Centre for Internet and Society

Panel Discussion on Equitable Access to Knowledge

Admin — 2019-02-22T15:32:46Z

Pranesh Prakash was a panelist and moderator in a panel discussion on Equitable Access to Knowledge on October 23, 2018 at Indian Institute of Science (IISc), Bangalore. The event was hosted by DST Centre for Policy Research (IISc), Bangalore.

Open Access seeks to return scholarly publishing to its original purpose: to spread knowledge and allow that knowledge to be built upon. Price barriers should not prevent students, researchers (or anyone) from getting access to research they need. Open Access, and the open availability and searchability of scholarly research that it entails, will have a significant positive impact on everything from education to the practice of medicine to the ability of entrepreneurs to innovate.

Panelists

Arul George Scaria - National Law University, Delhi
Carl Malamud - Public.Resource.Org
Pranesh Prakash (Moderator) - Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore
Richard Poynder - Journalist (covering OA movement around the world)
S Nayana Tara - Indian Institute of Management Bangalore
Shahid Jameel - Welcome Trust DBT India Alliance

This event was a part of International Open Access week activities planned at IISc Bangalore, organized by DST-Centre for Policy Research at IISc in association with National Institute of Advanced Studies (NIAS), Karnataka State Library Association (KALA), JRD Tata Memorial Library, Science Policy Group (SPG) and International Scientific and Technological Education Program (i-STEP).

Read more about the event on Facebook page

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/news/panel-discussion-on-equitable-access-to-knowledge

Lecture on Open Access and Open Content Licensing at ICAR (short course)

Admin — 2018-12-05T16:19:56Z

The ICAR-Indian Institute of Horticultural Research (IIHR) a constituent establishment of Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) organised a short course on 'ICTs for Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness in Agricultural Research, Education and Extension of NARES' during November 13-22, 2018 in Bangalore. Anubha Sinha delivered a lecture to the participants.

Read for more information about the programme.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/news/lecture-on-open-access-and-open-content-licensing-at-icar-short-course

Seminar on Open Access in Research Area: A Strategic Approach

sumandro — 2015-12-22T05:37:44Z

The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), Delhi, is organising a seminar on open access in research on Tuesday, December 22, 2015. The seminar will focus on: 1) wider access to scientific publications and research data, 2) access to scientific information, and 3) challenges and opportunities of research data. The Centre for Internet and Society is supporting the event as a Knowledge Partner.

Background

Open Access has become central importance to advancing the interests of researchers, scholars, students, business, and the public as well as librarians. Increasingly, research institutions require researchers to publish articles that report research findings openly accessible in open domain.

Open Access pursues to yield scholarly publishing to spread knowledge and allow that knowledge to be built upon. Price barriers should not stop researchers from getting access to research data. Open Access, and the open availability and search ability of scholarly research that it entails, will have a significant positive impact on everything from education to the research practice in various fields.

To explore why Open Access is so important to a number of groups, TERI Library along with The Centre for Internet & Society (CIS) as Knowledge Partner is organizing a half day seminar on Open Access in Research Areas: a Strategic Approach on December 22, 2015 at TERI Seminar Hall, IHC, Lodhi Road, New Delhi.

The Seminar will focus on:

wider access to scientific publications and research data
access to scientific information, and
challenges and opportunities of research data.

Schedule

No registration is required to attend the seminar. Seats are limited, and will be provided on first-come-first-served basis.

13:45 - 14:00		Registration and Networking
14:00 - 14:10		Welcome Address - Mr. Prabir Sengupta, Distinguished Fellow and Director, Knowledge Management Division, TERI
14:10 - 14:20		Special Address - Sumandro Chattapadhyay, Research Director, The Centre for Internet and Society
14:20 - 14:35		Keynote Address - Dr. K.R. Murali Mohan, Advisor, Big Data Initiatives Division, Department of Science and Technology
14:35 - 14:50		Inaugural Address - Dr. Chandrima Shaha, Director, National Institute of Immunology, New Delhi
14:50 - 15:00		Setting the Theme and Vote of Thanks - Dr. P.K. Bhattacharya, Fellow and Area Convenor, Knowledge Management Division, TERI
15:00 - 15:30		Tea and Refreshments
15:30 - 17:15		Plenary Session Chair: Dr. Ramesh Sharma, Director, CEMCA Puneet Kishor, Researcher and Independent Consultant - "Science, Data, and Creative Commons" Dr. Beth Sandore Namachchivaya, Associate Dean of Libraries and Professor University of Illinois - "Developing Services, Infrastructure, and Best Practices to Conserve and Provide Access to Research Data: Challenges and Opportunities" Dr. Usha Mujoo Munshi, Librarian, Indian institute of Public Administration

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/teri-seminar-on-open-access-in-research

Open Access Dialogues - Report and Policy Recommendations

sumandro — 2015-12-22T06:52:58Z

The Open Access Dialogues were a series of global electronic debates facilitated by Eve Gray and Kelsey Wiens, in partnership with The African Commons Project (South Africa) and the Centre for Internet and Society (India), during November 2012 to March 2013. It was supported by the Institute of Development Studies, Sussex, and was hosted at WSIS Knowledge Communities Discussion Forum.

Report: Download (PDF)

Policy Recommendations (as below): Download (PDF)

Is Open Access Only for Rich Countries?

Authors: Eve Gray, Sumandro Chattapadhyay, Kelsey Wiens and Alistair Scott

It is not unusual for analysis of research systems in the developing world to provide startlingly low figures for the participation of developing countries in world research. For example, the Times of India last October cited a report that claimed that India produced only 3.5% of the world’s research – a shocking statistic, the newspaper commented. The commonly accepted figure for Africa’s contribution is even worse, at 0.3%. In reality, these figures do not reflect at all the size and shape of the national research systems in these count ries nor their productivity. Rather, they are a measure of how many journal articles are published in journals in the global North and particularly in journals in the Thomson Reuters ISI indices.

The developing world has been badly served by the scholarly publishing system inherited from the 20th century. The commercialization and consolidation of scholarly publishing over the last 60 years has progressively put the publication of the bulk of the world’s research in the hands of a small number of giant co rporations, in an environment characterized by very high and continuously escalating subscription charges, putting access to the world’s research out of the reach of most developing countries. If Harvard complains, as it did recently, that it cannot afford the subscriptions to the major journals, then what could be said for universities in Africa or India?

To add to this, the impact of the dominant systems for measuring the quality and impact of global research have a perverse effect in the developing world, consigning its research to the periphery and categorizing it as of ‘local’ interest rather than being ‘global’, or ‘international’ in its importance.

Global Open Access Policy

Global Open access policy moved forward decisively from late 2011 to early 2013, with UNESCO’s launch of its Open Access to Scientific Information Programme [1] and the World Bank’s launch of its Open Knowledge Platform [2]. At national and regional levels, the Finch Group Report in the United Kingdom [3], the White House Memorandum on Access to Federally Funded Research [4] in the US A and the announcement of the open access provisions of the Horizon 2020 Framework for Research and Innovation [5] in the European Union all marked a global move to entrench open access to publicly funded research. These policies commit political weight and financial support to policy implementation, based on an understanding of the contribution that OA can make to innovation and thus to social and economic development across the world. In the face of these developments, the developing countries, which currently tend to have fragmented OA and research communication policies, face the risk of falling even further behind in finding their place in global and locally relevant research production.

What these events have added to the policy debate about open access over the last year is not only the recognition of the need for government - level logistical and financial support for open research communication, but also a widening of the mandate for open access. Early formulations of open access policy focused on opening up ‘the peer reviewed journal literature’, as the founding document on Open Access, the Budapest Open Access initiative, defined it in 2002 [6]. The principle was that these publications should be freely available to readers, to read, to download and data-mine.. It is this approach that largely informs the UNESCO’s Policy Guidelines for the Development and Promotion of Open Access (2012) [7]. The World Bank policy, on the other hand, takes a broader view of open access, applying a Creative Commons CC-BY licence to the work that it commissions, thus allowing for reuse and repurposing of content in order to reach the widest possible audience and have the maximum development impact [8].

Open Access Dialogues

A number of policy issues emerged from the Open Access Dialogues (OAD), facilitated by Eve Gray, The African Commons Project and the Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore, India, in late 2012 and early 2013 with participants from South Africa, India and Latin America. The overriding policy outcome was an expressed desire to expand the concept of open access to include other kinds of openness, such as open education and open development and to expand beyond journal articles in leveraging the benefits of openness in developing countries, as well as involving outside - university knowledge producers and distributors in the OA agenda. O ver - reliance on the ISI Impact Factor was also a key aspect of the present OA system that came in for criticism , leading to demands for the formulation of research reward systems that are better aligned with national and institutional research strategies and development of alternative metrics for evaluating research success.

The discuss ion took place on the UNESCO/WSIS Knowledge Communities discussion forum, where a total of 19 discussants, excluding the core team, took part. Additionally, the OAD Facebook page was ‘liked’ by 116 people (as of 1 March 2013), with the most common age grou p being 25 - 34 and the gender bias being towards female users at 60%. Two (one hour - long) Twitter discussions were also organised, which attracted 83 unique users in total, who shared 530 tweets using the #developOA hashtag.

Strategic Issues and Policy Recommendations

Beyond the Impact Factor

The ISI Impact Factor (IF) remains the dominant measure for research evaluation and determining academic rewards and promotions in the Anglophone world and beyond. The discussants identified the extreme preference for publication in ('closed') journals with high Impact Factors (IF) as a central obstacle to effective research communication aligned with national and regional goals. Of particular concern was the role this system has had in aligning developing country research activities with academic interests in the universities of the global North, and thus di verting developed country research away from local challenges and opportunities. This model also renders invisible much of the research that is actually produced that addresses local/national/regional concerns. Another concern was bibliographic malpractices including bias against citing works from developing country scholars and work published in non - 'prestigious' journals. Strong argument s were made for the use of article-level metrics as opposed to journal - level impact measurement . Studies were suggested to argue that article-level impact increases with OA journals.

Policy recommendations:

Replacing reliance on bibliometric s and journal-level citation indexes with article-level metrics and emerging alternative metrics that take into consideration the circulation and usage of knowledge beyond higher education institutes.
Developing education policies and guidelines to evaluate res earch and researchers in their specific contexts of relevance and impact, and aligning academic rewards with national, regional and local development strategies.

Uneven Geographies and the Need for Sustainable Models

Attention was drawn to the unfortunate lack of awareness about the nature and potential of OA across developing countries, even in scholarly communities. Simultaneously, the discussants highlighted several success stories of OA journals in developing countries, though mostly from science disciplines. Thus the developing world experiences an uneven geography of OA awareness and adoption, where the OA agenda is being pursued successfully by specific scholarly communities but not translating into widespread support across the higher academia landscape nor into coherent national policy development.

