BMP treatment technologies, monitoring needs, and knowledge gaps: status of the knowledge and relevance within the Tahoe Basin

This Technical memorandum fulfills Task 2 for Agreement 03-495 between El Dorado County and the Office of Water Programs at California State University Sacramento and their co-authors, Bachand & Associates and the University of California Tahoe Research Group: 1) a review of current stormwater treatment Best Management Practices (BMP) in the Tahoe Basin and their potential effectiveness in removing fine particles and reducing nutrient concentrations; 2) an assessment of the potential for improving the performance of different types of existing BMPs through retrofitting or better maintenance practices; 3) a review of additional promising treatment technologies not currently in use in the Tahoe Basin; and 4) a list of recommendations to help address the knowledge gaps in BMP design and performance. ... (PDF contains 67 pages)

Networks for Knowledge: Social Media enthuses students of Early Years Education

Networks for Knowledge (n4k Ltd) are a Work Based Learning organisation which specialises in Early Years Education. Training and Development Manager, Elaine Wareing has developed the use of Facebook and Twitter to promote peer learning and interaction beyond the classroom. It also allows trainers to discuss ideas and challengers with a wider group of learners. This has allowed practitioners across a wide geographical area to share their thoughts and ideas together on some of the subjects relating to early years practice.

Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States: a state of knowledge report from the U.S. Global Change Research Program

Executive Summary: Observations show that warming of the climate is unequivocal. The global warming observed over the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases. These emissions come mainly from the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas), with important contributions from the clearing of forests, agricultural practices, and other activities. Warming over this century is projected to be considerably greater than over the last century. The global average temperature since 1900 has risen by about 1.5ºF. By 2100, it is projected to rise another 2 to 11.5ºF. The U.S. average temperature has risen by a comparable amount and is very likely to rise more than the global average over this century, with some variation from place to place. Several factors will determine future temperature increases. Increases at the lower end of this range are more likely if global heat-trapping gas emissions are cut substantially. If emissions continue to rise at or near current rates, temperature increases are more likely to be near the upper end of the range. Volcanic eruptions or other natural variations could temporarily counteract some of the human-induced warming, slowing the rise in global temperature, but these effects would only last a few years. Reducing emissions of carbon dioxide would lessen warming over this century and beyond. Sizable early cuts in emissions would significantly reduce the pace and the overall amount of climate change. Earlier cuts in emissions would have a greater effect in reducing climate change than comparable reductions made later. In addition, reducing emissions of some shorter-lived heat-trapping gases, such as methane, and some types of particles, such as soot, would begin to reduce warming within weeks to decades. Climate-related changes have already been observed globally and in the United States. These include increases in air and water temperatures, reduced frost days, increased frequency and intensity of heavy downpours, a rise in sea level, and reduced snow cover, glaciers, permafrost, and sea ice. A longer ice-free period on lakes and rivers, lengthening of the growing season, and increased water vapor in the atmosphere have also been observed. Over the past 30 years, temperatures have risen faster in winter than in any other season, with average winter temperatures in the Midwest and northern Great Plains increasing more than 7ºF. Some of the changes have been faster than previous assessments had suggested. These climate-related changes are expected to continue while new ones develop. Likely future changes for the United States and surrounding coastal waters include more intense hurricanes with related increases in wind, rain, and storm surges (but not necessarily an increase in the number of these storms that make landfall), as well as drier conditions in the Southwest and Caribbean. These changes will affect human health, water supply, agriculture, coastal areas, and many other aspects of society and the natural environment. This report synthesizes information from a wide variety of scientific assessments (see page 7) and recently published research to summarize what is known about the observed and projected consequences of climate change on the United States. It combines analysis of impacts on various sectors such as energy, water, and transportation at the national level with an assessment of key impacts on specific regions of the United States. For example, sea-level rise will increase risks of erosion, storm surge damage, and flooding for coastal communities, especially in the Southeast and parts of Alaska. Reduced snowpack and earlier snow melt will alter the timing and amount of water supplies, posing significant challenges for water resource management in the West. (PDF contains 196 pages)

Knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of management strategies and regulations of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary by commercial fishers, dive operators, and environmental group members: A baseline characterization and 10-year comparison

This research is part of the Socioeconomic Research & Monitoring Program for the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS), which was initiated in 1998. In 1995-96, a baseline study on the knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of proposed FKNMS management strategies and regulations of commercial fishers, dive operators and on selected environmental group members was conducted by researchers at the University of Florida and the University of Miami’s Rosenstiel School of Atmospheric and Marine Science (RSMAS). The baseline study was funded by the U.S. Man and the Biosphere Program, and components of the study were published by Florida Sea Grant and in several peer reviewed journals. The study was accepted into the Socioeconomic Research & Monitoring Program at a workshop to design the program in 1998, and workshop participants recommended that the study be replicated every ten years. The 10-year replication was conducted in 2004-05 (commercial fishers) 2006 (dive operators) and 2007 (environmental group members) by the same researchers at RSMAS, while the University of Florida researchers were replaced by Thomas J. Murray & Associates, Inc., which conducted the commercial fishing panels in the FKNMS. The 10-year replication study was funded by NOAA’s Coral Reef Conservation Program. The study not only makes 10-year comparisons in the knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of FKNMS management strategies and regulations, but it also establishes new baselines for future monitoring efforts. Things change, and following the principles of “adaptive management”, management has responded with changes in the management plan strategies and regulations. Some of the management strategies and regulations that were being proposed at the time of the baseline 1995-96 study were changed before the management plan and regulations went into effect in July 1997. This was especially true for the main focus of the study which was the various types of marine zones in the draft and final zoning action plan. Some of the zones proposed were changed significantly and subsequently new zones have been created. This study includes 10-year comparisons of socioeconomic/demographic profiles of each user group; sources and usefulness of information; knowledge of purposes of FKNMS zones; perceived beneficiaries of the FKNMS zones; views on FKNMS processes to develop management strategies and regulations; views on FKNMS zone outcomes; views on FKNMS performance; and general support for FKNMS. In addition to new baseline information on FKNMS zones, new baseline information was developed for spatial use, investment and costs-and-earnings for commercial fishers and dive operators, and views on resource conditions for all three user groups. Statistical tests were done to detect significant changes in both the distribution of responses to questions and changes in mean scores for items replicated over the 10-year period. (PDF has 143 pages.)

Sentido común y "shared knowledge" en el doblaje cinematográfico

Santamaría, José Miguel; Pajares, Eterio; Olsen, Vickie; Merino, Raquel; Eguíluz, Federico (eds.)

Knowledge Exchange study: How Research Tools are of Value to Research: Use Cases and Recommendations

Research tools that are freely available and accessible via the Internet cover an emergent field in the worldwide research infrastructure. Clearly, research tools have increasing value for researchers in their research activities. Knowledge Exchange recently commissioned a project to explore use case studies to show research tools’ potential and relevance for the present research landscape. Makers of successful research tools have been asked questions such as: How are these research tools developed? What are their possibilities? How many researchers use them? What does this new phenomenon mean for the research infrastructure? Additional to the Use Cases, the authors offer observations and recommendations to contribute to effective development of a research infrastructure that can optimally benefit from research tools. the Use Cases are: •Averroes Goes Digital: Transformation, Translation, Transmission and Edition •BRIDGE: Tools for Media Studies Researchers •Multiple Researchers, Single Platform: A Virtual Tool for the 21st Century •The Fabric of Life •Games with A Purpose: How Games Are Turning Image Tagging into Child’s Play •Elmer: Modelling a Future •Molecular Modelling With SOMA2 •An Online Renaissance for Music: Making Early Modern Music Readable •Radio Recordings for Research: How A Million Hours of Danish Broadcasts Were Made Accessible •Salt Rot: A Central Space for Essential Research •Cosmos: Opening Up Social Media for Social Science A brief analysis by the authors can be found: •Some Observations Based on the Case Studies of Research Tools

Report on Knowledge Exchange workshop Sustainable Business Models for Open Access Services

The work on the sustainability of organisations which exist to provide services to the Open Access community, commissioned by Knowledge Exchange, identified that such organisations need to have a business-like approach and that the absence of rigorous attention to all aspects of the business may lead to sub-optimal performance and, potentially, failure. With this in mind, a Sustainability Index was drafted for consideration by attendees at the Knowledge Exchange workshop on sustainability in Utrecht (February 2014). Over fifty participants, representing Open Access service providers, IT-infrastructure and research funders, and users,worked to making past recommendations from KE work on Open Access actionable.

