Comments for Hilary Sutcliffe's Blog http://www.matterforall.org/blog This is a personal blog. It's about whatever gets me excited, winds me up or I need to get off my chest! I also want to use it to fulfill one of our aims which is to facilitate debate, so don't be shy about adding comments, supportive or critical or in general putting me right! Thu, 17 Nov 2011 16:09:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 Comment on Views on Geoengineering cock up by Views on Geoengineering Cock up 2 – response to Nature article « Hilary Sutcliffe's Blog http://www.matterforall.org/blog/2011/09/30/views-on-geoengineering-cock-up/comment-page-1/#comment-1239 Views on Geoengineering Cock up 2 – response to Nature article « Hilary Sutcliffe's Blog Thu, 17 Nov 2011 16:09:28 +0000 http://www.matterforall.org/blog/?p=378#comment-1239 [...] am actually still pretty happy with the conclusions mentioned in my original post called ‘Views on Geoengineering Cock Up’  and which are not a million miles away from their conclusions, but would like to make a few [...] [...] am actually still pretty happy with the conclusions mentioned in my original post called ‘Views on Geoengineering Cock Up’  and which are not a million miles away from their conclusions, but would like to make a few [...]

]]> Comment on The missing link: The importance of ‘cogitation’ in stakeholder engagement by Hilary http://www.matterforall.org/blog/2011/11/15/the-missing-link-the-importance-of-%e2%80%98cogitation%e2%80%99-in-stakeholder-engagement/comment-page-1/#comment-1238 Hilary Thu, 17 Nov 2011 11:48:55 +0000 http://www.matterforall.org/blog/?p=484#comment-1238 Interesting observations in this post above - 'Public Engagement is dead' from Bruce Etherington on what should public engagement be called. Lown Interesting observations in this post above – ‘Public Engagement is dead’ from Bruce Etherington on what should public engagement be called. Lown

]]> Comment on The missing link: The importance of ‘cogitation’ in stakeholder engagement by Public engagement is dead, long live…what? « Stories of science http://www.matterforall.org/blog/2011/11/15/the-missing-link-the-importance-of-%e2%80%98cogitation%e2%80%99-in-stakeholder-engagement/comment-page-1/#comment-1237 Public engagement is dead, long live…what? « Stories of science Thu, 17 Nov 2011 10:59:51 +0000 http://www.matterforall.org/blog/?p=484#comment-1237 [...] Matter’s decision to add another element to the Public Engagement Triangle and calling it Cogitate. The Matter team decided not to call it reflect as it was too “passive, academic, [...] [...] Matter’s decision to add another element to the Public Engagement Triangle and calling it Cogitate. The Matter team decided not to call it reflect as it was too “passive, academic, [...]

]]> Comment on Greenpeace response to our Responsible Research & Innovation report by Hilary Sutcliffe http://www.matterforall.org/blog/2011/11/07/greenpeace-response-to-our-responsible-research-and-innovaion-report/comment-page-1/#comment-1218 Hilary Sutcliffe Tue, 08 Nov 2011 11:01:04 +0000 http://www.matterforall.org/blog/?p=435#comment-1218 Thanks Simon, I agree. We are looking at Responsible Technology Innovation in the round, not just nano as that became clear to us too. We are also considering how to adapt the Responsible Nano Code to incorporate the new thinking of people like David and evolve that process for all emerging tech/tech innovation, so your comment is motivating! Thanks Simon, I agree. We are looking at Responsible Technology Innovation in the round, not just nano as that became clear to us too. We are also considering how to adapt the Responsible Nano Code to incorporate the new thinking of people like David and evolve that process for all emerging tech/tech innovation, so your comment is motivating!

]]> Comment on Greenpeace response to our Responsible Research & Innovation report by Simon http://www.matterforall.org/blog/2011/11/07/greenpeace-response-to-our-responsible-research-and-innovaion-report/comment-page-1/#comment-1213 Simon Mon, 07 Nov 2011 19:34:18 +0000 http://www.matterforall.org/blog/?p=435#comment-1213 I think that is an excellent and very well structured response, and if we take a 'high chunk' / low detail view of David's response we get an important and hugely instructive outline for both industry and government. This to do list would go a long way, not just with Nano, but other technologies too. Well done Hilary for inspiring the debate. I think that is an excellent and very well structured response, and if we take a ‘high chunk’ / low detail view of David’s response we get an important and hugely instructive outline for both industry and government. This to do list would go a long way, not just with Nano, but other technologies too.

Well done Hilary for inspiring the debate.