The role played by the global commercial businesses of scholarly works in impeding the Open Access agenda in developing countries was mentioned by most of the commentators. Simultaneously, the complicity of developing country academics in reinforcing the culture of 'prestigious' journals published by global publishers was also criticized. The increasing embracing of Author Processing Charges (APC), the discussants feared, will further entrench this uneven geography of OA adoption and research visibility. This issue is crucial since it is generating a sense of cynicism about OA as yet another incarnation of commercial exploitation of scholarship that advantages the rich countries. The use of fee waivers was criticised for being only an exceptional measure that serves to reinforce exclusion of researchers outside of or new to the dominant scholarly publishing system. There is a need, it was argued, to develop a sustainable business model that is functional in making knowledge circulate in ways that are useful to society, and not solely driven by profit-making needs of publishers.

Policy recommendations:

Promoting a bottom-up strategy for OA adoption in the developing world by focusing on capacity and community building exercises. This could involve scholarly colleagues and advocates gathered around thematic and/or disciplinary forums, facilitated by institutional and governmental recognition and support.
Linking the issue of OA to academic works to the structural problems in developing country academics, adopting a wide-ranging and systematic approach to research capacitation. There is a need to promote OA through curriculum development, knowledge dissemination, training and advocacy, engaging actors ranging from senior administrators to young scholars.
Addressing and involving non-university circuits of learning, of both institutional (primary and secondary education) and non-institutional (informal learning groups around MOOC courses) varieties, and also non-governmental organisations working o n education in particular, and development in general.

A Broader Vision for Open Access

A number of discussants argued for a broader mandate for OA than the traditional journal focus. There were two aspects to this recommendation: firstly, OA should align with other forms of ‘open’ agendas , such as open science, open education and open development, and secondly, OA policies should support distribution and re - usage of a wider range of research outputs. Thus the scope of OA needs to be broadened to focus on the needs of potential consumers of research findings rather than only on the scholar-to-scholar discourse that journals constitute. This wider agenda could include research data, multimedia, 'grey literature ’ such as research and briefing papers, and policy papers. In the context of developing countries, it was argued that 'translations' of research for communities outside academia were important, especially ' recognizing the importance of publishing in a format that most appropriately meets the information and knowledge needs of those who can use the research to improve society's development', as a leading public health academic argued in the OA dialogue.

This broader vision of OA challenges the conventional hierarchy of basic research over applied research, proposing that OA can provide a communicative continuum between scholar - to - scholar discourse, teaching and learning needs, and the mobilization of research for development.

Policy recommendations:

Build on the present governmental acceptance of the OA agenda by strategically using it as an entry point to promote the broader 'open' agenda, including open sharing of research data, bibliographic data, policy papers etc.
Recognize, support and reward OA initiatives and systems that facilitate sharing of a wide range of academic outputs, from journals, books and other scholarly publications to development - focused research outputs targeted at communities outside of higher academia.
Financial and logistical support for the creation and maintenance of websites, repositories, archives and other (offline/outreach) initiatives aimed at hosting and sharing a wide-range of academic outputs, including data and multimedia, and mandating licences that allow for re-use of scholarly materials ( such as CC-BY), for development and educational needs.
A comprehensive (national and international) institutional policy approach, ensuring a central role for research communication in universities and research institutes and for integrated administrative, technology and skills infrastructure to support these roles.

Notes

[1] See: http://www.unesco.org/new/en/communication-and-information/access-to-knowledge/open-access-to-scientific-information/

[2] See: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/

[3] The Finch Report: http://www.res earchinfonet.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Finch-Group-report-executive-summary-FINAL-VERSION.pdf

[4] The White House Open Access Memorandum: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/increasing-public-access-results-scientific-research

[5] http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-12-790_en.htm

[6] http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/openaccess/read

[7] http://www.unesco.org/new/en/communication-and-information/resources/publications-and-communication-materials/publications/full-list/policy-guidelines-for-the-development-and-promotion-of-open-access/

[8] http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/NEWS/0,,contentMDK:23164491~pagePK:64257043~piPK:437376~theSitePK:4607,00.html

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/open-access-dialogues-report

The city of Bhubaneswar is going Open

sailesh — 2019-03-07T11:41:16Z

The Openness movement is a concept or philosophy that is characterized by an emphasis on transparency, free and unrestricted access to knowledge and information. The movement across the world is trying to build on the interest of like-minded people and an urgent need of bringing new resources of knowledge for the benefit of people with a method of collaborative or cooperative management. Many successful projects such as OpenStreetMap, Github, Wikimedia projects are free, open for everyone and evolve both by contributions and review efforts by participant volunteers. Open Knowledge Projects across the world are embarking upon a silent revolution to change the way information and knowledge are consumed by people.

Bhubaneswar supporting the concept of Openness movement has joined as one of the ambassadors of the movement in the world by giving citizens the right to access the content online produced by the government and make use of the work. As the city turned 70-year-old as the capital of Odisha in April 2018, Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik launched two websites — Bhubaneswar.me and Smart City Bhubaneswar under a Creative Commons license. The websites were made to provide visitor or tourist information about the city and to showcase various projects being undertaken as a part of the Smart City mission.

A visual walk-through video was released for the visit.Bhubaneswar.me and Smart City website over social media sites for the public to understand the features of the websites which ended saying “Knowledge now made more accessible”, anyone can use the content and data of the website under the campaign for Transparency in Governance. These websites have adopted Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license also known as CC-BY-4.0, which allows the citizens of Bhubaneswar to use the work of the government. Creative Commons licenses are a set of open licenses that are used worldwide to enable widen use and reuse of creative work that is otherwise restricted by the strict copyright laws. Currently, the majority of government websites under the Bhubaneswar administration are under an Open license.

Transparency is considered the traditional hallmark of an open government, meaning that the public should have access to government-held information and be informed of government proceedings, says an article from Opensource.com. Transparency, accountability, and participation are one of the needed conditions for the government to ensure that public resources are used efficiently, public policies are designed in the best interest of the population.

Though most of the government websites can be accessed online, the content of those sites are not open by default, the government has to adopt a specific license to open their content. In September 2017, Odisha became the first state in India to release all of its social media contents under a free license such as Creative Commons license, initially eight social media accounts of the state government were part of the project and followed by few other departments under the state government releasing their content under the same license. Because of this initiative by the government, currently, ten or more websites and eight social media accounts are allowing people from all around the world to freely reuse the state government’s work.

As the content of the websites is under a free license it creates an impact on a project like Wikipedia-one of the most popular websites in the world and the largest online encyclopedia available on the internet, committed to free and open copyright licenses from its earliest days on the internet. Currently, a near about files from the websites and social media accounts of the Government of Odisha are added into Wikimedia Commons, Wikipedia’s sister site and an open multimedia repository, under a content donation program of which 70% of files are used in different Wikipedia articles, all of which together has received over 25 million page views in last 18 months.

Cities opening their data and content for the citizens encourages individuals for new innovation and to form new ideas that help to bridge the gap in the city. A report from Forbes in 2012 says Open city data can help app developers, urban planners, and others understand a city’s problems and manage city services in ways that improve the quality of life and business prospects for its residents. When Bhubaneswar led the way of promoting the Openness movement in India, there is a huge scope for the rest of the cities to adopt open licensing to make knowledge more accessible for the citizens and enhance public trust in government.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/the-city-of-bhubaneswar-is-going-open

Inaugural EPT Award for Dr. Francis Jayakanth

praskrishna — 2012-02-27T12:24:25Z

Programme

16.00	Welcome and introduction to the award Subbiah Arunachalam
16.05	Presenting the award and felicitation Prof. M S Swaminathan
16.15	Acceptance speech Dr Francis Jayakanth
16.25	Felicitation by eminent scientists Prof. G Baskaran Prof. K Mangala Sunder
16.35	Vote of thanks
16.40	Tea

Video

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/inaugural-ept-award-for-dr.-francis-jayakanth

GFM 2013

praskrishna — 2013-10-06T07:58:06Z

Nishant Shah participated in a panel discussion with Wendy Chun, Tom Levine and Geert Lovink , around 'The End of Bibliographies: New Media and Research'. Nishant also participated as a panelist in a panel discussion on 'Open Up: Pragmatism and Politics of Open Access'. The programme was held at the University of Luneberg in Germany from October 3 to 5, 2013.

Read the original posted on GFM Blogspot

Donnerstag, 03. Oktober 2013, ab 10:00 Uhr - Registrierung im Hörsaalgang

Begrüßung | Donnerstag, 03. Oktober 2013, 12:00 Uhr–13:30 Uhr in C HS1
Grußworte und Eröffnungsvortrag von Hans Jörg Rheinberger (Berlin) Wissenschaftsgeschichte und das Wissen der Medien

Mittagessen | Donnerstag, 03. Oktober 2013, 13:30 Uhr–14:30 Uhr in der Mensa

Session 1 | Donnerstag, 03. Oktober 2013, 14:30 Uhr–16:30 Uhr
Panel 1.1 | Maß und Medium – Medien der Messung in C HS3
Elektrisierte Zeit. Mediale Strategien in Helmholtz’ Messung der Nervenleitgeschwindigkeit von Henning Schmidgen (Regensburg)

Nachhall: Schallmessung im elektroakustischen Zeitalter von Roland Wittje (Regensburg)

Measuring with moving images in Albert Michotte’s perception experiments von Sigrid Leyssen (Paris | Regensburg)

Understanding Television: TV – als Meßgerätegeschichte von Bernhard Dotzler (Regensburg)

Moderation: Markus Krajewski (Lüneburg | Weimar)

Panel 1.2 | Medienanthropologische Szenarien. Wie situieren sich die Medien der Psychophysik und Psychologie? in C HS4

Intensität und Infinitesimales. Grenzen der Messbarkeit bei Hermann Cohen und Gilles Deleuze von Astrid Deuber-Mankowsky (Bochum)

Empfindung, Wahrnehmbarkeit, Medialität. Historische Psychologie und ihre Medien von Anna Tuschling (Bochum)

Was Zahlen in der sozialpsychologischen Medienwirkungsforschung erzählen. Das Problem der »Gewaltmedien«
von Estrid Sørensen (Bochum)

Moderation: Christoph Engemann (Lüneburg)

Panel 1.3 | Mediale Bedingungen von Behinderung in C HS5

Die (Re-)Sozialisierung technischer Objekte in Patientennetzwerken. Ein Fallbeispiel zur Herstellung des Cochlea-Implantats von Markus Spöhrer (Konstanz)

Netzhautimplantate und Eyeborgs. Visualisierungstechniken zwischen Prothese und Human Enhancement von Robert Stock (Konstanz)

Zur Produktion von Behinderung im Fotoarchiv von Anna Grebe (Konstanz)

Zur Um/Bildung von Gemeinschaften. Das Cochlea-Implantat und die »Sourds en colère« von Beate Ochsner (Konstanz)

