Posted: February 14th, 2015
Suggested MSc Dissertation Topics: 2014/15
Suggested MSc Dissertation Topics: 2014/15
Name of Faculty and Proposed Topics
Rocio Alvarez Tinoco
1. 1. Regional innovation systems
2. 2. Learning mechanisms and capabilities building in firms and systems
3. 3. Agribusiness development in developing countries
4. 4. Exploring agro-systems of innovation
5. 5. Innovation processes in firms/organisations
6. 6. Institutions and their role in innovations systems
Saurabh Arora
1. 1. Biofuels and other ‘green’ energy
a. a. Competition between resources for food production and for different ‘generations’ of biofuels
b. b. Biofuel production and so-called ‘land grabs’ in the global south
c. c. Future biofuels and synthetic biology
d. d. Possibilities of steering biofuel production toward greater sustainability (socioeconomic as well as environmental) by designing and implementing
standards and certification protocols
e. e. Micro-level histories of biofuel production in the 20th century
f. f. Tensions in the development of mini- and micro-hydropower projects in the third world
g. g. Controversies around wind power development (e.g. wind farms in the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, Oaxaca, Mexico)
h. 2. Food and agriculture
i. a. Global commodity chains and making food production/consumption more sustainable
j. b. Effects of food safety and environmental standards on farmers’ cultivation and post-harvest practices
k. c. Distribution of value between farm-workers, farmers, exporters and retailers in global commodity chains
l. d. Comparison of societal controversies around and public consultation on genetically modified seeds in different parts of the world
m. e. History of large-scale agricultural development projects (e.g. ‘Operation Flood’ or National Dairy Development Board in India and compulsory
villagization in Tanzania)
n. f. Farmer-led innovations in agricultural production technologies, credit provision and crop marketing (post-harvest) arrangements
o. g. Small farmer participation in and exclusion from agricultural technology development projects
p. h. Agricultural innovations and the landless in the global south
q. i. Effects of economic models and theories on agricultural development policies in different developing economies
r. 3. Urban environments
s. a. Post-disaster reconstruction of housing in urban areas of the third world
t. b. Grassroots visions of urban ‘improvement’ and their realization in marginalized parts of the city
u. c. User cooperatives and new infrastructure development
v. d. Role of existing urban infrastructures, and the social practices structured by them, in the development of bicycling for individual mobility
w. e. Collective aspects of individual mobility in urban areas
x. f. The role of social media and other technologies in the organization of protest events; as well as the development and deployment of new surveillance
technologies by the state for controlling such events
y. g. Policy impact of virtual protest events such as online petitions by Avaaz.org etc.
z. h. Base (or bottom) of the pyramid initiatives and ‘inclusive innovation’ in urban informal settlements
Theories/Methods:
Actor-Network Theory, Innovation Systems, or Transitions Frameworks as aides in constructing historical and/or ethnographic narratives. Other qualitative work may be
built on discourse analysis of documents in the public domain (such as those from the World Bank or the UN) or on structured interviews (in person or through
Skype/phone) with a purposively sampled group of actors. Experiments with creative mixing of methods (quantitative and qualitative) also possible.
Rob Byrne
a. 1. Low carbon energy in developing countries, particularly low-income developing countries, and especially in relation to any of: energy access, poverty
reduction, gender, and/or sustainability.
b. 2. I would be especially interested in approaches that include the politics of the above topics, the emergence of the new low carbon technologies in these
contexts, and links to industrialisation.
c. 3. Theories/methodologies of interest include strategic niche management, transitions theory; pathways approach (see the STEPS Centre website for more
information on this), discourse/narrative analysis and potentially other qualitative approaches (I am happy to discuss possibilities).
Rose Cairns
a. 1. Topics related to the politics, ethics and governance of climate geoengineering, or climate governance more broadly.
b. 2. From a methodological point of view, if students are interested in utilising discourse/framing analyses in their work, and in particular using Q
methodology (to examine discourses around any topic area), I’d be happy to supervise them.
Roberto Camerani
a. 1. Diffusion and adoption of consumer technologies
b. 2. User-generated innovations
Tommaso Ciarli
a. 1. Development, Technological change, and Institutions
a. a. Agriculture, standards, contract farming and the global food market
b. b. The emergence of agriculture technologies (including GMO): with particular focus on rice
c. c. Conflicts, illegal markets, and institutions
d. d. Private economic activity and development (Business Development)
e. e. Micro macro relations in technological change and development
f. f. Inclusive innovation
a. 2. Technological trajectories
a. a. Identification and analysis of trajectories and pathways of technology
b. b. Empirical analysis, cases studies and literature reviews
a. 3. Structural change, development and growth
a. a. Long run models and empirical analysis
b. b. Growth and organisational/institutional changes
c. c. History of technology structural change and the divergence of world income
d. d. Trade and growth, with particular focus on firm export and growth
a. 4. Environmental impact of consumption
a. a. Models of firm and consumer behaviour
b. b. Empirical analysis and case studies on firm and consumer behaviour
a. 5. Firm level studies
a. a. Trade and firm productivity
b. b. Innovation , technical change and (un)employment
a. 6. Inequality
a. a. Measurement of non-income inequality
b. b. Innovation, technical change and inequality (firm and/or household data)
a. 7. Methods
a. a. Simulation model (agent based models)
b. b. Data analysis with micro data
c. c. Scientometrics
d. d. Mixed methods
Alex Coad
a. 1. Firm-level innovation, including evaluations of R&D subsidies and other interventions
a. 2. ‘Creative slack,’ innovation, and organizational performance. How much failure should be tolerated?
b. 3. Selection effects in an evolving economy. Selection via differential growth and selection via exit. Darwinian processes of variation, selection and
retention in the evolving economy.
?
a. 4. Interfirm interactions: positive knowledge spillovers, industry trends, rivalry effects in limited factor markets, etc.
b. 5. Econometric theory: Interpretation of regression estimates in the presence of measurement error.
c. 6. Entrepreneurial learning. Do entrepreneurs learn from experience? Do they learn from failure? Through which mechanisms? What is the evidence?
d. 7. Firm growth – theories and evidence. Characteristics and determinants of firm growth rates. What are the strategies available to firms that seek growth
(replication, diversification, internationalization, mergers/acquisitions, franchising, etc.)?
?
a. 8. Revisiting Gibrat 1931 (Fluency in French language needed)
b. 9. Industries evolve as some firms overtake others. How can we investigate the persistence of leadership in particular industries? Are some industries
more turbulent than others? What insights do we get from applying the new methodology called ‘rank clocks’??Batty M (2006). Rank clocks. Nature, vol 444, 30 November
2006, pp592-596
c. 10. What are the characteristics and regularities of spinoffs? How do they differ from other new firms? What is the contribution of spinoffs to economic
growth? This work will involve analysing the data in Andersson and Klepper (2013). Enthusiasm for quantitative analysis is compulsory. This work might lead to a co-
authored publication.?Andersson M., Klepper S., (2013). Characteristics and performance of new firms and spinoffs in Sweden. Industrial and Corporate Change 22 (1),
245–280.
Rachael Durrant
1. 1. The roles played by civil society organisations (CSOs) in sustainability transitions
1. 2. Transitions to sustainable healthy diets in the UK
1. 3. The development of organic farming, agroecology and food sovereignty as green niches in the UK
Rumy Hasan
a. 1. Corporate social responsibility/corporate social governance
b. 2. Non-governmental organisations and Multinationals
c. 3. Corporate Ethics
d. 4. FDI in Russia
e. 5. Strategic alliances – especially equity joint ventures
f. 6. Culture and development
Ralitsa Hiteva
a. 1. Governing energy transformations /low carbon energy transitions at different levels and scales (such as transnational municipal networks and smart
cities)
b. 2. Approaches and challenges to govern and understand interactions between different infrastructure sectors, especially water, energy, transportation and
ICT (this could involve smart grids, electric vehicles)
c. 3. Politics of urban transformations involving green/sustainability experiments, diverse/informal/sharing economies, and/or creative spaces
d. 4. Processes and practices of intermediation in governing socio-technical change
Sabine Hielscher
a. 1. Grassroots innovations in particular looking at community energy in the UK (such as Transition Towns) or community digital manufacturing (such as
FabLabs)
b. 2. Stainable consumption in particular using ‘Practice Theory’
c. 3. Studies that apply/critically examine ‘Strategic Niche Management’
Michael Hopkins
a. 1. Licensing intellectual property – the key to unlocking open innovation?