]]> Comment on Lack of ambition & poor communication on technology innovation say investors by Greenpeace response to our Responsible Research and Innovaion report « Hilary Sutcliffe's Blog http://www.matterforall.org/blog/2011/10/28/lack-of-ambition-and-poor-communication-by-companies-on-innovation-say-investor/comment-page-1/#comment-1210 Greenpeace response to our Responsible Research and Innovaion report « Hilary Sutcliffe's Blog Mon, 07 Nov 2011 11:16:42 +0000 http://www.matterforall.org/blog/?p=405#comment-1210 Here is David Santillo's response to our report which he presented at the meeting. http://www.matterforall.org/blog/category/responsible-innovation/ Here is David Santillo’s response to our report which he presented at the meeting.

http://www.matterforall.org/blog/category/responsible-innovation/

]]> Comment on Lack of ambition & poor communication on technology innovation say investors by Hilary http://www.matterforall.org/blog/2011/10/28/lack-of-ambition-and-poor-communication-by-companies-on-innovation-say-investor/comment-page-1/#comment-1195 Hilary Sat, 29 Oct 2011 08:12:04 +0000 http://www.matterforall.org/blog/?p=405#comment-1195 From Prof Peter Dobson, fonder of Oxonica, Oxford BioSensors, now Academic Director of the Begbroke Science Park and National Advisor on Nanotechnologies to RCUK. Received by email Very interesting. I can see shades of the “Open Innovation” debate in your summary. In some ways I sympathise with the idea of more information sharing at the early stages, and indeed that was the model that worked very well in Japan for many years. I am very surprised that investors were saying this, because in the past they have encouraged companies to patent or keep secret much of the potentially “market-making” work. Personally I find myself at odds with many of the open innovation protagonists too. They have usually read a bit of Chesbrough’s work and not looked at the detail......it was originally a ploy by large corporations to hoover up ideas from small companies and universities, and really nothing has changed. Under open innovation or information sharing, how do investors create value? From Prof Peter Dobson, fonder of Oxonica, Oxford BioSensors, now Academic Director of the Begbroke Science Park and National Advisor on Nanotechnologies to RCUK. Received by email

Very interesting. I can see shades of the “Open Innovation” debate in your summary.

In some ways I sympathise with the idea of more information sharing at the early stages, and indeed that was the model that worked very well in Japan for many years. I am very surprised that investors were saying this, because in the past they have encouraged companies to patent or keep secret much of the potentially “market-making” work.

Personally I find myself at odds with many of the open innovation protagonists too. They have usually read a bit of Chesbrough’s work and not looked at the detail……it was originally a ploy by large corporations to hoover up ideas from small companies and universities, and really nothing has changed. Under open innovation or information sharing, how do investors create value?

]]> Comment on Distinguishing Public Engagement – when is it Market Research, PR and Sales? by free ipad facebook http://www.matterforall.org/blog/2011/03/07/public-engagement-when-is-it-market-research-pr-and-sales/comment-page-1/#comment-1178 free ipad facebook Fri, 30 Sep 2011 19:46:51 +0000 http://www.matterforall.org/blog/?p=222#comment-1178 <strong>apple ipad future...</strong> Keep working ,great job!... apple ipad future…

Keep working ,great job!…

]]> Comment on What’s Irresponsible Innovation? by Hilary http://www.matterforall.org/blog/2011/09/08/exploring-irresponsible-innovation/comment-page-1/#comment-1171 Hilary Thu, 08 Sep 2011 11:18:26 +0000 http://www.matterforall.org/blog/?p=369#comment-1171 Thanks James, yes good points. I do think it is the way they are applied that counts, and also how we think through the repercussions of their use. Re your point about disempowerment, yes that's an interesting one I have also been pondering. But I have access to alot of the detail on nano for example and I still haven't a hope of getting to the bottom of it all, so don't know where to go with that either. Thanks also for the nice comment about www.nanoandme.org! Thanks James, yes good points. I do think it is the way they are applied that counts, and also how we think through the repercussions of their use.

Re your point about disempowerment, yes that’s an interesting one I have also been pondering. But I have access to alot of the detail on nano for example and I still haven’t a hope of getting to the bottom of it all, so don’t know where to go with that either.

Thanks also for the nice comment about http://www.nanoandme.org!

]]> Comment on What’s Irresponsible Innovation? by James Traeger http://www.matterforall.org/blog/2011/09/08/exploring-irresponsible-innovation/comment-page-1/#comment-1170 James Traeger Thu, 08 Sep 2011 11:13:10 +0000 http://www.matterforall.org/blog/?p=369#comment-1170 Interesting and thought provoking - a cautious response to your list of irresponsible innovation - surely it depends on the context? Could some of your examples could have contexts and approaches which could be responsible? Details and contexts? Is it the way these technologies are generally applied rather than themselves per se? Most things are about the 'how' rather than the 'what'? The intention and awareness, (care, craft and love) behind them? I really like your nano website - it is really balanced gives a richer fuller context to the background of this (which for some people is just plain 'bad') - couldn't this also be said/done for many of the things in your list? Does disempowerment come when people don't realise the choice they have in the details... Excuse the ramble - hopeful of use... Interesting and thought provoking – a cautious response to your list of irresponsible innovation – surely it depends on the context? Could some of your examples could have contexts and approaches which could be responsible? Details and contexts? Is it the way these technologies are generally applied rather than themselves per se? Most things are about the ‘how’ rather than the ‘what’? The intention and awareness, (care, craft and love) behind them? I really like your nano website – it is really balanced gives a richer fuller context to the background of this (which for some people is just plain ‘bad’) – couldn’t this also be said/done for many of the things in your list? Does disempowerment come when people don’t realise the choice they have in the details…
Excuse the ramble – hopeful of use…

]]>