Moderation: Anne Ganzert (Konstanz)

Panel 1.4 | (Film-)Wissen als Modus der Kinoerfahrung in C 14.027

Transnationale Filmgeschichte(n) schreiben von Wolfgang Fuhrmann (Zürich)

Filmwissenschaft und ihre Quellen. Historisches Wissen und digitale Repräsentationsformen von Film und Kino von Franziska Heller (Zürich)

Filmwissen/Erfahrungswissen/Kinoerfahrung. Anmerkungen zum Verhältnis von Kinoerfahrung und Wissenserwerb von Florian Mundhenke (Leipzig)

Moderation: Florian Mundhenke (Leipzig)

Panel 1.5 | Was vom Leben bleibt in C 14.001

Vom täglichen Kampf gegen das ›Gestaltsehen‹ und der Hartnäckigkeit von Bildtraditionen. Biologisches Wissen auf der Schwelle eines Medienwandels von Nina Samuel (New York | Berlin)

Über zwei Arten des Gebrauchs von Datenbanken in der Molekularbiologie von Robert Meunier (Berlin)

Moderation: Janina Wellmann (Lüneburg)

Workshop 1.6 | Fakturen in C 14.006

In der Ausstellung »Fakturen – Medien der Wissenschaften«, die anlässlich der GfM–Tagung an der Leuphana stattfindet, reflektieren Künstler_innen wie Martin John Callanan (UK), Driessens & Verstappen (NL), Sabrina Raaf (US), Jan Peter E.R. Sonntag (D) und Herwig Turk (A|PT) über die Ästhetik wissenschaftlicher Instrumentarien, Modelle und Methoden.

In diesem Workshop stellen die Künstler_innen ihre Projekte vor und diskutieren mit den Teilnehmer_innen die spezifischen Erkenntnismöglichkeiten künstlerischer Forschung und Darstellung.

Organisiert vom Leuphana Arts Program (Andreas Broeckmann, Alexandra Waligorski) mit freundlicher Unterstützung des Kunstraum der Leuphana Universität Lüneburg.

AG-Treffen 1.7 | Comicforschung in C 12.001

AG-Treffen 1.8 | Auditive Kultur und Sound Studies in C 12.006

Kaffeepause | Donnerstag, 03. Oktober 2013, 16:30 Uhr–17:00 Uhr im Hörsaalgang

Session 2 | Donnerstag, 03. Oktober 2013, 17:00 Uhr–19:00 Uhr
Panel 2.1 | Medien der Philologie – Philologie der Medien in C HS3

Was ist eine medienphilologische Frage? von Rupert Gaderer (Bochum)

Ist Medienphilologie reaktionär? von Friedrich Balke (Bochum)

Medienphilologie als Verfahren von Natalie Binczek (Bochum)

Braucht die Medienwissenschaft Philologie? von Harun Maye (Weimar)

Moderation: Daniel Eschkötter (Weimar)

Panel 2.2 | Kosmotechnologie in C HS4

Freischwebende Sterne im Stereokomparator von Kohei Suzuki (Berlin)

Nomos, Physis, Techné. Zum Konzept der Kosmotechnologie bei Walter Benjamin von Hans-Christian von Herrmann (Berlin)

Vektorkosmologie. Buckminster Fullers Ausdehnungslehre von Christina Vagt (Berlin)

Das Projektionsplanetarium als Medium kosmologischer Weltbilder von Julian Furrer (Berlin)

Moderation: Isabell Schrickel (Lüneburg)

Panel 2.3 | Akustische Medien als Werkzeuge wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnis in C HS5

Stimmgabeln. Vom Lernen über das Hören und der Verwissenschaftlichung des Gehörs am Beispiel der Zeitschrift für Psychologie und Physiologie der Sinnesorgane (1890–1915) von Heiner Stahl (Erfurt)

Geschulte Ohren und akustische Repräsentation. Zur Geschichte der auditiven Kultur der Naturwissenschaften von Axel Volmar (Siegen)

Tiere, Töne: Tatsachen? Zur Rolle von Medientechnologien in bioakustischer Feldforschung von Judith Willkomm (Siegen)

Insect Noise in Stored Foodstuff. Zur Interferenz von Wissenschaft und Kunst im Feld der Radiophonie von Ania Mauruschat (Basel)

Moderation: Ute Holl (Basel)

Panel 2.4 | Wissenschaft und Audiovision. Vom Denken in und mit bewegten Bildern in C 14.027

Filmmaterial, Fühlbarkeit und Diskurs von Naomi Rolef (Berlin)

What you see is what you get. Zur Rhetorik wissenschaftlicher Vorträge von Christina Schmitt (Berlin) | Sarah Greifenstein (Berlin)

Animierte Filmwissenschaft. Multimediale Publikation und analytische Zugänge zur Ästhetik audiovisueller Medien
von Jan-Hendrik Bakels (Berlin) | Cilli Poggoda (Berlin)

Das Gehirn als Kosmos. Neurowissenschaftliche Bilder und ihre Präsentation in populärwissenschaftlichen audiovisuellen Formaten von Regina Brückner (Berlin) | Sarah Greifenstein (Berlin)

Moderation: Andreas Kirchner (Lüneburg)

Panel 2.5 | Experimentelle Anordnungen zur Erforschung des Medialen in C 14.001

Stil, Experiment und Medium – die epistemische Dimension des Stilbegriffs in Wissenschaft und Kunst von Veronika Pöhnl (Konstanz)

Experimental Television: Versuchsanordnungen der Fernsehkunst von Samantha Schramm (Konstanz)

Die Erkundung des »videospace« in der Arbeit des National Center for Experiments in Television (1967–1975)
von Barbara Filser (Karlsruhe)

Wenn das Wohnzimmer zum Labor wird von Matthias Wieser (Klagenfurt)

Moderation: Isabell Otto (Konstanz)

Panel 2.6 | Medien im Maßstab. Wie sich Feld- und Laborforschung als situierte Medienpraxis untersuchen lassen in C 14.006

Sammeln, Ordnen, Vergleichen. Über die Domestizierung fremder Dinge von Anna Brus (Siegen)

Andere Medien? Anderes Wissen? Anderes Streiten? Weblogs als Formen der internen Wissenschaftskommunikation von Matthias Meiler (Siegen)

Wissenschaftsmedien in »freier Wildbahn«. Computersimulationen und gesellschaftliches Zukunftswissen in Wirtschaft und Politik von Cornelius Schubert (Siegen)

Fliegen, Fotografieren und Wettermachen. Zur Relevanz fotografischer Praktiken im Cloud Seeding von Nadine Taha (Siegen)

Moderation: Gabriele Schabacher (Siegen)

AG-Treffen 2.7 | Medienkultur und Bildung in C 12.001 AG-Treffen 2.8 | Medienwissenschaft und politische Theorie in C 12.006

Abendessen | Donnerstag, 03. Oktober 2013, 19:00 Uhr–20:30 Uhr in der Mensa

Podiumsdiskussion | Donnerstag, 03. Oktober 2013, 20:30 Uhr–21:30 Uhr
Am Ende der Bibliographien. Vom neuen (medialen) Selbstverständnis wissenschaftlichen Arbeitens in C HS 1
mit: Wendy Chun (Providence | Lüneburg), Ute Holl (Basel), Thomas Y. Levin (Princeton | Lüneburg), Geert Lovink (Amsterdam | Lüneburg), Nishant Shah (Bangalore | Lüneburg), Frank Schirrmacher (Frankfurt)

Moderation: Wolfgang Hagen (Lüneburg)

Session 3 | Freitag, 04. Oktober 2013, 9:30 Uhr–11:30 Uhr
Panel 3.1 | Dokumentarischer Film zwischen wissenschaftlicher Forschung und populärer Wissensvermittlung in C HS 3

Die Welt mit dem Röntgenblick sehen von Kay Hoffmann (Stuttgart)

Körperpolitik zwischen den Trümmern: Gesundheitsfilme aus der Besatzungszeit 1946 bis 1949 von Ursula von Keitz (Konstanz)

Die Encyclopaedia Cinematographica – ein analoger Computer von Eva Knopf (Berlin)

Dokumentarische Langzeitstudien als Gegenstand und Verfahren sozialwissenschaftlicher Forschung von Britta Hartmann (Bonn)

Moderation: Thomas Weber (Hamburg)

Panel 3.2 | Informationsumwelten in C HS 4
Record and Erase: Magnettonbandtechnik und die Historiographie des Kalten Kriegs von Monika Dommann (Zürich)

What you see is what you get? Grafische Benutzeroberflächen als infrastrukturelle Bildsysteme von Margarete Pratschke (Zürich)

Die Grenzen der Cyborgmetaphorik. Zur Rolle des fliegerischen Gefühls im Zeitalter der Flugautomation von Christian Kehrt (Hamburg)

Psychologie und Schalttafel. Oder, Informationszeitalter »from below« von Max Stadler (Zürich)

Moderation: Cornelius Borck (Lübeck)

Panel 3.3 | Aperture Sciences. Spielen im Labor des Spielens in C HS 5

»The Cake is a Lie«. Das Portal-Labor als Verhaltensexperiment von Rolf F. Nohr (Braunschweig)

Von sprechenden Kartoffeln und anderen (epistemischen) Dingen. Portal als Experimentalensemble von Markus Rautzenberg (Berlin)

Laborgeschichten von Benjamin Beil (Köln)

»Know your paradoxes!« Das Computerspiel als multistabiles Bild von Thomas Hensel (Siegen)

Moderation: Panelteilnehmer

Panel 3.4 | Szenariotechniken des Anthropozäns. Daten, Kosmogramme, Simulationen in C 14.027
Analoge Signale. Das Anthropozän im geohistorischen Rauschen von Christoph Rosol (Berlin)

Welt – Bild – Technik. Zum Begriff des Visineerings von Isabell Schrickel (Berlin)

Burning Planets – Kosmogramm des Anthropozäns? Eine Medienkritik der Klimavisualisierung von Birgit Schneider (Potsdam)

Vernetzte Daten – Webbasierte Datenbanken in der Klimafolgenforschung von Christine Hanke (Potsdam)

Moderation: Sebastian Vehlken (Lüneburg)

Panel 3.5 | Vor Augen führen in C 14.001

Von Bildern, die »freylich noch vollkommener seyn könnten«. Vetreter der frühen Hirnforschung als Bildkritiker von Wibke Larink (Hamburg)

Orpheus im Atlas oder: Das epistemische Bild bei Aby Warburg von Eva Frey (Lüneburg)

Aufzeichnen. Transformieren. Verzeichnen. Medien der Geschichtsschreibung ephemerer Kunstformen (Performance und Aufführungen) von Barbara Büscher (Leipzig | Köln)

Medien der Medienwissenschaft. Zwischen Gebrauchs- und Diskursgeschichte von Martina Leeker (Lüneburg)

Moderation: Wolfgang Hagen (Lüneburg)

Workshop 3.6 | Das Wissen der Instrumente in C 14.006

Der Workshop »Das Wissen der Instrumente« präsentiert konkrete (medien-)instrumentale Settings als Materialisierungen ästhetischen Wissens. Dabei wird sensorische Medienarbeit mit akademischen Diskursen kurzgeschlossen. Dafür werden die Settings nicht nur in theoretischen Statements vorgestellt, sondern auch von den Teilnehmenden praktisch erprobt.