a. 2. Routes through the financial maze for high technology firms and their investors (esp. topics related to venture capital and stock markets) – a database
of UK firms may be made available of this.
b. 3. Managing change at organisational and business ecology levels (e.g. diffusion of innovations)
c. 4. How has the national context for stem cell innovation shaped observed progress and practices?
d. 5. How is genetic testing regulated in China and how does this affect innovation?
e. 6. What is the role of intellectual property in stimulating medical innovation in China?
f. 7. An assessment of credible alternatives to the modern drug innovation model
g. 8. What services in drug discovery are UK universities and hospitals offering and do these organisations have any comparative advantages over their
private sector counter-parts?
h. 9. Managing sectoral change – i.e. co-ordination of multiple firms and mixed networks of organisations.
i. 10. Strategy for emerging high tech firms esp. financing, alliances, and IP
j. 11. Government policies for promoting high-tech firms
k. 12. Mapping the publications of the emerging uk biotech industry
l. 13. Mapping the patents of the emerging uk biotech industry
m. 14. Government policies for allocation of public sector research funding and use of foresight
n. 15. In particular I am interested in supervising a wide range of projects related to healthcare innovation (products or services) and related industrial
dynamics. Example topics include:
a. a. Genetic testing and new healthcare services
b. b. The future of pharmaceutical innovation
c. c. The relationships between biotech and pharmaceutical firms
d. d. Intellectual property rights in biotech (especially DNA patenting and diagnostics)
e. e. Studies on biotech./ biomedical innovation, especially drugs/ diagnostics
Phil Johnstone
a. 1. Sustainable transitions, particularly Western Europe focus; research focussed on the German Energiewende, and UK energy policy, or even better a
comparison of the two particularly welcome.
b. 2. Anything related to the governance of nuclear technology; Nuclear waste; nuclear fusion policy
c. 3. The role of the state in the promotion of low carbon technologies
d. 4. Democracy, politics and power in innovation systems and transitions
e. 5. Geographical debates related to sustainable transitions
f. 6. Destabilisation and discontinuity in technological systems
g. 7. The governance of Small Modular nuclear Reactors (SMRs)
h. 8. Security-led innovation, nuclear-propelled submarines, nuclear weapons research in the UK, military-related R and D, innovation under illegality,
innovation and counter-innovation in the ‘war on drugs’
i. 9. Technological and cultural innovations in the evolution and diffusion of techno music
Florian Kern
(limited availability)
a. 1. Technology and innovation policy
b. 2. Innovation in renewable energy technologies
c. 3. Governance of socio-technical transitions towards sustainability
d. 4. Energy and climate policy (esp. UK energy efficiency policy)
e. 5. Local sustainability initiatives and their role in contributing to transition processes
Frederique Lang
a. 1. Entrepreneurship / Start-ups / Spin-offs / Academic Entrepreneurship
b. 2. Innovations in the Biotechnology sector
c. 3. Knowledge and Technology Transfer
d. 4. Cluster /Regional innovation systems
e. 5. Methods:
a. a. Social network analysis
b. b. Bibliometrics and scientometrics (especially publications)
c. c. Natural language processing methods (machine learning) applied to Big Data
Ben Martin
a. 1. Technology foresight: a critical review:
a. a. Technology Foresight is now in widespread use around the world. How effective has it proved? Has it live up to its promise? Have the concerns about the
threat posed to basic research been justified? How is foresight evolving in the light of changing demands and pressures? Can it cope with the need to engage with the
full range of stakeholders or ‘publics’?
a. 2. The changing nature and role of the university:
a. a. Universities are under increasing pressures to produce useful knowledge and train students with useful skills. What can society reasonably expect from
universities in return for public investment? What does the future hold for the university? Is its existence under threat as some have suggested?
a. 3. Plagiarism, fraud and other malpractice in scientific research:
a. a. Is it increasing/spreading? What are the factors that give rise to it? What policies are most effective in combating it?
a. 4. Towards a European Research Area:
a. a. The European Commission has a vision of creating a European Research Area in which national and EU policies for research are brought into closer
harmony. How realistic is this vision? What advantages would it bring? Would it enable Europe to challenge American hegemony in science?
a. 5. The European Research Council
a. a. How successful has it proved?
a. 6. The Precautionary Principle
a. a. It is consistent with scientific and technological progress? How much precaution should we adopt? Who should decide and how? Have we got the balance
right (e.g. in the debate over global warming)?
a. 7. The interaction between science and society
a. a. What are the lessons and the policy implications of the debate over (i) GM food or (ii) animal testing of new health products or (iii) MMR and autism
or (iv) stem cell research (or any other recent hotly debated scientific topic)?
a. 8. The interaction between policy researchers and policy makers
a. a. Why has science policy research/innovation studies not had more impact on policy making? Do we have a ‘model’ of the interactions between policy
research and policy making?
b. b.
a. 9. The relations of STS (science and technology studies) to science policy research
a. a. Why has there not been more interaction between STS and science policy research? Case-studies of where there has/has not been interaction (e.g. in the
area of socio-technical transitions).
a. 10. The evolution of STS and the implications for science policy research
a. a. e.g. the ‘third wave’ of science studies (Harry Collins) as a ‘controversy’ study – why has this notion been so critically received within the STS
community?
a. 11. Alternative medicine
a. a. Should it be subject to the same scientific and regulatory scrutiny as conventional medicine (e.g. double-blind testing, regulated clinical trials)?
What are the pros and cons and the likely consequences? What are the policy implications?
Mari Martiskainen
a. 1. Topics related to community energy, especially those approaching community energy as a grassroots innovation/social innovation
b. 2. Energy efficiency policies related to domestic buildings/households in the UK
c. 3. Social innovation and tacit knowledge
d. 4. Strategic niche management mainly in niche development theory, especially linking to the emergence and diffusion of niches.
Mariana Mazzucato
a. 1. The economics of clean technology
a. 2. The economics of innovation in State Investment Banks
b. 3. The feedback between finance and innovation
Caitriona McLeish
a. 1. Allegations of chemical weapons use in Syria
b. 2. The role of social media in the Syrian civil war
c. 3. The pursuit of climate altering technologies in chemical weapons programmes
d. 4. Implementing international law nationally: what implications does Bond v United States have for implementation of international treaties in the US?
e. 5. Has the changing nature of war affected our understandings of the utility of chemical and biological weapons?
a. 6. Assess the role of non-traditional actors (civil society, industry etc) in the implementation of the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention and the 1993
Chemical Weapons Convention.
b. 7. What is the military identity of Ecstasy?
c. 8. Anything on chemical, biological (or nuclear) weapons or warfare.
Erik Millstone
a. 1. The evolution of institutional structures for, and practices of, providing scientific advice to a government, or a comparison between two countries.
a. 2. A review of debates about how to conduct an assessment of the environmental impact of fracking.
a. 3. A review debates about the safety of the new artificial sweetener called Stevia.
a. 4. Review of debates about the meaning and desirability of the ‘sustainable intensification’ of agricultural production.
a. 5. A review of the ways in which responsibilities for the scientific and policy aspects of GM crop regulation are shared between the European Commission
as its expert advisors.
a. 6. A review of the scientific and policy debates about Acrylamide. Acrylamide is a genotoxic carcinogen that has been found in significant quantities in
some processed foods. Different national agencies, and their expert advisors, are adopting and proposing to adopt different sets of measures to respond to possible
risks.
a. 7. H5N1 bird flu’ reached the UK in early 2007, and the UK government asserted that it’s management of the challenge had learnt all the lessons of the
BSE saga, yet Ministers also insisted that they were always and only following scientific advice. An analysis of science and politics in the Bird Flu saga would
provide the basis for a fascinating dissertation.
a. 8. The EU’s REACH chemicals regulatory regime – a review of the policy debate about its creation, or a review of debates about its current operations.
a. 9. A review of the agricultural research programme and policies of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
a. 10. A review of the ways in which the Japanese government has responded to the crisis in the Fukushima nuclear power plant. (Only for students who can
read Japanese.)