Knowledge Exchange meeting on Research tools

Knowledge Exchange investigated the diversity and complexity of research tools, techniques and researchers' behaviours to identify how and where the initiative can eliminate barriers to cooperation between different parts of the whole system. Experts from the partner organisations and beyond exchanged knowledge and experiences, during our meeting on Research Tools which took place on 27 June 2012, in Utrecht, the Netherlands. Experts considered ‘the use of digital technologies in research' or ‘digital research tools' with a view to informing future Knowledge Exchange activities.

IPR POLICY AND SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE REPORT FOR SCIENTIFIC POLICY MAKERS

The report provides recommendations to policy makers in science and scholarly research regarding IPR policy to increase the impact of research and make the outcomes more available. The report argues that the impact of publicly-funded research outputs can be increased through a fairer balance between private and public interest in copyright legislation. This will allow for wider access to and easier re-use of published research reports. The common practice of authors being required to assign all rights to a publisher restricts the impact of research outputs and should be replaced by wider use of a non-exclusive licence. Full access and re-use rights to research data should be encouraged through use of a research-friendly licence.

KE Workshop report: Report Knowledge Exchange workshop Making data count - Research Data and Research Assessment

The possibilities of digital research have altered the production, publication and use of research results. Academic research practice and culture are changing or have already been transformed, but to a large degree the system of academic recognition has not yet adapted to the practices and possibilities of digital research. This applies especially to research data, which are increasingly produced, managed, published and archived, but play hardly a role yet in practices of research assessment. The aim of the workshop was to bring experts and stakeholders from research institutions, universities, scholarly societies and funding agencies together in order to review, discuss and build on possibilities to implement the culture of sharing and to integrate publication of data into research assessment procedures. The report 'The Value of Research Data - Metrics for datasets from a cultural and technical point of view' was presented and discussed. Some of the key finding were that data sharing should be considered normal research practice, in fact not sharing should be considered malpractice. Research funders and universities should support and encourage data sharing. There are a number of important aspects to consider when making data count in research and evaluation procedures. Metrics are a necessary tool in monitoring the sharing of data sets. However, data metrics are at present not very well developed and there is not yet enough experience in what these metrics actually mean. It is important to implement the culture of sharing through codes of conducts in the scientific communities. For further key findings please read the report.

Report on Knowledge Exchange workshop Price of keeping knowledge: financial streams for digital preservation

In contrast to cost modeling activities, the pricing of services must be simple and transparent. Calculating and thus knowing price structures, would not only help identify the level of detail required for cost modeling of individual instititutions, but also help develop a ”public” market for services as well as clarify the division of task and the modeling of funding and revenue streams for data preservation of public institutions. This workshop has built on the results from the workshop ”The Costs and Benefits of Keeping Knowledge” which took place 11 June 2012 in Copenhagen. This expert workshop aimed at: •Identifying ways for data repositories to abstract from their complicated cost structures and arrive at one transparent pricing structure which can be aligned with available and plausible funding schemes. Those repositories will probably need a stable institutional funding stream for data management and preservation. Are there any estimates for this, absolute or as percentage of overall cost? Part of the revenue will probably have to come through data management fees upon ingest. How could that be priced? Per dataset, per GB or as a percentage of research cost? Will it be necessary to charge access prices, as they contradict the open science paradigm? •What are the price components for pricing individual services, which prices are currently being paid e.g. to commercial providers? What are the description and conditions of the service(s) delivered and guaranteed? •What types of risks are inherent in these pricing schemes? •How can services and prices be defined in an all-inclusive and simple manner, so as to enable researchers to apply for specific amount when asking for funding of data-intensive projects?Please