Organisiert vom Schwerpunktbereich audio^[+] Ästhetische Strategien des Instituts für Kultur und Ästhetik Digitaler Medien, Leuphana Universität Lüneburg (Rolf Großmann, Sarah-Indriyati Hardjowirogo, Andreas Otto, Malte Pelleter) und der Forschungsstelle Musik und Medientechnologie der Universität Osnabrück (Arne Bense).

AG-Treffen 3.7 | Medien und Kunst / Kunst und Medien in C 12.001

AG-Treffen 3.8 | Daten und Netzwerke in C 12.006

Kaffeepause | Freitag, 04. Oktober 2013, 11:30 Uhr–12:00 Uhr im Hörsaalgang

Session 4 | Freitag, 04. Oktober 2013, 12:00 Uhr–13:30 Uhr
Panel 4.1 | Wissensmedium Patent – Kulturtechnik Patentieren in C HS 3

Patentstörungen. Sollbruchstörungen im Medium des Patents von Christian Kassung (Berlin)

Be it known that I ... - Digitalisierte historische Patente als Gegenstand wissenschaftlicher Forschung von Marius Hug (Berlin)

Was erzählt ein Patent? Casellis bildtelegraphische Patente als Medien der Wissenschaften von Julia Zons (Konstanz)

Moderation: Thomas Brandstetter (Basel)

Panel 4.2 | Verhalten bilden in C HS 4

Wahnsinnige Bilder. Zu einer medialen Wissensgeschichte des Irrationalen um 1900 von Veronika Rall (Zürich)

Familien-stellen. Zur Medialität der systemischen Therapie von Katja Rothe (Berlin)

Fotografie, vergleichende Verhaltensforschung und Evolutionslehre am Moskauer Darwin Museum von Margarete Vöhringer (Berlin)

Moderation: Christoph Windgaetter (Berlin)

Panel 4.3 | Programme verstehen - Verstehen programmieren in C HS 5

Source Code als Quelle. Arbeiten mit Friedrich Kittlers Programmierwerk von Paul Feigelfeld (Berlin) | Peter Berz (Berlin)

»Digital Humanities« und das neue Wissen der Bilder. Über Praxis, Theorie und Geschichte der apparativen Bildsortierung von Matthias Wannhoff (Berlin)

Intermedialitätsbegriff und Sinnverstehen im Kontext alternativer Arbeitstechnik von Miklas Schulz (Lüneburg)

Moderation: Martin Warnke (Lüneburg)

Panel 4.4 | Diagramme als Medien des Wissens in C 14.027

Information als Konfiguration. Zum Verhältnis von Gestalt und Gehalt in Diagrammen von Matthias Bauer (Flensburg)

Diagramme als Generatoren wissenschaftlicher Autorität von Christoph Ernst (Erlangen | Nürnberg)

Konfiguration, Leib und Geometrie. Merleau-Pontys Philosophie der Mathematik von Jan Wöbking (Berlin)

Moderation: Gottfried Schnödl (Lüneburg)

Panel 4.5 | HIV|AIDS als visuelles Wissen in C 14.001

Der AIDS-Atlas. AIDS als klinisches Krankheitsbild von Lukas Engelmann (Berlin)

Toxische Körper. Medien der Ansteckung und Affektpolitiken zur Zeit der frühen AIDS-Krise von Katrin Köppert (Berlin)

»Art about AIDS«. Über die Konstruktion von Wissen über Menschen mit AIDS von Sophie Junge (Zürich)

Moderation: Brigitte Weingart (Bonn)

Panel 4.6 | Wissenschaft in Serie. Fernsehen als Versuchsanordnung in C 14.006

Serielle Epidemiologie von Daniela Wentz (Weimar)

Situationen, Labor, Experiment. Die Sitcom als Medium der Wissenschaft des Menschen von Herbert Schwaab (Regensburg)

Die Physik der Serie. Modell und Motiv der Tafel in »The Big Bang Theory« von Dominik Maeder (Siegen)

Moderation: Thomas Waitz (Wien)

AG-Treffen 4.7 | Genre Studies in C 12.001

AG-Treffen 4.8 | Games in C 12.006

Mittagessen | Freitag, 04. Oktober 2013, 13:30 Uhr–14:30 Uhr in der Mensa

Session 5 | Freitag, 04. Oktober 2013, 14:30 Uhr–16:30 Uhr
Panel 5.1 | Medien(Affekt)Wissen in C HS 3

»Von uns schweigen wir...«. Narrative Affektmodulationen in Philosophie und Wissenschaft von Bernd Bösel (Köln)

Affektenlehre, Sonic Warfare und die Medienschriften der auditiven Affizierung von Rolf Großmann (Lüneburg)

Verdrahtete und durchleuchtete Gehirne. Zur Verwendung von Videospielen in neurologischer und psychologischer Forschung von Serjoscha Wiemer (Paderborn)

Affektmedialisierung im diskursiven und sozialen Bereich von Michaela Ott (Hamburg)

Moderation: Marie-Luise Angerer (Köln)

Panel 5.2 | Geteilte Bilder. Fotografieforschung im Internet in C HS 4

Digitale Bildbestände als Grundlage neuer Visualisierungskulturen von Winfried Gerling (Potsdam)

Die Wiederkehr des Analogen. Rezeptionsweisen von Fundfotografien von Susanne Holschbach (Berlin)

Collective Collections. Wissensordnung digitaler Bildersammlungen von Petra Löffler (Berlin)

Neue Bilder, alte Orte. Räume der Bildberichterstattung von Kathrin Peters (Oldenburg)

Moderation: Katja Müller-Helle (Berlin)

Panel 5.3 | Das Wissen der Oberfläche in C HS 5
Oberflächenmoderne von Stefan Rieger (Bochum)

Das Display. Am Beispiel akustischer Texte von Natalie Binczek (Bochum)

Oberflächen und Ränder des Urbanen. Photodokumentarische Forschungen um 1970 von Christoph Eggersglüß (Weimar)

Vom Grund zur Oberfläche. Messung, Behandlung und Beschreibung von Oberflächen in volkssprachlichen Fachtexten der Frühen Neuzeit von Christina Lechtermann (Bochum)

Moderation: Claus Pias (Lüneburg)

Panel 5.4 | Passt schon! in C 14.027

»Pi mal Daumen«. Medien der Ingenieurswissenschaft zwischen »Applied Sciences« und »reiner« Wissenschaft von Florian Hoof (Frankfurt)

Siegesversuchskörper. Planen, Prüfen, Erinnern von Ingo Landwehr (Berlin)

Bilder von antizipierten Ruinen als Orte der Identitätsformation von Sibylle Machat (Flensburg)

Messen ohne Skalen. Warum der Geigerzähler kein Messgerät ist von Marc-Robin Wendt (Berlin)

Moderation: Peter Berz (Berlin)

Panel 5.5 | Weltfrieden. Medien und Methoden möglicher Zukünfte in C 14.001

Nash Equilibrium von Ana Teixera Pinto (Berlin)

Der globale Körper. Heinz von Foerster und Noa Eshkol am Biological Computer Laboratory von Eva Wilson (Berlin)

Unzeitgenössische Welt von Ana Ofak (Berlin)

Moderation: Isabell Schrickel (Lüneburg)

Panel 5.6 | Mediamorphosen der Wissenschaft. Zwischen Unsinn und Eigensinn in C 14.006

»Wenn Sie mir dies einmal beschreiben würden…«. »Medien der Wissenschaften« in audiovisuellen Essays von Alexander Kluge von Florian Wobser (Rostock)

Philosophie diesseits der Wende zur Bildlichkeit. Der Buch-Bausatz Kant für die Hand als mediale Herausforderung
von Hanno Depner (Rostock)

Paranoische Decodierung. Zur Intermedialität einer Pseudowissenschaft von John Seidler (Rostock)

Die Quantifizierung von Reputation in den Sozialwissenschaften. Zitationsindizes und Zeitschriftenrankings – reflexive oder vorreflexive Beziehung zur eigenen Medialität? von Dennis Wutzke (Rostock)

Moderation: Elizabeth Prommer (Rostock)

AG-Treffen 5.7 | Filmwissenschaft in C 12.001

AG-Treffen 5.8 | Medienphilosophie in C 12.006

Kaffeepause | Freitag, 04. Oktober 2013, 16:30 Uhr–17:00 Uhr im Hörsaalgang

Session 6 | Freitag, 04. Oktober 2013, 17:00 Uhr–19:00 Uhr
Panel 6.1 | Medien der Universität in C HS 3

Die Medialität wissenschaftlicher Zeitschriften von Martina Franzen (Bielefeld)

Medienreflektionen im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert: »Massenmedien im gelehrten Diskurs« von Kai Lohsträter (Hamburg)

Entwürfe der Grenzüberschreitung. Interdisziplinarität und die mediale Konstitution von Epistemologien (1960 – 1980) von Susanne Schregel (Weimar)

Das technische und das ökonomische Regime der Universität. Effekte der Ökonomisierung und des Internets auf Wissen und Lehre von Stefan Heidenreich (Lüneburg)

Moderation: Claus Pias (Lüneburg)

Panel 6.2 | Mit/in/durch Medien? Praktiken der Medientheorie in C HS 4

Trennen und Verbinden von Peter Bexte (Köln)

Revidieren von Manuela Klaut (Weimar)

Reflektieren von Katerina Krtilova (Weimar)

Re-make von Katharina Wloszczynska (Weimar)

Moderation: Lorenz Engell (Weimar)

Workshop 6.3 | Open Up! The Politics and Pragmatics of Open Access in C HS 5
Our academic landscape adapted fast to the disruption of Open Access: commercial publishers have started several successful Open Access platforms, and Open Access is by now the EU's official funding guideline. But there remain open questions. What modes of openness are called for in knowledge production and dissemination? Does the take-up of Open Access fully satisfy the drive towards openness stirred up by digital media? How is Open Access challenging academic research practices or even our understanding of knowledge? What are the limits to openness? The Hybrid Publishing Lab and its international guests will present their research.

The workshop is also open to short example-oriented presentations of participants who want to engage in the discussion. Please email us beforehand at hybridpublishing@inkubator.leuphana.de

Organisiert vom Hybrid Publishing Lab der Leuphana Universität Lüneburg mit Janneke Adema (Coventry University) und Nishant Shah (Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore).