Paul Nightingale
a. 1. Business models, business model innovation (particularly high growth firms)
b. 2. Modelling the growth of start ups
c. 3. Crowdfunding – particularly the performance of firms
d. 4. Innovation in Bio-Pharmaceuticals
e. 5. High growth firms and their funding
f. 6. Venture Capital, Angel Investment and /or the AIM market
g. 7. The performance of university spin-out firms
h. 8. Science Policy – particularly the strategy of the research councils
i. 9. Science policy of big data, modelling, statistics
j. 10. Creative Digital Content firms (anything on the Brighton creative media cluster)
k. 11. Financial infrastructure, particularly ICT systems and shadow banking infrastructure
l. 12. Geo-engineering policy (using technology to change the climate and address global warming) or a review of the technologies involved
m. 13. Public Private Partnerships and infrastructure
n. 14. Innovation in Infrastructure
o. 15. Changing legal controls over dual use materials
Colin Nolden
a. 1. Scales and spaces of energy transitions
b. 2. Community, local and regional energy
c. 3. Scales and spaces of energy transitions
d. 4. Energy services and energy service companies
e. 5. Servitisation and product-service systems
Gabriele Pellegrino
a. 1. Obstacles to innovation and characteristics of non-innovators. Conceptual and econometric analysis of the nature, characteristics and effect of those
factors that can hinder the innovation activity at firm level.
b. 2. Sources and modes of innovation at firm levels. Which are the main drivers and determinants of firm’s innovation activity? Do different innovative
inputs lead to different innovative outputs?
c. 3. Empirical (micro-econometric) and conceptual analysis of the relationship between firm age and Innovation. Are there any substantial differences in the
nature and effects of innovation activity carried out by firms of different ages (matures vs young)?
d. 4. Innovation activity and firm growth. Is innovation a key driver of firm performance? Which is the relationship between innovation and employment growth
at firm level? Is innovation activity labour friendly or labour saving?
e. 5. Persistence of innovation and path dependence. Empirical (micro-econometric) and conceptual analysis of the drivers of persistence in innovation
activity (with particular reference to R&D).
Matias Ramirez
a. 1. Knowledge management
a. 2. Knowledge work
b. 3. Knowledge transfer
c. 4. Networks
d. 5. Labour mobility
e. 6. Communities of Practice
f. 7. Chinese national system of innovation
g. 8. Latin American system of innovation
h. 9. Science parks
i. 10. Clusters
j. 11. Creative industries
k. 12. Skills
l. 13. Inclusion and Innovation in 3rd world clusters
m. 14. Comparative analysis of management and employment regimes
a. a. In particular how professional, occupational, practice-based networks are configured across national systems
James Revill
a. 1. Anything on Chemical or Biological weapons or warfare
b. 2. Anything on science and international security/terrorism
c. 3. Biosecurity and biosafety/regulation in the biotechnology sector
d. 4. Responsibilities of scientist/engagement with the scientific community
e. 5. General topics linking science & technology with war/security/terrorism
f. 6. Drones/UAVs
g. 7. “Cyberwar” or “Cybersecurity”
h. 8. “non-lethal weapons”
i. 9. Improvised Explosive Devices
j. 10. Tacit knowledge and terrorism
k. 11. “Terrorist” innovation
Karoline Rogge
(limited availability)
a. 1. I am interested in supervising dissertations studying the role of the policy mix for sustainable energy innovations and the governance of energy
transitions. Within this broad range I am currently particularly interested in supervising dissertations which could relate to one of the following themes:
a. a. Regime analysis of the electricity sector in Germany (or other country) following MLP (e.g. based on literature review and expert interviews)
b. b. Impact of the policy mix for low carbon or low energy innovations (e.g. through analysis of survey data or company case studies)
c. c. Green industrial policy (e.g. policy mix supporting supply chain build up for Offshore Wind industry in Newhaven)
Daniele Rotolo
a. 1. Network dynamics featuring in emerging technologies (see www.danielerotolo.com/#!netgenesis/c8kr)a. a. How do (inter-organisational) networks
form and evolve in the shapes we know when a new technology emerges?
b. b. How does the agency of actors shape the evolution of networks in the case of emerging technologies?
c. c. What policy implications can be designed to stimulate the development of network structures that support the emergence of a wider variety of
technological options?
a. 2. Dynamic of funding systems (see www.cancerresearchuk.org/sites/default/files/interdependencies_ of_funders_in_the_uk_march2014.pdf)a. a. How do
different funding sources (e.g. governmental, charitable, industrial) complement each other in the production of scientific and technological knowledge?
b. b. To what extent complementarities between different funding sources can stimulate research that is more likely to exert an impact, to be
interdisciplinary, or to be of a translational nature?
c. c. Why do complementarity effects between different research funding sources emerge?
a. 3. Mapping science and technology dynamics (see www.interdisciplinaryscience.net/overlaymapping)a. a. How can mapping techniques provide analysts and
policy makers with intelligence on the dynamics of science and technology?
b. b. How can novel sources of data (e.g. ‘big data’ and altmetrics) be used to trace the evolution of science and technology?
Carlos Sato
a. 1. Project Management and:
a. a. Strategy: how do firms use projects/programmes to implement their strategy and achieve their strategic goals?
b. b. Business transformation: the use of projects and programmes to deliver business transformation.
c. c. Innovation management: exploring links between project and innovation management.
d. d. Innovation systems: using projects and programmes to build innovation systems.
e. e. Actuality: how are projects actually managed?
f. f. Mega-Projects: exploring challenges, long-term impact, sustainability issues, strategies and/or risks to manage mega-projects (such mega-projects are
usually those in the range of billions of pounds).
g. g. Software Development projects: exploring distinctive characteristics of software development/IT projects, including innovative methods such as extreme
programming, scrum, etc.
a. 2. Systems Integration & integrated solutions:
a. a. How do firms search for knowledge and solutions to meet customer needs?
b. b. How do firms recognise opportunities and develop them (eg. Into a contract)?
a. 3. Distributed Innovation & Open Innovation:
a. a. How do firms change their product/service development processes in order to involve innovative outsiders? Do firms use platforms for collaboration?
b. b. To what extent should firms control their own product/service development processes or outsource them to third party firms?
c. c. What is the changing role of R&D in a more open and collaborative environment?
d. d. What kind of new business models are emerging?
a. e. How is ICT leveraging the practice of innovation in a more open and collaborative environment?
Maria Savona
1. 1. Conceptual and Empirical (micro-econometric and/or qualitative) analysis of obstacles to innovation and characteristics of non-innovators
2. 2. Conceptual and empirical (econometric and/or qualitative) analysis of the employment and productivity impact of innovation in firms and sectors
3. 3. Conceptual and measurement issues of innovation in services and intangible sectors and their economic impact
4. 4. Cooperation for innovation with public and private partners in services
1. 5. Industry dynamics and structural change in developing countries
1. 6. Empirical analysis of innovation and regional development
1. 7. Global value chains in services and their impact on development
1. 8. Global value chain in services versus backward and forward linkages as development strategies
Gregor Semieniuk
a. 1. Firm competition and innovation
b. 2. Financial market selection and innovation
c. 3. Renewable energy sector firm performance in the real and financial markets
Josh Siepel
a. 1. Entrepreneurship, innovation and strategy, particularly in the financing of entrepreneurship and innovation, managerial factors contributing to the
growth of firms, characteristics and pathways of high growth firms, and policy measures to support small firm growth.
a. a. Patents and Venture Capital – The relationship between firms’ patenting behaviour and their ability to acquire venture capital has gone under-explored.
A student working on this topic would be helping to collect and analyse patent data for a sample of small firms that have received venture capital.
b. b. Policies in support of small firms – Small firms are widely perceived to be drivers of growth, and governments are eager to create policies to provide
support (financial or managerial) to these firms. Case studies analysing the success of schemes in the UK or elsewhere would be of interest.
c. c. Fund managers and governance of VC and equity investments – Work on the composition and characteristics of teams that make investments is a gap in the
literature and an area with considerable possibility.
d. d. Impact of venture capital on firm expansion – Although receipt of equity funding is understood by policymakers to be linked to growth, we do not know
as much about how exactly VC is used by firms and its impact. This is particularly true in relation to UK firms, where there are questions about the level of value
addition by investors.
e. e. Rise of the UK Alternative Investment Market (AIM) – For years Europe has been perceived to be disadvantaged by the absence of a small-cap, technology
specialist market like NASDAQ. However the UK Alternative Investment Market has since its creation in 1995 played that role to some extent, though it hasn’t evolved
exactly as intended. There is space for some interesting qualitative and/or quantitative work examining the history and characteristics of AIM and its ability to
provide capital for UK SMEs.
f. f. Technology accelerator programmes and the performance of firms who participate in them.
