being integrated and in terms of institutional possibilities for the invention of new ideas.