Panel 6.4 | Wissenschaftsdiskursivierung im Medium Comic in C 14.027
Comic als Medium der Wissenschaft von Jens Meinrenken (Berlin)

Selbstreflexive Wissensvermittlungen im Comic. Wenn Comics Comics erklären von Simon Klingler (Hamburg) | Andreas Veits (Hamburg)

Die Szenographie der Alltagsnavigation: Manga-Grafiken zur Darstellung von Wirkungszusammenhängen im öffentlichen Raum von Lukas Wilde (Tübingen)

Ikonizität und Zeugenschaft. Dokumentarische Comics über den israelisch-palästinensischen Konflikt von Roman Mauer (Mainz)

Moderation: Véronique Sina (Bochum)

Panel 6.5 | Modelle als Medien in C 14.001

Fragile Netzwerke, zerbrechliche Schönheiten. Die Harvard Glass Flowers als Medien zwischen Wissenschaft und Kunst von Florian Huber (Wien)

Von Modell zu Modell von Jan Müggenburg (Lüneburg)

Modell-Licht-Bild. Medien im Mathematikunterricht 1910 bis 1920 von Anja Sattelmacher (Berlin)

Drogulus. Ein mechanisches Modell maschinischen Lebens um 1960 von Thomas Brandstetter (Basel)

Moderation: Stefan Rieger (Bochum)

Panel 6.6 | Wissenschaftskulturen der Bio- und Öko-Medialität in C 14.006
Conways »Game of Life« zwischen Unterhaltungsspiel und epistemischem Werkzeug von Serjoscha Wiemer (Paderborn)

»What I cannot create, I do not understand«. Synthetische Biologie, Biopolitik, Biomedialität von Martin Müller (Paderborn)

Für eine kleine Ökologie von Maren Schwieger (Bochum)

Leben im Kreis. Uexkülls Medien von Christoph Neubert (Paderborn)

Moderation: Marie-Luise Angerer (Köln)

AG-Treffen 6.7 | Treffen in C 12.001

17:00 Uhr–18:00 Uhr: AG »Medienindustrien«
18:00 Uhr–19:00 Uhr: AG »Fotografieforschung«

AG-Treffen 6.8 | Gender Studies und Medienwissenschaft in C 12.006

Abendessen | Freitag, 04. Oktober 2013, 19:00 Uhr–20:30 Uhr

Buffet mit Weinempfang im Hörsaalgang

Keynote | Freitag, 04. Oktober 2013, 20:30 Uhr–21:30 Uhr in C HS 1

Feierliche Eröffnung des Digital Cultures Research Lab der Leuphana Universität Lüneburg

Festvortrag von Bernard Stiegler (London)

Digital studies as an organology of mind
anschließend Party im Salon Hansen

Session 7 | Samstag, 05. Oktober 2013, 9:30 Uhr–11:30 Uhr

Panel 7.1 | KonferenzWissen in C HS 3

Do’s and Don’ts and How to Break Them: Conferences and the Mediated Performance of Knowledge von Kristoffer Gansing (Berlin)

Das Wissen der Versammlung. Vorschlag zur Einrichtung eines experimentellen Lecture Theatre von Sybille Peters (Gießen)

Stammbücher als Medien der methodischen Orientierung von Anna Echterhölter (Berlin)

Ethos, Pathos, Logos – Über Digitales Präsentieren von Wolfgang Hagen (Lüneburg)

Moderation: Oliver Lerone-Schultz (Lüneburg)

Panel 7.2 | Medienbildung und Digital Humanities. Die Medienvergessenheit technisierter Geisteswissenschaften in C HS 4

Die Digitalisierung der Medienwissenschaft? Computergestützte audiovisuelle Analyse und Software Studies – Methoden zur rechnergestützten medienwissenschaftlichen Forschung und Lehre von Petra Missomelius (Innsbruck)

Unbegrenzte Möglichkeiten und die Grenzen der Möglichkeiten. Das Web 2.0 und seine Erkenntnispotentiale von Katja Grashöfer (Bochum)

Digital (Media) Studies zwischen Datenbank und Narration von Roberto Simanowski (Basel)

Algorithmische Kritik oder Kritik der Algorithmen? von Till Andreas Heilmann (Basel)

Moderation: Petra Missomelius (Innsbruck)

Panel 7.3 | Aus dem Rahmen fallen in C HS 5

Wuchernde Milieus. Meeresbiologische Medien um 1900 von Christina Wessely (Berlin)

»The Breaking of the Second Frame«. Transgressive Denkfiguren der Avantgarde von Katja Müller-Helle (Berlin)

Die Kinoleinwand als Ausstellungsobjekt von Dennis Göttel (Braunschweig)

Touristische Selbst- und Fremdbeobachtung. Film, Reise und Reflexivität von Thomas Morsch (Berlin)

Moderation: Gloria Meynen (Friedrichshafen)

Panel 7.4 | Spielend wissen in C 14.027

Robot Challenges. Zur Performanz künstlicher Intelligenz von Ulf Otto (Hildesheim)

Welt spielen. Sim Earth als Grenzfall zwischen Spiel und wissenschaftlicher Simulation von Niklas Schrape (Lüneburg)

Spielprototypen als Form spielanalytischer Wissensproduktion von Stefan Werning (Bayreuth)

Potentiality and Actuality of Computer-based Simulation Environments von Sabine Thürmel (München)

Moderation: Jan Müggenburg (Lüneburg)

Panel 7.5 | Medienwissenschaft ohne Gedächtnis? Hindernisse und Lösungswege beim Zugang zum audiovisuellen Medienerbe in C 14.001

Sind Rundfunkarchive immer noch Geheimarchive? Oder bewegen Sie sich doch?
von Michael Crone (Darmstadt)

Vom Geheimschatz zum Allgemeingut? Strategien der audiovisuellen Medienerbe-Verwaltung im internationalen Vergleich
von Leif Kramp (Bremen)

Das Recht als Schranke. Juristische Perspektiven beim Umgang mit dem audiovisuellen Medienerbe in Deutschland
von Paul Klimpel (Berlin)

Digitale Archive der »zweiten Öffentlichkeit«. Forschungsmethoden und »participatory research« von Katalin Cseh (Wien)

Moderation: Christoph Classen (Potsdam)

AG-Treffen 7.6 | Treffen in C 12.001
9:30 Uhr–10:30 Uhr: AG »Populärkultur und Medien«
10:30 Uhr–11:30 Uhr: AG »Animation«

AG-Treffen 7.7 | Medienwissenschaft und Wissenschaftsforschung in C 12.006

Kaffeepause | Samstag, 05. Oktober 2013, 11:30 Uhr–12:00 Uhr im Hörsaalgang

Session 8 | Samstag, 05. Oktober 2013, 12:00 Uhr–13:30 Uhr
Panel 8.1 | Eingeräumt: Darstellen in 3-D in C HS 3

Das Bild des Raumorgans. Zur historischen Epistemologie der Dreidimensionalität von Stephan Günzel (Berlin)

Dreidimensionale Bilder als Medien der Teilchenphysik von Jens Schröter (Siegen)

Vom Raum im Raum. Mutmassungen über die Anfänge menschlicher Raumbildungen im Tanz von Walter Siegfried (München)

Moderation: Inge Hinterwaldner (Lüneburg | Basel)

Panel 8.2 | The Revolution Will Not Be Televised in C HS 4
Netzkritik revisited! Eine Diskursgeschichte der Medienwissenschaft von Clemens Apprich (Lüneburg)

Die Aporie des Neuen. Medienwissenschaftliche Deutungsmuster des Internets von Linda Groß (Hamburg) | Lisa Wiedemann (Hamburg)

Moderation: Andreas Broeckmann (Lüneburg)

Panel 8.3 | Licht – Glas – Kälte. Zum Tempus »wohltemperierter« Bilder der Wissenschaft in C HS 5
-273 °C – Eine Reise in die Tiefe der Temperaturskala. Die Exploration der Kälte im populären Wissenschaftsfilm von Claudia Pinkas–Thompson (Karlsruhe)

Gläserne Gebilde. Zur Transparenz der Medien und Symbolik des Wissensdurstes von Szilvia Gellai (Karlsruhe)

Spiegelplaneten und kosmische Archive. Eine medienarchäologische Perspektive auf die Popularisierung astronomischen Wissens im 19. Jahrhundert von Dominik Schrey (Karlsruhe)

Moderation: Andreas Böhn (Karlsruhe)

Panel 8.4 | Populäre Wissenschaftskulissen. Wissen(schafts)formate in populären Medienkulturen in C 14.027
Wissen(schaft) für die Masse. Die »Urania-gesellschaft« und die Popularisierung wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisse im 19. Jahrhundert von Thomas Wilke (Halle)

Philosophie im/des Fernsehens. Metamorphosen philosophischen Wissens in den Fernsehformaten »Das philosophische Quartett« und »Precht« von Marcus S. Kleiner (Siegen)

Folksonomies. Wissensaggregate im Social Web von Ramón Reichert (Wien)

Moderation: Holger Schulze (Berlin)

Filmvorführung 8.5 | »Odyssee und Nahverkehr« (2012) in C 14.006

Ein Film von Martin Schlesinger (Bochum) und Marius Boettcher (Weimar)

AG-Treffen 8.6 | Fernsehgeschichte und Television Studies in C 12.001

Kommissionstreffen 8.7 | Lehre in C 12.006

Kommissionstreffen 8.8 | Medien/Recht in C 12.006

Mittagessen | Samstag, 05. Oktober 2013, 13:30 Uhr–14:30 Uhr in der Mensa

Mitgliederversammlung | Samstag, 05. Oktober 2013, 14:30 Uhr–16:30 Uhr in HS 3
Verleihung des Best Publication Award der AG Gender Studies und Medienwissenschaft
Verleihung des Karsten-Witte-Preis der AG Film
anschließend Mitgliederversammlung der GfM

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/gfm-2013

Design!publiC

praskrishna — 2011-06-03T13:27:22Z

The Centre for Internet and Society in partnership with Centre for Knowledge Societies, Venkataramanan Associates, Centre for Law and Policy Research and LiveMint is organising Design!publiC on March 18, 2011. Design Public is a conversation about whether and how to bring design thinking to bear upon the challenges of government so as to promote governance innovation.

Background

The problem of governance is perhaps as old as society, as old as the rule of law. But it is only more recently -- perhaps the last five hundred years of modernity -- that human societies have been able to conceive of different models of government, different modalities of public administration, all having different effects on the configuration of society. The problem of governments, of governmentality, and of governance is always also the problem of how to change the very processes and procedures of government, so as to enhance the ends of the state and to promote the collective good.