Steve Sorrell
(limited availability)
a. 1. I would be interested in dissertations on sustainable energy topics, particularly if they involve original case study research or the quantitative
analysis of secondary data. Some possible topics include:
a. a. Innovative financing models for energy efficiency
b. b. Global coal depletion
c. c. Embodied energy and energy efficiency
d. d. Comparative evaluation of energy scenarios
e. e. Barriers to energy efficiency in retrofitting commercial buildings
Ed Steinmueller
a. 1. Empirical and methodological examination of advanced communication services and technology (including, but not limited to, the use of the Internet, the
past and future prospects for WWW server (or ASP) applications, big data, video messaging and other applications of local and wide area networks)
b. 2. Emerging technologies involving electronic networks and services including intelligent energy grids, multimedia, electronic books, Internet services,
and related topics.
c. 3. Developments in the open source software community and other virtual communities that produce information goods (such as Wikipedia).
d. 4. The economic and technological determinants of the boundary between ‘tacit’ and ‘codified knowledge and changes in this boundary over time in specific
industries or types of knowledge.
e. 5. Any aspect of the integrated circuit industry or other electronics manufacturing activity, especially aspects related to globalisation of production
and use.
Technological change in the process of software production, especially the issue of whether the barriers for developing country participation through outsourcing and
similar relationships are increasing or diminishing and studies of software development failure.
Examination of rules, procedures or practices in the exchange of information (data, research methods, and results) across organisational boundaries, especially co-
operative research projects in ‘basic’ science or the co-operative development of complex systems or ‘platforms’.
Extensions and critiques of the existing literature on scientific and technological knowledge including the theory of knowledge networks, the ‘publicness’ vs.
’embedness’ of scientific and technological research results, ideas about ‘open innovation.
Andy Stirling
Andy has indicated that he is keen to supervise dissertation topics that relate to the?questions on the research tab of my website?
http://www.sussex.ac.uk/spru/people/peoplelists/person/7513/
a. 1. Directions of Progress: Given that research and innovation in any particular area can progress in many alternative directions (and that not all can be
realised together), how can society enable a more inclusive, deliberate, democratic, plural and reflexive politics of choice among possible pathways?
b. 2. Knowledge and Power: How can public policy (including science advice and research governance) be more open, equitable and accountable in dealing with
relations between environmental sustainability, technological risk, scientific uncertainty, social values, political priorities, economic interests and the exercise of
power?
c. 3. Precaution and Participation: What are the links between progressive social and scientific advance and innovation (on one hand) and participatory
democracy, social responsibility and precaution (on the other)? How can we minimise political manipulation and avoid simplistic ideas that these imperatives are
somehow necessarily in tension?
d. 4. ‘Opening Up’ Social Appraisal: Which are the most appropriate and practical ways under different conditions, to get the best out of specialist
analysis, whilst valuing public scepticism, engaging ‘stakeholders’, learning from many different experiences and respecting and empowering the least privileged groups
in society?
e. 5. Diversity and Transformation: How can society achieve global transitions to more genuinely sustainable technologies – in areas like nuclear power,
energy, gm crops, food policy, biotechnology, neuroscience, biodiversity, chemicals and public health? What roles can be played by making our technologies and
institutions more secure, diverse, flexible and resilient?
a. 1. I am interested in supervising dissertations on topics at the interfaces of creativity, entrepreneurship, and innovation. Particularly I am interested
in the connections between these fields at individual and organizational levels, the relationships between individual agency, processes, practices and tools. For
example:
a. a. Individual and organizational capability development in new ventures.
a. b. Role of innovation in new venture growth.
a. c. Creativity and innovation practices for opportunity recognition.
Joe Tidd
Puay Tang
a. 1. Cybercrime – looking at cybercrime through the lenses of innovation studies (for instance, the ecosystem for cybercrime), the reasons for its growth,
and policy and technical measures to counteract them.
b. 2. Intellectual Property Management strategies for firms, for instance, what forms of protection (formal, semi-formal and informal) – why and how, forms
of enforcement – why and how.
a. 3. Digital innovation, for example, innovation in electronic services; e-commerce
b. 4. The contributions of social scientists to the non-academic community (policy-makers, business, NGOs, etc.)
c. 5. Governments in the UK and worldwide want to capture the social and economic benefits from publicly funded research for a number of reasons, including
accountability for the spending of public funds. In the UK and elsewhere, for instance, the U.S., it is government policy to have an “impact assessment” of any policy
measure/initiative. The development of impact assessment and evaluation of research methods is an ongoing research activity. Dissertation topics, therefore, could
address methods for impact assessment/evaluation of publicly funded research, or involve fieldwork that examines the processes and ways of capturing the social and
economic benefits of publicly funded research, including the challenges involved in trying to capture these benefits.
d. 6. University-industry relations/academic entrepreneurship, which addresses how universities undertake knowledge transfer activities, outreach activities
and commercialization of research outputs. This topic will also include:
a. a. The models for knowledge transfer and commercialization
b. b. How universities manage the Intellectual Property generated by researchers
c. c. How universities develop business opportunities
d. d. Universities interactions with business – barriers to and opportunities for engaging with industry, and research collaboration
James Wilsdon
a. 1. The politics of scientific advice
b. 2. The use of evidence in policy making
c. 3. Public engagement in science & technology
d. 4. UK science and innovation policy
e. 5. Science, democracy & emerging economies
f. 6. The future of metrics for research assessment (scientometrics, altmetrics, data analytics etc.)
g. 7. Interdisciplinarity in policy processes – especially interactions between natural & social sciences
h. 8. The economic & social impact of UK social science.
Ohid Yaqub
a. 1. Pharmaceutical and medical innovation, especially vaccine innovation
b. 2. Global health, neglected diseases and development/capacity building
c. 3. ICTs, social media and hyperlocal media
4. Science parks, clustering and agglomeration
Dear Baoxin:
You are making progress. People may have researched the question before but they do not agree on the answer.
Your answers are not very credible. Depends on how long in the future.
a) China is already using renewable energy,
b) In the foreseeable future Chine will still use fossilfuels,
c) The EXTENT or level of renewable energy in the future is what needs to be investigated.
Best regards, Ed
Dear Professor Ed,
Thank you for your patience to answer.
I finally understand a little of what is the research question, which is no one have researched before, and the question have alternative answers that do not have
obvious answers. I need to find some evidences and logic to support my answers.
In summary, my research question change to ‘What is the future of renewable energy in China?. Then explain the alternative answers a)China use renewable energy in the
future. b)China still use fossil fuels in the future. c)It depends on opportunities and constraints.
Do you think it can work?
King regards,
Baoxin Wu
Dear Baoxin:
First, ‘what renewable energy is’ is NOT a research question. It is a question that you look up — it is a question of fact. A research question has alternative
answers, none of which is obvious. The stronger answer can be found by using facts (evidence) and logic.
‘Your research question is not yet a research question but a topical question.’
I say this because a) your idea of research question appears to be that research is something you ‘look up’ (i.e. the answer is already available in articles or books
and all you need to do is find the ‘right’ one), b) the question ‘What is the future of renewable energy in China?’ is the simplest possible way to combine China,
renewable energy and ‘the future’ in a question — this future is not predetermined, it depends on what human beings and particularly Chinese human beings do – what
choices they make. These choices, in turn, depend on opportunities and constraints — investment constraints, competing priorities constraints, and the opportunity to
improve the environment. How these constraints and opportunities are grasped (or not) shape or influence the future development of renewable energy in China. A
critical essay recognizes that each of these constraints and opportunities is subject to debate, i.e. people will not agree on the importance or size of these
constraints and opportunities. Research may help in providing evidence and logic in support of one or the other side of these debates.
Hope this helps…
Best regards, Ed
Dear Professor Ed,
Thanks your reply. After your explain about my research topic, I have clear ideas.
However, I am sorry. I am not very understand the last paragraph. What is that meant?
My research topic is not yet a research topic?
So do I need to change the topic like ‘what is the future of renewable energy in China?’?
But I think this question’s answer should be what renewable energy is. Not the yes, no and it depends answers.
Best wishes,
Baoxin Wu
Dear Baoxin:
The outline is fine. In better English, the research question might be Is it feasible to employ renewable energy to replace fossil fuel in China?
This question has three answers yes, no, or it depends. Your answers suggest what it might depend upon — simplifying the answers are a) investment, b) government
commitment and c) environmental decline.
So a first issue with feasibility involves the extent and pace of change in moving from fossil fuel to renewables — this might suggest a revised research question in
which you set a goal or benchmark for how far to move — perhaps less than 100% and perhaps sooner than the 22nd Century.