Since the establishment of India’s republic, many kinds of changes have been made to the policies and practices of its state. We may think of, for instance, successive stages of land reforms, the privatization of large-scale and extractive industries, the subsequent abolition of the License Raj and so and so forth. We may also consider the computerization of state documents beginning in the 1980s, and more recently, the Right To Information Act (RTI). More recently there have been activist campaigns to reduce the discretionary powers of government and to thereby reduce the scope of corruption in public life.

While all these cases represent the continuous process of modification, reform, and change to government policy and even to its modes of functioning, this is not what we have in mind when we speak of ‘governance innovation.’ Rather, intend a specific process of ethnographic inquiry into the real needs of citizens, followed by an inclusive approach to reorganizing and representing that information in such a way that it may promote collaborative problem-solving and solutioneering through the application of design thinking.

The concept of design thinking has emerged only recently, and it has been used to describe approaches to problem solving that include: (i) redefining the fundamental challenges at hand, (ii) evaluating multiple possible options and solutions in parallel, and (iii) prioritizing and selecting those which are likely to achieve the greatest benefits for further consideration. This approach may also be iterative, allowing decisions to be made in general and specific ways as an organization gets closer and closer to the solution. Design thinking turns out to be not an individual but collective and social process, requiring small and large groups to be able to work together in relation to the available information about the task or challenge at hand. Design thinking can lead to innovative ideas, to new insights, and to new actionable directions for organizations.

This general approach to innovation -- and the central role of design thinking -- has emerged from the private sector over the last quarter century, and has enjoyed particular success in regards to the development of new technology products, services and experience. The question we would like to address in this conference is whether and how this approach can be employed for the transformation public and governmental systems.

What is the Evidence that Design Thinking Positively Impacts Governments?

Many European countries have government-supported design conglomerations for the purposes of enhancing business and the government’s interface with the public. Design Council in the UK not only works to create public identities but also helps formulate national design strategies that help the United Kingdom to differentiate its national brand and achieve broad national benefits. Elsewhere in the UK, a private organization, Think Public, and various governmental agencies, are working through a consultative approach with citizens to better target governmental services so as to maximize citizen benefits.

In the context of public health, the first major public health information system has been built in Canada, and in many ways it may serve as a reference and benchmark for other countries around the world. The first deployment of a public health information system in developing country contexts is in Ghana, where a specialized Resource Center is even now being conceived to enable the support and further development of this new system.

In India, early innovation research and concept development activities by the Center for Knowledge Societies for the Gates Foundation has shown promising results in terms of new opportunities to enhance the quality of health care delivery through the Bihar pilot itself, using the tools and techniques of ethnography, design, and user experience enhancement. In its studios in New Delhi and Bangalore, it has hosted innovation workshops with international health experts, public officials and other stakeholders to envision new kinds of technologies and solutions for improving public health delivery. In future, it may be possible to organize these kinds of efforts in the form of an Innovation Lab or Innovation Center.

Whereas, in the past, diverse attempts have been made to reform government, to make it more efficient, to reduce corruption and the arbitrariness of decisioning authority. Beneficial as these approaches may have been, they have not always been successful in fundamentally transforming the ways in which bureaucracies think about their mission, objectives and goals. They have not resulted in greater consumer orientation of these cadres, or greater public participation in the decision-making of these bureaucracies. These are the kinds of benefits that design thinking can bring to governmental and quasi-governmental bureaucracies.

In this conclave, our interest is to explore how design thinking and user-centered innovation might help such organizations better accomplish their mission and better serve their beneficiaries. We also seek to explore and establish particular modalities through which governance innovation can be achieved, as well as to identify key stakeholders and personalities gripped of the challenge of governance innovation. Our larger goal is to craft a path forward for integrating design thinking and innovation methodologies in the further re-envisioning, refashioning and improvement of public services in India and elsewhere in the world.

Specific Expected Outcomes

A shared understanding and common vocabulary around design thinking and innovation
A review of insights and outcomes from the event by members of government with a view to routinizing and institutionalizing innovation in government
A documentation of case-studies, concepts and perspectives from different participants emerging from the conclave
An emerging community of thinkers and practitioners interested in working together to share information and insights to accelerate governance innovation
A consensus on the modalities and occasion for the conduct of a follow-up conclave, possibly in Bangalore as soon as September 2011

An Invitation to Dialogue

Design Public is a conversation among a select group of high level thinkers and actors who care about public services design. No more than 50 persons will be in attendance. Presentations will be brief. Panel discussants will intersperse with the other participants for greater involvement and equal opportunity for dialogue and response. All attendees will be asked to participate in the emerging dialogue through the day.

Draft Schedule

10.00 am
What do Designers do? How can Physical, Informational and Interaction Design Impact the Everyday Life of Citizens?

Sunil Abraham, Executive Director, Centre for Internet and Society (Moderator)
Aditya Dev Sood, CEO, Center for Knowledge Socities
Abhimanyu Kulkarni, Design Director, Philips Design
Younghee Jung, Senior Designer, Nokia Corporation
Daniela Sangiorgi, Lecturer, Lancaster University
Sudhir Krishnaswamy, Founder, Centre for Law and Policy Research
Naresh Narasimhan, Principal Architect, VA Group

11.00 am

How Can the Government Best Use Designers and Design Thinking?

Aditya Dev Sood, CEO, Center for Knowledge Societies (Moderator)
Niels Hansen, Project Manager, MindLab
Aparna Piramal Raje, Design Thinker, Mint
Anant Shah, Program Officer, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Harsh Shrivastava, Consultant (Planning), Planning Commission of India
Kiran Dhingra, Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation
Shubhagato Dasgupta, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Policy Research
Steven Solnik, Member-Government Performance and Accountability, Ford Foundation

12.00 pm

How can Social / Media Promote Design and Governance Innovation?

Suresh Venkat, Executive Producer, CNBC TV18 (Moderator)
Vibodh Parthasarthy, Associate Professor, Jamia Milia Islamia
Yatish Rajawat, Editor-in-Chief, Business Bhaskar
R. Sukumar, Editor, Mint
Sashwati Banerjee, Executive Director, Sesame Workshop India
Aditya Mishra, Founder, Headstart Foundation

1.00 pm

Working and Networking Lunch

2.00 pm

Innovation Workshopping Breakout Sessions

Track One:

Conducting Ethnography to Inform the Innovation Process

The group is responsible for coming up with an innovative approach to curbing power theft in peri-urban locations in India. Many factors are responsible for this phenomenon. What questions will you ask and how will you collect information on the ground to inform any future innovations you might come up with? (Case Study subject to change)
Brainstorming and Concepting in Response to Ethnographic Data

The group is responsible for conceptualizing a new ways to promote maternal and child health using mobile devices. Data on this question has already been collected and will be shown to you in the form of a brief presentation. You must come up with as many different ideas or concepts as possible using post-its. Then you must prioritize these concepts and vote on the ones you would like to see implemented. (Case Study subject to change)
Approaches to Institutionalizing Innovation in Government

This group will consider ways and means for accelerating and institutionalizing innovation in governance, through for example, the provision of knowledge, best practices, support, training, and organizational change. Ideas may include, but not be restricted to new kinds of handbooks, online sources, academic and applied training and other ideas. Approaches should be evaluated and prioritized prior to presentation back to the group.

4.30 pm
Team Presentations (over tea served at tables)

5.00 pm
What institutional and organizational models can best foster Governance Innovation?

Amit Garg, Director, MXV Consulting (Moderator)
Arun Maira, Member, Planning Commission & Member, National Innovation Council
R. Gopalakrishnan, Member Secretary, National Innovation Council
Mohammad Haleem Khan, Director, CAPART
D S Ravindran, CEO, Center of e-Governance, Government of Karnataka
Aditya Dev Sood, CEO, Center for Knowledge Societies

Other Notable Discussants and Interactants

Anil Khachi, Deputy Director General, UIDAI
Narahari Mahato, Member of Parliament, AIFB
N. Cheluvaraya Swamy, Member of Parliament, JD(S)
Syed Azeez Pasha, Member of Parliament, CPI
Moinul Hassan, Member of Parliament, CPM
Amit Garg, Director, MXV Consulting
William Bissell, Managing Director, FabIndia
Kalpana Awasthi, Officer on Special Duty (OSD) to Sam Pitroda
Abhimanyu Kulkarni, Design Director, Philips Design
D. Raja, Member of Parliament, CPI
Josh Glazeroff, Visa Chief, US Embassy
Pooja Sood, Curator and Director, Khoj Foundation
Ravina Agarwal, Program Officer, Ford Foundation
Nita Soans, Advisor, Center for Knowledge Societies
Ekta Ohri, Head of Project Operations, Center for Knowledge Societies

Individual Participation

In order to make each voice count, entry to the conclave will be by arrangement only. Others who are truly interested, should please drop us a few lines on how they would like to contribute and we will be glad to get back in touch.

There are no registration fees. However, we would like to see participants take their own initiative in covering their own travel costs and making their own arrangements for stay so far as possible. If specific needs are perceived, please communicate them to the organizers.

Institutional Participation

Confederations of industry, associations of management, departments of government and diverse development sector and civil society organizations are invited to express their interest in supporting this event.

Organizers

Center for Knowledge Societies (CKS)
Center for Internet and Society (CIS)

Sponsors

Venkatramanan Associates (VA)
Center for Law and Policy (CLP)

Date and Venue
The date for the event has been decided for Friday, the 18th of March, 2011. It will be held at the Taj Vivanta in Central Delhi.

Thought Leadership and Dialogue
Dr. Aditya Dev Sood, CEO, Center for Knowledge Societies
aditya@cks.in

Naresh Narasimhan, Principal, VA Associates
naresh@vagroup.com

Sudhir Krishnaswamy, Founder, Center for Law and Policy
sudhir.krishnaswamy@ashiralaw.co.in

Participation Enquiries

Sumeet Malhotra, Business Development Manager
sumeet@cks.in

Download the book here [PDF, 2.8 MB]
Download the case studies here [PDF, 641 KB]
Download the glossary here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/events/design-public

Seminar on Open Access for Scientific Information

praskrishna — 2011-06-09T12:41:22Z

Open-access provides free online access to quality scholarly material that can be defined as “open domain,” meaning publicly supported research information, and “open access,” so that it is copyrighted to be freely available scholarly material. Open-access publishing enables researchers in developing countries to establish priority for their research, which they could use later to defend their intellectual property. It removes excess barriers in terms of both price and permission, enhances national research capacity, and improves visibility for developing-country research. Open access thus enables a global platform for this research and collaboration and reciprocates the information flow from South to North among all countries.

In India, there is a large opportunity for open-access publishing. There are many non-commercial research and development institutions, both academic and research laboratories. For example, there are approximately 300 universities that offer both graduate and research programs. There are also many R&D laboratories operating within government science agencies, which cover domains like industrial research, defense research, agricultural research, medicine, ecology, environment, information technology, space, energy, and ocean development.