A second answer is that the answers are not really alternatives, but instead different facets or aspects of the issue — each raises its own research question
a) at what prices would investment in renewables to replace 50% of fossil fuel use be justified? b) are government commitments in this area credible in view of China’s
development priorities? c) can the current experience of environmental decline with fossil fuels be addressed by other measures — e.g. more distant power stations or
relocation of polluting industries away from large cities. If you are referring to global warming, then b) again becomes the central issue.
In summary, your research question is not yet a research question but a topical question — what is the future of renewable energy in China? You can ask this question
in a way in which there are yes, no and it depends answers (see above) but it is only the it depends line of investigation that leads to real research questions —
when you examine what it depends upon new questions emerge and these are closer to research question — alternative answers that do not have obvious answers.
Dear Professor Ed,
I have already prepared the research topic about the PMS first assignment.
The research topic is ‘Does feasibility implement the renewable energy instead of fossil fuel in China?’. But I am not clear the structure of this essay.
The first structure of this essay is:
1.Research topic
2.Research background
3.Aims and Objectives
4.Literature review
5.Methodology
6.References
Or I just need to analysis two or more possible answers about this research topic. For example:
1.To implement the renewable energy need capital and technology, so it will face a big challenge.
2.Government policies support the renewable energy development, so it has good prospects.
3.Using fossil fuel will cause environmental pollution, so it simply has no other choice but to rapidly develop its biofuel and renewable energy production.
And then put some literature review and methodology to explain these answers.
I am confusing whether this research topic work, and which one is the right structure. Now I’m lost in this crossroads. Could you give me some advices? Thank you.
King regards,
Baoxin Wu
Serious attention:Hello, my order will use Turnitin anti-plagiarism software to check, so no copy no plagiarism. If I test the order in Turnitin system show it
plagiarism, I will apply refund money due to the reason bad quality. And please finish it on time,no any reason for extend?Thanks
Please ensure the quality for the essay,it is important for me?Thanks
Module Guide for Perspectives, Methods and Skills for Science, Technology & Innovation Studies (750N1)
Read following Requirement carefully?
MY Dissertation topic:What is the future of renewable energy in China?’
Asssesment
See Sussex Direct to Confirm — (2500 word essay)
Within the topic that you currently plan to study for your MSc dissertation, please provide an essay describing the motivation for your study (the reasons why the
topic of your study is of interest for research) and identify one or more research questions, of a type suitable for an MSc dissertation, to which two or more answers
could be advanced. In addition your essay should also accomplish the following:
(a) Explain the alternative to answers to the research question(s).
(b) Identify key literature relevant to framing the research question(s) and answers and which may also provide evidence concerning possible answers to the
question or questions.
(c) Provide an outline of some suitable methods of inquiry and analysis with which to judge the relative robustness of competing answers.
(d) Discuss the extent to which quantitative and qualitative methods could make useful contributions.
Lecture Topics
1. Overview and defining a research topic (ES) 21 January
In defining a research project, the starting point is often an interest in a particular topic. During the ‘topic identification’ stage of research, a researcher
identifies and examines what is known about a topic and what issues others have identified as being interesting or important to understand about the topic. For
example, a researcher might begin with the topic of ‘entrepreneurs’ and, during the topic stage, the researcher will
a) examine definitions of the terminology used in connection with the topic (e.g. the term ‘entrepreneur’ and related terms such ‘serial entrepreneur’ and ‘market
entry’)
b) survey the scope and variety of issues connected to the topic (e.g. Is entrepreneurship only something relevant to private enterprise? What are the backgrounds
and motivations of entrepreneurs?)
c) identify contested issues – (e.g. whether entrepreneurs are born or created through experience, whether those undertaking new businesses are necessarily
entrepreneurs –is buying a MacDonald’s franchise an entrepreneurial act?)
It is important to understand that careful thought about a topic is only the first stage of a successful research project. Having enthusiasm for a topic may lead to
information overload (and the resulting loss of time and motivation) or a failure to define a research project that ‘drills down’ into the topic. By ‘drilling down’
we mean a project that is able to narrow the scope so that contested issues may be addressed in some depth.
Reading (required): Peter T Knight, Small-Scale Research, Sage Publications 2002 Ch 1 especially pp. 5-11 (total
Reading (supplemental): J Bell, Doing your research project, Open University Press, Ch 2, pp. 27-42.
2. Identifying relevant theory and conducting a literature search (ES) 28 January
Theory is initially a daunting term for beginning researchers because it suggests either that there is one proper way to think about a research project or that one
must devote a long time in grappling with abstract concepts and understandings before one can make progress in conducting research. Theory can be ‘demystified’ if one
begins with the idea that theories are perspectives with implications for what we expect to be able to observe. The statement and refinement of theories is often
taken as an ‘end’ – a sufficient purpose or objective for research. In STI policy and management research, theory is more often a ‘means,’ a way of organising the
chaotic and confusing collection of facts and observations about a topic in order to make statements about cause and effect or sources of influence. Theories can be
thought of as tools, and those tools are used for several purposes. As well as helping us to find similarities below apparent differences, and differences below
apparent similarities, the main work that theories do is to help us provide explanations for events, states of affairs and changes.
For example, the examination of the climate change is often based upon the premise of anthropogenic (manmade) alteration of the CO2 content of the earth’s atmosphere
and pathways to reducing the emission of CO2 are examined in terms of costs and effectiveness. A theory, such as the ‘rebound effect’ is used to explain why some
methods for reducing CO2 emissions from particular activities might have the perverse effect of actually increasing total CO2 emissions. Without the theory, one might
conclude that the effect of a programme or policy of reducing CO2 emission would lead in a straightforward way to a reduction in CO2 emissions. The ‘rebound effect’
is an example of a theory that involves a change in perspective – taking the perspective of an individual actor rather than the perspective of society.
In order to create interesting and answerable research questions it is useful to avoid ‘reinventing the wheel.’ We do this by examining what other researchers have
judged to be interesting and important questions and answers. We also examine how other researchers have analysed or conceptualised and examined the issues in which
we are interested. These examinations are the central purposes of a literature search and a researcher’s account of their understanding and critique of existing
literature is a literature review. Note that this definition of literature review takes for granted two important elements: a) the researcher has a point of view on
the literature and b) the researcher will not simply record what others have said but critically examine what they have said to answer their questions and your
question(s) – what will my research contribute to understanding?
Reading (required): M Hammond & J Wellington, Research Methods: the Key Concepts, Routledge, 2013, entry on ‘Literature Review’ pp 99 – 105
Reading (desirable): J. Bell, Doing your Research Project, Chapters 4,5,6, pp. 63-114 (this is a complete simplified guide to the research literature review process)
3. Specifying research questions and Research Design (SA) 4 February
The fact that several different perspectives on an issue may be identified as relevant to many areas of investigations implies there may be more than one answer to
questions we might ask about issues that are contested for a particular topic. Thus, moving from a topic to defining ‘research questions’ – questions that have more
than one answer (and that often also involve different theoretical perspectives) is a necessary step in developing a research project. Devising a useful research
question is often more difficult than any other part of the research. A useful research question is one whose answer will a) resolve a contested issue, b) can be
supported by evidence that can be gathered, and c) will be robust against alternative interpretations and understandings. Correspondingly, research questions that are
less useful (or largely useless) are ones that a) lead to weak conclusions, b) involve infeasible plans for evidence gathering, or c) have equally or more plausible
answers than the one offered.
A research design is the plan for answering research questions. It specifies the method(s) that will be used and, most importantly, examines how the evidence gathered
through the use of a specific method can be interpreted to provide a robust and unambiguous answer. A research design is, at heart, a study of the feasibility of
making a claim about ‘reliable knowledge’ – knowledge that can be relied on in specific conditions to inform decision making. It is often true that some assumptions
and qualifications are necessary in a research design and these will limit the generality and reliability of the answer to the research question that can be achieved.
A research design is therefore a balance between the ambition of the researcher to make a contribution and the researcher’s acknowledgement of the limits of what can
actually be achieved in the time available and claimed based upon the evidence gathered.
Reading (required) P T Knight, Chapter 2, pp. 16-48
4. Qualitative and interpretive methods overview (SA) 11 February
A claim to reliable knowledge is often based on a series of assumptions about relationships and causal processes and effects that are not readily or definitively
measured. In law, judgements are made in some circumstances based upon the weight of the evidence. In a similar fashion, in STI investigations, it is often necessary
to use evidence that must be weighed and interpreted against alternative evidence, claims, interpretations or understandings. In addition, the motives and actions of
both individuals and organisations are complex and therefore it can be necessary to construct explanations of influences and actions using evidence that must be
weighed and interpreted by the investigator. Methods that aim to gather robust evidence about motivations or intentions and actions, and the relation between ‘causes’
(or influences) and effects are often ‘qualitative’ in nature. The ways individuals and organisations behave do not always match their statements concerning their
intentions, reasons or actions.