Many of these institutions, and also several professional societies, publish science journals. Tools like the Open Journal Systems could help many of these journals to come online in an open-access environment. Open Access is relevant to India because most research is funded from public money, institutional framework and information infrastructure, trained manpower and financial resources are adequately available. It widens distribution of information and knowledge and lowers the cost of reaching a fairly wide audience while maximising return on public money. The OA movement is being supported by research funding agencies, academic institutions, researchers and scientists, teachers, students, and members of the general public.

Open access publishing can foster the exchange of research results amongst scientists from different disciplines, thus facilitating interdisciplinary research, whilst providing access to research results to researchers world-wide, including from developing countries, as well as to an interested general public.

Access to and sharing of information, including scientific information, goes through dramatic changes because of rapidly emerging new communication and information technologies (ICTs) and the societal transformations that they generate. But what are the long-term strategies to efficiently harness the open access potential for developing new approaches to knowledge acquisition and sharing? What needs to be done to effectively integrate these strategies into forward looking and sustainable policy making? How can we harness the potential of open access to develop knowledge societies that are people-centred, inclusive and development oriented? What are the global environmental trends that will influence open access in the next few years? What are the main needs of the open access stakeholders in India and South Asia ? Which are the publishing models for open-access journals and what does it imply to finance and sustain open access journals in developing countries; how to overcome language and other barriers ?

These issues are of strategic relevance to UNESCO as they address key challenges linked to building knowledge societies, one of the overarching objectives of the Medium Term Strategy 2008-2013.

UNESCO, jointly with the Centre for Internet Society is well placed to mobilize interested stakeholders to develop efficient implementation strategies in the area of acquision and sharing of scientific information and to integrate them into forward looking and sustainable policies.

UNESCO believes that open access is an enriching part of the scholarly communication process that can and should co-exist with other forms of communication and publication, such as society-based publishing and conferencing activities. Open access publications are also more easily included and searchable in search engines and indexing databases.

In order to initiate a sub-regional dialogue on democratizing access to scientific and health-related information, on the economics of scientific publishing and the implications of the various open-access models and the copyright and intellectual property issues, UNESCO convenes a one day seminar on 16 March 2011 in New Delhi. The concept of « open access » and the inter-relationships between academic institutions, researchers, scientists and publishers will be examined, as well as the challenges and barriers which OA is currently facing in this part of the world.

Overall objectives

Strengthen awareness of UNESCO’s stakeholders on the potential of open access in scientific knowledge sharing that are dramatically accelerated by ICTs;
Provide analysis for anticipating foreseeable trends end emerging challenges in order to enable Indian and South Asian stakeholders to develop strategies and policies to take them up;
Develop a partnership and collaboration among interested stakeholdesr in order to improve access to and sharing of scientific information and research through open access

Expected results

The discussion of the Open Access Seminar is expected to achieve the following results:

UNESCO’s stakeholders enabled to understand trends and emerging challenges related to the impact of open access on scientific information acquisition and sharing;
Possible developments prospected in the area of scientific information sharing in the coming 5 years;
Specific technology generated trends, and their consequences for development in scientific information and research sharing
Highlight the collaborative and collective efforts and actions behind the Open Access movement
Discussions of best practices of Open Access Initiatives

Who should attend:

Science editors
Policy makers
Information professionals
Researchers
Open Access movement activists
Academics and all those interested in electronic publishing.

Terms of Reference:

1) Initiatives within the open access movement (with focus on what all of this means for developing countries):

discussion on the pros and cons of open access
different models used and paths to achieving open access to the health literature
research reports and open access
democratizing access to scientific and health-related information
economics of scientific publishing and implications of the various open-access models
copyright and intellectual property

2) Open Access and the journals from developing countries

what does it means to bring journals online
publishing models for open-access journals
financing and sustaining open access journals in developing countries
costs associated with open access in developing countries
language barriers and translation
training information specialists and users on searching and accessing health literature

This event is co-organised by UNESCO and the Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore

Download the agenda here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/events/open-access

Delhi Declaration on Open Access

Admin — 2018-02-26T14:53:07Z

Open Access India recently released a statement to promote openness in science and research communities. CIS contributed to the text and introduced it to the participants of OpenCon 2018, Delhi.

Published by Open Access India on February 14, 2018. Read the original post here.

This declaration was drafted by a group comprising of researchers and professionals working for opening up access to research outputs for public good in India. The declaration is aimed at scientific communities, scholarly societies, publishers, funders, universities and research institutions to promote openness in science and research communications.

Preamble

The South Asian region, home to 24% of the world’s population faces major challenges such as hunger, poverty and inequality. These challenges become the collective responsibility of scholars and experts in research universities across the country. Consequently, it becomes imperative that research institutes share scientific research outputs and accelerate scientific research. The Open Access movement which aims for making all ‘publicly funded research outcomes publicly available for the public good’ is gaining momentum.

“Open means anyone can freely access, use, modify, and share for any purpose(subject, at most, to requirements that preserve provenance and openness)” –Open Definition.

As per the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI), ‘Open Access’ (to scholarly literature) is “free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself”.

Since the launch of the BOAI on 14th Feb. 2002, efforts are being made by various scholarly societies, academic communities and governments to make scholarly content Open. However, due to various reasons, the full potential of Open Access is not realised by the producers (scholars), publishers and readers (scholars and society at large) of this knowledge and the world is still disconnected in terms of sharing the scholarly content openly.

As per the Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR), India ranks 9th in the year 2016 producing about 13 lakhs articles. However, 82% of them are not Open Access and the Institutional Repositories in India are sparsely populated in spite of having Open Access mandates in place. The Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) lists only 200 out of the 20,000+ journals being published from India.

The historical BOAI is now 16 years old, but still there is a need for all of us to be educated and empowered to realize the power of Open Access to scholarly content and harness it for public good in India. With burgeoning commercial scholarly publications and increasing diversity in terms of availability of & accessibility to the information, we need to create a necessary framework for making Open Access the default by 2025 in India.

To ensure the wide availability and encourage the use of of research data and information for the purpose of addressing multifaceted challenges, Open Access to publicly funded research and scholarly outputs are to be made available under Open Licenses (e.g. Creative Commons) while duly acknowledging the intellectual property (work/rights of the creators/producers/authors).

Declaration

We, the contributors and signatories of this declaration, members of the Open Access India, Open Access communities of practice in India and the attendees of the OpenCon 2018 New Delhi held on 3rd Feb., 2018 at Acharya Narendra Dev College, Kalkaji, New Delhi (University of Delhi) agree to issue this declaration:

We advocate for the practice of Open Science (sharing research methods and results openly which will avoid “reinventing the wheel”) and adoption of open technologies for the development of models for sharing science and scholarship (Open Scholarship) to accelerate the progress of research and to address the real societal challenges
We will strive to publish our interim research outputs as preprints or postprints (e.g. Institutional Repositories) and encourage our peers and supervisors to do the same to make our research open and actionable in a timely manner.
We will practice and encourage researchers and scientists to implement openness in peer-reviewing and other editorial services, influence the scholarly societies to flip their journals into Open Access and will contribute for the development of whitelist of Open Access journals in India adhering to the “Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing”.
We will garner support of the relevant stakeholders (scholars, journal editorial teams, university libraries, research funders, authorities’ in-charge of dissemination of scholarship in higher education) for spearheading the Open Access movement.
We will take forward the concept of Open Access to further bring all the publicly funded research outputs (not limited to journal literature alone) to be freely available under open licenses to the public to use, reuse and share in any media in open formats.
We will impress upon policy makers to adopt an open evaluation system for research and an institutional reward system for practicing openness in science ,scientific communications and academic research across disciplines including Humanities and Social Sciences
We will support and work for an alternate reward system in recognition and promotion not in terms of the ‘Impact Factor’ of the journals, but the ‘Impact’ of the articles/scholarship in science and the society and impress upon all the scientists/scholars, research funders, research institutes, universities, academies and scholarly societies to sign the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA).
We strongly agree with the Joint COAR-UNESCO Statement on Open Access , Jussieu Call and Dakar Declaration. And will also follow the international initiative Open Access 2020, to develop roadmaps to support sustainable Open Access scholarly communication models which are free of charge for the authors and free of charge availability to the readers.
While learning from South South cooperation on Open Access, will work for developing a framework for Open Access in India and South Asia: National Policies for Open Access and country-specific action plans will be formulated aimed at making Open Access as the default in India and South Asia, by 2025.
For creating more awareness on Open Access, infrastructure, capacity building, funding and policy mechanisms, as well as incentivizing for the Open Access, we come forward to share success stories, studies and discussions during the Open Access Week.

Adopted on 14th February 2018

Signatories (along with their affiliation):

Anasua Mukherjee, BRICSLICS
Anubha Sinha, CIS India
Anup Kumar Das, Open Access India; CSSP, JNU
Arul George Scaria, NLU Delhi
Barnali Roy Choudhury, Open Access India
Bhakti R Gole, Open Access India
Girija Goyal, ReFigure.org
Javed Azmi, Jamia Hamdard
Kavya Manohar, Open Access India
Neha Sharma
Nirmala Menon IIT Indore
Sailesh Patnaik, Access to Knowledge, CIS
Savithri Singh, Creative Commons India
Sridhar Gutam, Open Access India
Subhashish Panigrahi, Internet Society, O Foundation
Vijay Bhasker Lode, Open Access India
Virendra Kamalvanshi, Banaras Hindu University
Tanveer Hasan A K, Access to Knowledge, Bangalore
Waseem A Malla