Qualitative evidence provides grounds for selecting conclusions, which can be evaluated in terms of their plausibility, credibility, and consistency. For example, in
gathering evidence about the causes of obesity, it may be more important to study institutions and structures, as well as gauging attitudes, opinions and actions of
people than to measure their caloric intakes. While the latter is definitively linked to the incidence of obesity, the former is much more informative about the
reasons we observe a changing levels of obesity in particular populations. The answer that people are obese because they consume an excess of calories is far less
informative than understanding that people may use food as a comfort or relief from difficulties in life or that the food industry deliberately devotes most of it
innovation and marketing to products high in calories. Correspondingly, in developing policies to address obesity, it may be less useful to suggest people eat less
than attempting to change the strategies of food companies and to persuade people that a change in the balance of their diet may have beneficial effects.
This lecture examines the nature of different types of qualitative evidence and identifies a range of methods for gathering and analysing such evidence. More
importantly, however, it examines how qualitative methods are directly related to the theories that are employed to guide a research project and the task of devising
of research questions and creating a research design within the theoretical framework chosen.
Reading (required): P T Knight, Chapter 8
Reading (supplemental): J Bell Chapters 6 & 11
5. Quantitative methods overview and Summary (ES) 18 February
Quantitative methods are based upon the premise that particular phenomenon can often be accurately measured or at least estimated with numbers. The measures that we
use are based upon theories (and their perspectives). As we observed in the first TB module on Markets, Firms and Policies, measures such as GDP are often incomplete
or require care in interpretation (a rise in the GDP is not necessarily synonymous with an increase in social welfare although some analysts assume that will be true).
In addition, seemingly objective measures such as the profit of an enterprise require care in interpretation (e.g. the levels of costs and revenues are recorded in
the same period even though either may have implications for their future levels).
Although quantitative methods may be used to make estimates of behavioural responses, e.g. the price or income elasticity of demand for a good, they can also be used
for qualitative purposes. For example, the market share of a firm may be interpreted as a measure of the firm’s performance. In this case, what matters is not so
much the value of the market share, but a comparison of the firm’s market share with other firms.
This mid-term lecture will also provide a review of the research planning process covered in the first five lectures and a preview of the second half of the course
which is devoted to research methods and to the skills needed to prepare and execute research proposals.
Reading (required): Presentation slides Introducing Quantitative Research Methods, Mark Smith, KTH (Sweden) on Study Direct.
6. Data gathering and interpretation (1) – Respondent-based Inquiry Methods (ES) 25 February
Respondent-based inquiry methods – interviews, questionnaires, and related techniques – are direct methods of gathering both qualitative and quantitative evidence. In
STI research, respondents are often members of elites and the fact that their social status and power is likely to be greater than that of a student researcher has
specific implications for the feasibility and accuracy of evidence gathering. It is often, incorrectly, assumed that respondents will give an accurate and
disinterested account of their judgements, actions and experiences. Whilst this is a questionable premise for any respondent, it is particularly dubious with respect
to elites who often have a direct interest in how they or their organisations are portrayed by researchers. Any research project involving a critical inquiry that
relies on elite interviews faces several hurdles which are further complicated by the ethical regulation of university research which amplifies the power of
respondents relative to researchers. Consideration of the issues surrounding gathering evidence from respondents who are members of elites is a first theme of this
lecture.
The lecture’s second theme is a consideration of how questions are formulated for the purposes of interviews and questionnaires. The ‘instruments’ for gathering data
will be described and techniques for reducing ambiguity and respondent bias will be presented. Once questions are formulated and respondents have answered questions,
the researcher must interpret the results. The difficulty of interpretation will reflect not only the precision with which questions were initially formulated, but
also unexpected results arising from responses. Qualitative and quantitative techniques for interpreting evidence gathered from respondents will be identified and
their advantages and pitfalls will be considered.
Reading (required): PT Knight Ch 3 and 4
Reading (supplemental) J Bell Chapters 7 & 8
7. Data gathering and interpretation (2) – Desk-based Research (SA) 4 March
As with respondent-based inquiry – desk-based research can be employed to gather either qualitative or quantitative evidence. Examples of qualitative evidence include
the use of books, papers, published interviews, company or government reports and statements, hearings and court proceedings, and the wealth of information produced
for myriad purposes that may be found using Internet-based methods. An overview of the use of desk-based research methods for qualitative evidence gathering will be
provided as well as a consideration of methods for interpreting such qualitative data to answer research questions and make conclusions about the balance of evidence.
This lecture will also examine desk-based quantitative research methods. A major share of quantitative research is based upon published statistics compiled by
government and industry sources. A researcher interested in quantitative methods must cultivate knowledge of what statistics are available and how they are compiled,
because that is important for how they can be interpreted. Whilst experienced researchers often have such knowledge at the time they are thinking about research
questions, less experienced researchers need to gain knowledge of what data might be available early in their project. An important part of this lecture is
identifying data sources that are useful for a variety of MSc projects and strategies for ‘data search.’ In addition, we will examine how to organise the planning of
data analysis and interpretation in order to answer research questions and make conclusions about the balance of evidence.
Reading (required) P T Knight Chapter 8
Reading (supplemental) J Bell Ch 11
8. Data gathering and interpretation 3 – Case studies (SA) 11 March
Case studies are the most common type of research projects conducted for SPRU MSc dissertations and term papers. Case study research may combine qualitative and
quantitative methods and may be pursued using respondents and/or through desk-based query. Unlike inquiries which are either implicitly or explicitly aimed at making
generalisations about a group of ‘similar’ actors or organisations, case study research is aimed at capturing the ‘situated’ (particular to individual circumstances)
nature of a case. Case study research can be a response to existing ‘general’ theories, aiming to better identify the conditions under which the predictions of a
general theory do not hold. Case studies are also used when existing theories provide an incomplete guide to expected behaviour or outcomes. For example, there is no
general theory explaining how organisations translate a technological capability into products or services. Case studies of specific experience are relevant to our
understanding of this important capability.
A case study method may address issues of generality through counter-example (as suggested above). More commonly, however, a case study is used to examine to make
sense out of various theoretical perspectives in the context of actual organisational complexity. Assessing the priority or relative importance of issues or factors
is thus a key feature of case study research and this assessment needs to be open-minded and transparent (clearly considering alternative evidence and interpretation).
Case studies always are at risk of being seen as descriptive anecdotes and therefore of less value in providing evidence for answering research questions than other
methods. To avoid this risk, the design of a case study needs to explicitly consider what may be learned from a case study that would be novel or interesting compared
to what would be expected from existing theory. In addition, case study results almost always raise questions of comparison or significance that need to be considered
in their planning and execution. In other words, it is not enough to simply develop an ‘anecdote’ or a description and call it a ‘case study’ – the researcher has to
ask and answer questions about the significance of findings in a case study context for research in other contexts or for the theories that are examined in the case
considered.
Reading (required)
Reading (supplemental)
9. The Research Proposal (SA) 18 March
A research proposal brings together each of the elements of research planning discussed in this module, though in outline. It needs to provide a clear motivation for
undertaking the research (why is research about the topic useful and/or interesting?) and an insightful and critical review of some relevant literature – concerning
what is known about the topic, what issues are contested, and what gaps in knowledge or understanding exist that provide a research opportunity. This research
opportunity is crystallised in the statement of (a) research question(s) which have alternative answers whose relative plausibility or credibility can be assessed
through the use of evidence. A research proposal also sets out a research design which explains which evidence will be gathered and how, and how it will be analysed
to answer the research question(s). In explaining the evidence gathering plan, the research design specifies the method or methods that will be used and why these
methods are used rather than others. Finally, a research proposal considers the practical issues of conducting and concluding the research including the feasibility,
budget, and the timing, both intermediate and final, of the research project.
Strong research proposals are revised several times during the course of the research project as the researcher accumulates preliminary evidence, tightens (makes more
specific) the scope of the research, and improves the connections between the theories that are relevant for asking and answering research questions, the specific
statement of research questions, and the evidence available to answer these questions. Writing a research proposal is, itself, a research process involving gathering
evidence about what people have written and proposed about topics and the contested issues related to these topics, surveying the evidence that might be used to answer
possible research questions, and exploring the opportunities and limits of specific research methods for shedding light on the research questions that are proposed.
The attention to planning suggested by this description of a good research proposal might suggest that the research project would then be a straightforward exercise.
This is sometimes true. More often, however, a well-planned research project allows the researcher to make changes and adaptations to the uncertainties and problems
of the actual project and thus to achieve a far better outcome than if planning had not been undertaken. In other words, a good research proposal is a good indicator
of the quality of the eventual research – even if the research project itself requires a ‘change in plan’ during the conduct of research.
Reading (required) P T Knight, Chapters 1 and 2
Reading (supplemental) J Bell Chapters 1 and 2
10. Writing Research Papers and Dissertations (SA) 25 March
The construction of a research proposal is the beginning of the process of writing a research paper or dissertation. The structure of the research proposal is similar
to that of a paper or dissertation and elements of the proposal, such as the literature review, are directly applicable to the draft paper of dissertation. This
lecture will provide a systematic guide to the structure and elements of a high quality research paper or dissertation.
The two most important things to remember about writing are 1) successful writing requires many revisions – even very talented writers often edit their drafts many
times and 2) explaining the ‘motivation’ of your presentation to the reader is essential for maintaining the reader’s attention and conveying the content of your work.
Writing that is done at the last minute and as a ‘stream of consciousness’ (writing without revising your thoughts) invariably receives lower marks and is less
satisfying to both the reader and writer. In addition, scholarly work avoids ‘lecturing’ the reader in favour of ‘explaining’ what was thought and done and the
reasoning behind those thoughts and actions. Scholarly work also carefully considers the evidence for statements and makes reference to this evidence in the form of
footnotes to high quality sources. An experienced scholar will interrogate every sentence that they write in the course of revision asking: ‘Do I know this to be
true? If so, how?’ You should do the same. When one states an opinion without evidence or reasoning to support it, one is ‘editorialising’ and while friends or
family may appreciate your editorial views, your academic readers and future employers will look at your work more critically and assess it against the evidence that
you provide to support your judgements and conclusions.
Reading (required): P T Knight, Chapters 1 and 9
Reading (supplemental) J Bell Chapter 12
Note: This will be the last lecture. Ed will attend the Dissertation Workshop sessions on both the 9th and 10th of April to provide feedback on presentations.
Perspectives, Methods and Skills (750N1)
Seminars Guide– Spring 2014
1. Introduction – 22 and 23 January
This seminar will outline the purpose of the subsequent seminars. The seminars for the module are intended to provide practical support to the series of lectures with
additional time to answer student questions and discuss issues. As such the seminars reflect the content of the previous week’s lectures and allow a greater question
and answer type development of the skills required to produce an MSc dissertation. This seminar (preceding the first lecture) will also establish initial discussion
groups and introduce research ethics including the requirements for ‘ethical approval’ at University of Sussex.
Preparation beforehand
Reading (required) This Seminar series outline
Reading (supplemental)
Bell (2010) Doing Your Research Project: A guide for first-time researchers in education, health and social science, 5th Edition, Open University Press, Chapter 3
Hammond and Wellington (2013) Research Methods: The Key Concepts, Routledge, Entry on Ethics, p. 59-62
2. What makes a topic interesting and do-able? – 29 and 30 January
Usually, it is not the ‘newness’ of a topic but some aspect of the topic that is ‘contested’ (about which there are different view or perspectives) that makes it
interesting.
This seminar will involve small group discussions. During those discussions participants will consider two different types of topics, and for each topic they will be
asked to develop lists of interesting questions. That list will then be refined to identify those questions that could be deemed ‘policy-relevant’. From those sub-sets
of questions, participants will then seek to differentiate those that could be answered in the time and resources available for an MSc dissertation and questions that
would require more time and/or resources. Note that interesting and feasible questions are not necessarily ‘research questions.’ However, starting with ‘topical
questions’ is often the best path to begin the process of defining a ‘research question.’
Preparation beforehand
Reading (required) none
Reading (supplemental) Knight (2002) Small Scale Research, Sage, Chapter 2
Bell (2010) Doing Your Research Project: A guide for first-time researchers in education, health and social science, 5th Edition, Open University Press, Chapter 2
Hammond and Wellington (2013) Research Methods: The Key Concepts, Routledge, p. 131-133
3. Tools for literature searching and reference management – 5 and 6 February
During this seminar we will provide a systematic introduction to the techniques that researchers use to search for relevant theoretical literatures, information about
a topic and identify gaps or interesting contested issues worth addressing in research. Additionally, the seminar covers using Endnote to manage your references and
bibliographies. The seminar will take place in a cluster room to allow hands on experience of various search tools and Endnote.
Preparation beforehand
Reading (required) none
Reading (supplemental) Knight (2002) Small Scale Research, Sage, Chapter 1, p. 11-15
Bell (2010) Doing Your Research Project: A guide for first-time researchers in education, health and social science, 5th Edition, Open University Press, Chapter 5
Hammond and Wellington (2013) Research Methods: The Key Concepts, Routledge, p. 99-105
4. What is a good research question and how does one choose which research question to ask? – 12 and 13 February
This seminar will be a workshop in identifying and crafting policy-relevant research questions on one or more of the topics for which a literature search was conducted
during or following the previous week’s seminar. A mixture of self, group and instructor criticism will be used to identify hazards in asking different types of
research questions as well as identifying useful ways to spot research questions that are promising.
Preparation beforehand
Reading (required)
Reading (supplemental) Knight (2002) Small Scale Research, Sage, Chapter 1, p. 5-11
Bell (2010) Doing Your Research Project: A guide for first-time researchers in education, health and social science, 5th Edition, Open University Press, Chapter 2
Hammond and Wellington (2013) Research Methods: The Key Concepts, Routledge, p 131-133
5. Reading between the lines – 19 and 20 February
This seminar is a workshop on the use and interpretation of qualitative evidence such as that found in government or private sector documents. The aim is to understand
how one interrogates (questions), interprets and analyses such material to inform further corroborating or critical research. The seminar will use a leaked UK
Government document to explore various issues surrounding documentary evidence.
Preparation beforehand: read hand out
Reading (required): Hand out with leaked UK Government document
Reading (supplemental) Knight (2002) Small Scale Research, Sage, Chapter 4, p. 104-108
Bell (2010) Doing Your Research Project: A guide for first-time researchers in education, health and social science, 5th Edition, Open University Press, Chapter 7
Hammond and Wellington (2013) Research Methods: The Key Concepts, Routledge, p. 52-57
6. Setting and Testing Quantitative Hypotheses – Measures and indicators – 5 and 6 March
This seminar will examine the elements of the process of setting hypotheses that can be tested using quantitative data. Methods for framing hypotheses will be examined
and specific examples of hypotheses will be provided to stimulate discussion of the opportunities and limits to quantitative research. Methods of indicator
construction from secondary data sources will be explored using a range of readily available data sources.
Preparation beforehand
Reading (required) none
Reading (supplemental) Knight (2002) Small Scale Research, Sage, Chapter 8
Bell (2010) Doing Your Research Project: A guide for first-time researchers in education, health and social science, 5th Edition, chapter 12, p. 211-233
Hammond and Wellington (2013) Research Methods: The Key Concepts, Routledge, p. 133-141
7. Questions for interviews and questionnaires – 12 and 13 March
This seminar will be a workshop on designing questions for interviews and questionnaires. Those design decisions should be taken in the light of expectations about how
the data could and should be analysed. Through a combination of self, group and tutor criticism we will seek to identify problems that often appear in question design
and the elements of better questions, and how they might be overcome. This will explore the strengths and weaknesses of open and closed questions as well as the
different methods of administering a survey.
Preparation beforehand
Reading (required)
Reading (supplemental) Knight (2002) Small Scale Research, Sage, Chapter 3
Bell (2010) Doing Your Research Project: A guide for first-time researchers in education, health and social science, 5th Edition, Chapters 8 and 9
Hammond and Wellington (2013) Research Methods: The Key Concepts, Routledge, p. 91-94
8. Interpretive Narratives and Histories – 19 and 20 March
Much of research is re-search, the reinterpretation and reframing of existing knowledge in the light of alternative perspectives. This seminar will consider several
examples of how different accounts of a body of evidence may be articulated, compared and contrasted with a view toward identifying evidence concerning the relative
credibility of competing interpretations.
Preparation beforehand
Reading (required)
Reading (supplemental) Knight (2002) Small Scale Research, Sage, Chapter 2
Bell (2010) Doing Your Research Project: A guide for first-time researchers in education, health and social science, 5th Edition, Open University Press, Chapter 6
Hammond and Wellington (2013) Research Methods: The Key Concepts, Routledge, p. 110-111
9. Conducting case studies – 26 and 27 March
This seminar will examine two or three case studies that illustrate the value and limitations of case study method and indicate key elements in a successful case
study. The previously provided case studies will be used as the basis for group and then general discussions.