Ahsan Ullah, Bangladesh
Anila Sulochana, Central University of Tamil Nadu
Anoh Kouao Antoine, Ecole Supérieure Africaine des TIC, Côte d’Ivoire (Ivory Coast)
Antonio Solís Lima,México
Atarino Helieisar, FSM Supreme Court Law Library, Federated States of Micronesia
Bidyarthi Dutta, Vidyasagar University
Binoy Mathew, INELI
Boye Komla Dogbe, Ministère De La Communication, De La Culture, Togo
Srikanth Reddy, CBIT
Cajetan Onyeneke, Imo State University, Nigeria
Chantal Moukoko Kamole, Universitty of Douala, Cameroun
D Puthira Prathap, Extension Education Society
Daniel Bossikponnon, Ministère du plan et du Développement, Bénin
Dare Adeleke, the Federal Polytechnic, Ado-Ekiti, Nigeria
Dilip Man Sthapit, TU Central Library/LIMISEC, Nepal
Emmy Medard Muhumuza, Busitema University Library, Uganda
Fabian Yelsang, Institute for Interdisciplinary Research and Consultancy Services, Ghana
Fayaz Loan, University of Kashmir
GJP Dixit, Central Library, Central University of Karnataka
Gurpreet Singh Sohal, GGDSD College
Harinder Pal Singh Kalra, Punjabi University
Hue Bui, Thainguyen University of Sciences, Vietnam
Jacinto Dávila, Universidad de Los Andes, Venezuela
Jaishankar K, International Journal of Cyber Criminology
Jancy Gupta, National Dairy Research Institute
JK Vijayakumar
Jonathan Tennant, Open Science MOOC, Germany
Julián Vaquerizo-Madrid, Unidad de Neurología Clínica Evolutiva, Spain
Kamal Hossain, University of Liberal Arts Bangladesh (ULAB), Bangladesh
Kasongo Ilunga Felix, Democratic Republic of Congo
Kavita Chaddha
Kojo Ahiakpa, Research Desk Consulting Ltd., Ghana
Krishna Chaitanya, Velaga, the Wikipedia Library
Kumaresan Chidambaranathan, New Zealand
Kunwar Singh, Banaras Hindu University
Luis Saravia, PERU
Mahendra Sahu, Gandhi Institution of Engineering & Technology,Gunupur
Maidhili S., Meenakshi College for Women
Manika Lamba, University of Delhi
Md. Nasir Uddin, BRAC University, Bangladesh
Md. Nazim Uddin, International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Bangladesh
Md. Nurul Islam, International Islamic University Chittagong, Bangladesh
Md. Shahajada Masud Anowarul Haque, BRAC University, Bangladesh
Mir Sakhawat Hossain, Kabi Nazrul Government College, Bangladesh
Munusamy Natarajan, CSIR-NISCAIR
Murtoza Kh Ali, Bangladesh
Subash Pillai, ICAR-Indian Institute of Farming Systems Research
Nasar Ahmed Shah, Aligarh Muslim University
Nimesh Oza, Sardar Patel University
Niraj Chaudhary, United States
Poonam Bharti
Prerna Singh, Central University of Jammu
Rabia Bashir, Law and Parliamentary Affairs, Pakistan
Rajendran Murugan, Department of Education, University of Delhi
Rama Kant Shukla, Delhi Technological University
Raman Nair R, Centre for Informatics Research and Development
Rebat Kumar Dhakal, KUSOED Integrity Alliance, Nepal
Revocatus Kuluchumila, AMUCTA, Tanzania
M. Humayun Kabir, Tutul, National Health Library & Documentation Centre, Bangladesh
Sabuj Kumar, Chaudhuri, University of Calcutta
Sandipan Banerjee
Satwinder Bangar
Shahana Jahan, Bangladesh
Shamnad Basheer, SpicyIP
Shivendra Singh
Shreyashi Ray, NLU, Delhi
Sivakrishna Sivakoti
Soumen Kayal, Maharaja Manindra chandra College
Srinivasarao Muppidi, Sanketika Vidya Parishad Engineering College
Stephanie Gross, MSLIS from Pratt Institute, USA
Sujata Tetali, MACS-Agharkar Research Institute
Surjodeb Lulu Hono Basu
Susmita Das, Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council, Bangladesh
Susmita Chakraborty, University of Calcutta
Thilagavathi, Thillai Natarajan, Avinashilingam Institute for Home Science and Higher Education for Women
Umesh Kumar
Umme Habiba, Noakhali Science and Technology University, Bangladesh
Vinita, Jain, M D College of Arts, Science and Commerce
Virginia Inés Simón, Red Iberoamericana de Expertos sobre la Convención de los Derechos de las Personas con Discapacidad, Argentina
Vrushali Dandawate, AISSMS College of Engineering/DOAJ
Waqar Khan, Dhaka Shishu Hospital, Bangladesh
Wilbert Zvakafa, Chinhoyi University of Technology, Zimbabwe
Yasser Ahmed, South Valley University, Egypt
Yohann Thomas, Wikimedia India
Zakir Hossain, International Association of School Librarianship, International Schools Region, Switzerland
Dahmane Madjid, CERIST, Algeria
Nagarjuna G, Homi Bhabha Centre for Science Education, TIFR
Sulyman Sodeeq Abdulakeem, Federal Polytechnic Offa, Nigeria
Leena Shah, DOAJ
Hamady Issaga Sy, Sénégal
Sanket Oswal, Wikimedia India
Chitralekha, University of Delhi
Chris Zielinski, University of Winchester, United Kingdom
Mourya Biswas, Prateek Media

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/news/delhi-declaration-on-open-access

India’s top science institution is trying hard to fix its “manel” problem

Admin — 2019-08-19T13:58:51Z

B Chagun Basha is a science, technology and innovation policy fellow at Bengaluru’s Indian Institute of Science’s (IISc) Centre for Policy Research established by the department of science & technology (DST-CPR).

The blog post was published in Quartz India on August 16, 2019. Sunil Abraham was quoted. This piece was originally published on Connect under the headline, “We Learned (The Hard Way) Not to Have Manels.”

While organising an event at IISc, he and his colleagues realised they hadn’t paid much thought to gender inclusivity until it was explicitly pointed out to them that there were no women in their event. That sparked some introspection, as well as actions to ensure that this wasn’t repeated. In this interview, he talks about the incident and important lessons from it.

How did you first hear of the term manel?

It was when I was organising my first event of an academic nature. Every year, DST-CPR marks International Open Access Week by planning activities for the entire week, and having a panel discussion is a major part of it. We bring in experts to sensitise people about topics related to open access and how we can incorporate it in our institute through a bottom-up approach.

In October 2017, when International Open Access Week came round, we collaborated with six other groups to organise it. We had a poster competition, a panel discussion, and a few other activities like engaging with the student community about open access and how they could play a role in promoting it.

A week before the panel discussion was scheduled, we had confirmed the participation of all our speakers—five male speakers and one female speaker. The female speaker had not been included out of a conscious effort to ensure gender diversity—she happened to be on the list of names we came up with, we had written to all of them, and they had agreed to come. But a few days before the panel discussion, we received an email from her saying that she would not be able to join us.

We didn’t think it was a big deal. Instead of six participants we would have five, one of whom would be the moderator. Sunil Abraham of the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) had already confirmed that he would be the moderator. He sent us an email asking for details of the panelists, so that he could communicate with them and plan and structure the discussion. But when we sent him the details, he immediately got back to us saying that he wouldn’t be able to participate in this panel discussion.

I was a little shocked—you can replace a panelist at the last minute, but finding a new moderator to curate a discussion is harder as doing so requires in-depth knowledge of this space and familiarity with open access policies at different levels. I asked Sunil what had happened—why did he have to pull out? He said that CIS had a written policy that was followed strictly: members could not participate in “manels”—a word I was hearing for the very first time. I didn’t even catch it properly when we spoke on the phone. Then he explained to me that if there was a panel on which there were only men and no women panelists—which are called “manels”—then people from his organisation avoided them completely.

What happened next?

I realised that as an organiser of an event, I wasn’t even thinking about being inclusive.

I realised that as an organiser of an event, I wasn’t even thinking about being inclusive. So we requested Sunil to suggest names of women speakers whom we could approach. I realise now that it was not a good thing to do—when somebody points out that there are no women on your panel, and for those reasons they are not going to participate, you should try harder to rectify this at your end, and not dump the responsibility for this on the person who pointed it out in the first place.

We should have put in genuine effort from our end to learn more about other women in the field whom we could approach for the panel. But at the time Sunil generously agreed and gave us a list with 12 names. We contacted all of them: two people responded, one of whom—Padmini Ray Murray, who was a faculty member at the Srishti Institute of Art, Design and Technology—happened to be in Bengaluru and agreed to participate at short notice. We were really thankful for that.

The panel discussion went off smoothly, and at the end we gave a vote of thanks, where we acknowledged our goof-up, thanked Sunil for bringing it to our notice, and we promised the audience sitting in Faculty Hall, which included the Director of NCBS and the Deputy Director of IISc, that we wouldn’t run any more manels. We said we would consciously include more women in all events we organised from then on—not just panel discussions but talks, workshops and so on. That’s more or less an official decision we took for CPR.

Did you feel like you were being put on the spot at the time?

We would often ask our superiors to suggest names for events or scout for people on our own, but actively thinking about including people of all genders was something we never really did. Now it feels like something that is really important.

And an interesting thing happened after the vote of thanks that year: other people who had been in the audience and worked in other institutes or other departments at IISc came up to talk to us during the tea break. Like us, previously they thought it wasn’t important to think about who was being invited as panelists, but they began to see it was important too.

Has that changed how you planned subsequent events?

Two months after that panel discussion, we organised a workshop. On the final day of the workshop, we presented information on how many male and female participants applied, and how many of each we selected (women formed a little over 50% of those selected). That was our indirect way of letting people know that we took gender into consideration during our selection process.

In October 2018, when International Open Access Week came around again, we organised a panel discussion as well as an event called the Global Equity Forum for librarians, because they play a key role in making open access a reality at the institutional level. We consciously included women for both events, and not just because they were women. We realised that if you put in a little effort, you can easily find competent people of all genders without having to select people only for representation’s sake.

What about the people you mentioned earlier, who came up after the panel to ask you about including more women—do you know if they ever followed up on it?

Since the 2017 panel, others have made an effort to have equal numbers on men and women in panels too. It’s been like a chain reaction—some of those who attended our panel discussion took notice and kept it in mind when they organised events themselves. For now, though, ensuring gender diversity has depended on the efforts of the individual organisers. What happens when they leave and others take their place?

I think we need to put forth a policy at an IISc-wide level for events organised on campus so that we can ensure balanced representation of women—not just on stage, but among participants of events like seminars and workshops as well. Leaving it up to personal decisions means that it may not be a sustained process, and that’s why we need to work towards having it as a departmental policy or as an institutional policy. Of course we need to push for this as individuals, but we also need the leadership on board in order for this to materialise.

Ensuring equal representation for men and women in public events may seem like a small issue, but it drives bigger issues.

Ensuring equal representation for men and women in public events may seem like a small issue, but it drives bigger issues. Everybody is supportive of gender equality and inclusion of women at some abstract level, but if we really want that to happen, it has to start at small levels and at different stages. That’s a key thing we learned from organising the 2017 panel—that it had to start with us. Inclusion in panel discussions and events is just one of the stages at which it can happen.

In an academic set-up, dialogue is one way of engaging with a larger audience. You also have events, exams, student participation, and many other such avenues at which it happens, right? We have to address inclusion at all levels. If we have a policy about gender inclusion in events on campus, it could pave the way for policies on gender inclusion in other areas like intake of students, picking members of faculty, picking members of decision-making committees, and so on.

We have to start somewhere, and we can’t rely on easy excuses not to act. It’s a fundamental issue that really needs to be addressed—and maybe then it will become the norm, and open our eyes to the need for other kinds of inclusion as well.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/news/quartz-india-august-16-2019-india-s-top-science-institution-is-trying-hard-to-fix-its-manel-problem