Preparation beforehand
Reading (required) Case study evidence provided in the previous week
Reading (supplemental)
Hammond and Wellington (2013) Research Methods: The Key Concepts, Routledge, p. 16-19
10. Research Proposal Workshop – 16 and 17 April
This seminar will be a workshop on creating a research proposal. The aim is to provide further opportunities to learn about the benefits and shortcomings of
alternative ways of seeking to ask and answer policy-relevant research questions. These exercises are intended to improve students’ understanding about how to approach
the project they envisage for their dissertation work. To prepare for this seminar, students should come with one or more specific ideas about the research you might
like to conduct for your dissertation.
Preparation beforehand
Prepare an initial draft of your research proposal
Reading (required) none
Reading (supplemental) none
Annex: Reading Material for Session on Reading between the lines – Seminar 5 – 19 and 20 February
Textual and spoken evidence often needs to be interpreted; not all statements and documents can be taken at face value. As Bell points out, we need to read documents
carefully both to be as clear as possible about what they say, and to ‘read between the lines’. i.e. to identify implications that are not entirely explicit, but which
can be inferred from, for instance, the way things were said and what was not said.
Reading between the lines often involves noticing the rhetorical style and chosen vocabulary. It also involves noticing what is omitted as well as what is included. It
is often important to inquire what relevant interests the author(s) might have and why they might wish to persuade you to accept their explicit and implicit messages.
Can some documents be taken at face value, and if so which ones, and in which respects?
One documentary example is introduced and reproduced below, and it will provide the basis for discussion group exercises that will take place either at 11am or 12 am
on the 26th February 2014 in Jubilee Room 155. I would like you read to the end of this document to prepare for the seminar.
The document reproduced below is a UK Cabinet Office document, which was subject of an unauthorised disclosure. It was reproduced in The Guardian, Wednesday 3 March
1999, Section II, page 5.
Try reading between the lines to identify any clues indicating the assumptions that then framed UK government policy on GM foods. What does it suggest about the
government’s rhetorical strategy? Can the document be read in several different ways, and if so what are some of the competing interpretations that can be placed on
it, and how might you set about trying to decide between them?
Background briefing
From 1990 to late 1998, the UK government operated on the assumption that the provisions of an European Directive meant that if a GM food or GM crop had been formally
assessed scientifically and approved by any EU member State it could be lawfully sold and cultivated in all EU Member States. In late 1998 a flurry of scientific,
ecological and policy debate indicated that:
1) Official scientific assessments of the risks posed by the cultivation of GM crops had often considered only direct and short-term effects but not long-term
and/or indirect effects.
2) The EU comprises multiple different types of environments, and that scientific assessments of the environmental impact of cultivating GM crops cannot be
generic or universal but must be specific to particular environments.
3) Questions were raised about potential risks from consuming GM foods that could not readily be answered with the available scientific evidence.
The UK and other European governments responded by negotiating with major agricultural biotechnology companies an agreement (or Voluntary Deal) to the effect that all
GM crops and foods that had, by then been approved, would remain on the market, but that the industry would not bring any further products forward for authorisation,
until the UK government (and or the EU) had reviewed its assessment and regulatory systems. All EU Member State then reached agreement on what was known as the
Moratorium, which decided that, until further notice, no consent would be given for the importation of any GM crops not yet already approved, while the EU, i.e. the
Council of Ministers, the European Commission and the European Parliament, reviewed and reformed their institutions and procedures.
On 3 March 1999, the following leaked UK government document was published in The Guardian, under the title: ‘Food politics: You may well ask, Jack’. The document
contains 46 questions, which the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Jack Cunningham) addressed to his civil servants. It was organised into 8 main sections.
The first two raise questions about the voluntary deal with industry and the moratorium on new imports. The third section discusses ‘labelling’. European rules already
stipulated that products containing GM foods had to be labelled to indicate their presence. Question 17 below, refers to the fact that some food additives (as well as
the foods themselves) can be derived from GM crops. For example, many products such as margarine and chocolate contain lecithin as an emulsifier, and almost all
lecithin is extracted from soy beans. Consequently a question arose concerning cooking oils from soya and maize, because they may have refined sufficiently that no
residues of their GM-sources could be detected.
The final set of questions relate to an international agreement called the Biosafety Protcol. That agreement, under the provisions of the Convention on Biodiversity,
stipulates that countries that are parties to the agreement will ensure that their companies do not export GM crops or foods to other parties without their prior
explicit agreement. Under the agreement, each country is expected to, and is at liberty to, establish its own national regime for assessment and decisions on consent.
The implications of that protocol for the UK government depended on whether the UK would only ever be an importer of GM crops and foods or whether it might also become
an exporter.
The text of the document is as follows:
Voluntary deal with industry
1 How many years does it last for?
2 How exactly does it work?
3 Are there any other safeguards in place which we can point to?
4 How can we be sure that the deal will not unravel?
5 What can we do if it begins to do so?
6 Do we have any statutory powers to impose in-use conditions?
7 Under what circumstances would we use them? The worst scenario seems to be the Government and its advisors thinking that there is insufficient evidence to proceed
with plantings but the industry disagreeing and deciding to proceed to full commercialisation anyway.
8. Is this tenable?
9 Are we sure that the deal will allow us to capture all the necessary data, to come to a sensible evaluation?
10 What is English Nature disagree? And respected pressure groups such as the RSPB?
11 What about long term monitoring? Even after five years, the real environmental costs may be unknown?
12 Will we have the means to identify longer-term effects?
13 If environmental damage is shown to occur, how much do we tolerate as a justifiable cost?
14 Or do we believe that any damage should justify a halt? (The latter is unlikely to be true, but will be difficult in presentational terms).
Moratorium
15 How confident are we that our line that a moratorium would be illegal is accurate?
16 If this proves to be untrue, the pressure could increase even further.
Labelling
17 When will a decision on labelling additives be made in Brussels?
18 How much progress has already been made on this?
19 What are other member states’ views? Will we get what we want? Enforcement of the labelling requirements: we still have no enforcement mechanisms.
20 Is there a case to accelerate the implementation of these?
21 When they are implemented, can we be sure that they will be implemented fully, and that local authorities will have the expertise and the resources to do so?
(Stories like ‘Thousands of GM products on the shelves and only one inspector to test them’)
22 Is our labelling line on soya oil tenable?
23 Even if no GM DNA or protein is present in soya oil normally, might this not be the case in some samples? Would they need to be labelled? How do we enforce it?
24 If people have ethical objections to GM processes, should they not have a real choice informed through labelling?
25 If it would be impossible to enforce, regulation would be the wrong vehicle, but what about voluntary arrangements?
GMOs and health impact
26 Why don’t we require a pharmaceutical type analysis of the safety of these foods with proper trials?
27 At its last meeting, MISC6 [the Cabinet Office sub-committee on biotechnology] requested a paper by the Chief Medical Officer and Chief Scientific Advisor on human
health implications of GM foods. Will be publish this when it is ready (about April) and use it as a means to explain that GM foods on the market are safe?
28 What if it shows up any doubts?
29 What can we do? We will be pressured to ban them immediately.
30 What if it says that we need evidence of long term effects? This will look like we are not sure about their safety – we do not monitor consumption of other foods.
Animal feeds
31 How can we be sure of the safety of products derived from animals which eat GM animal feeds?
32 Following BSE, how can we be sure that animal products derived from animals which eat GM animal feeds do not contain any GM materials themselves?
33 If we can’t be, then does this not weaken our position on labelling significantly?
Review
34 What do we want it to achieve?
35 Where is it heading?
36 What will come out of it?
37 How should we prepare the ground for the outcome politically and presentationally?
38 Do we see this as an opportunity? We will find it difficult to ignore the views of eminent scientific opinion.
Public consultation
39 Can we be sure that we are asking sensible questions?
40 Aren’t the results likely to be contaminated by recent media coverage?
41 How do we prepare the ground?
Biosafety protocol/trade
42 What will the biosafety protocol mean?
43 What are the presentational implications?
44 Are we effectively geared up?
45 How real is the risk of a trade war with the Americans on GM foods?
46 Do we need to do a risk analysis of this issue and a consideration of how we should react?
PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT 🙂
Expert paper writers are just a few clicks away
Place an order in 3 easy steps. Takes less than 5 mins.