Showing posts with label evidence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label evidence. Show all posts

23 November 2013

The Start of the Counter-Attack Against Hargreaves?

As I noted a couple of years ago, one of the most important legacies of the Hargreaves review of copyright in the digital age was its insistence that policy must be based on evidence, not dogma. There were some heartening signs that the UK government was indeed following through on that, notably in terms of a series of reports from Ofcom that explore in detail many aspects of the online use of copyright materials - something that was simply unavailable before.

On Open Enterprise blog.

10 February 2013

Copyright: Finally, the Evidence is Coming

Back in 2011, I noted that one of the most significant achievements of the Hargreaves report was its shockingly revolutionary suggestion that copyright policy should be based on the available evidence, not "lobbynomics". The fact that this even had to be said shows to what depths policy-making had sunk - something clearly demonstrated by the disgraceful Digital Economy Act, or the extension of copyright term for musical performances, both of which were passed despite the evidence, rather than because of it.

On Open Enterprise blog.

New UK Copyright Research Center Immediately Under Attack For Daring To Ask About Evidence

As Techdirt reported last year, some copyright maximalists in the UK seem to be against the whole idea of basing policy on evidence. Last week saw the launch of CREATe: Creativity, Regulation, Enterprise and Technology, a new UK "research centre for copyright and new business models in the creative economy." One of the things it hopes to do is to bring some objectivity to the notoriously contentious field of copyright studies by looking at what the evidence really says; so it was perhaps inevitable that it too would meet some resistance from the extremist wing of the copyright world. What's surprising is that it seems to have happened during the launch itself, as Paul Bernal, an academic who was there, reports: 

On Techdirt.

08 December 2012

Gathering Evidence for a Fact-Based Copyright Policy

As I noted at the time, perhaps the most revolutionary aspect of the Hargreaves Review of copyright in the digital age was simply the idea that copyright policy should be based on evidence. Of course, the fact that until now it has been determined purely by dogma, and drawing on bogus statistics put out by the copyright industries, is incredibly damning. 

On Open Enterprise blog.

Supplying The Missing Ingredient In Evidence-Based Policymaking: Evidence

It seems extraordinary that in the area of copyright it is only recently that people have started to consider the evidence before formulating policy. Even now, there is still resistance to this idea in some quarters. Elsewhere, though, there is a growing recognition that policy-makers must have access to the data they need when considering how to achieve given goals. 

On Techdirt.

14 October 2012

Stop the UK Badger Cull: Letter to My MP

I had been vaguely aware that the proposed cull of badgers in the UK was controversial, but had not fully realised that the evidence against it was so overwhelming.  That was confirmed by this letter in the Observer today, with some of the top scientists in the country coming out against it, and this short video, which usefully explains the issues and why the cull will make things worse.

As a result, I have been moved to send a missive to my MP, using the wonderful WriteToThem service.  Here's what I've written:

I am writing to you to express my deep concern over government plans to cull badgers.

As a Londoner, this is not a topic I normally concern myself with. I naturally have no objection to farmers seeking to minimise losses to their herds from serious diseases such as TB. However, as the letter in today's Observer (at http://www.guardian.co.uk/theobserver/2012/oct/14/letters-observer) from 30 leading professors with expertise in this area points out, a badger cull is likely to make the situation worse, not better.

The reasons why are well explained in this video (http://justdosomething.org.uk/badgersmatter), which includes a contribution from Sir David Attenborough among others: shooting badgers will lead to a dispersion of them from their current locations. If any of them are infected with TB, they will carry that with them to new areas. A far better solution would seem to be the use of vaccination of badgers against TB, something that is apparently already efficacious, but which could benefit from funding to refine.

Given the overwhelming – indeed, near-unanimous – view that the badger cull will not only fail to achieve its goals, but will actually exacerbate the situation, I am disturbed that the Government is nonetheless planning to proceed with it. It is crucially important that policy be evidence-based, not the result of pandering to groups that have apparently taken an unscientific view for reasons best known to themselves. I would be grateful if you could convey my concerns to the relevant minister, along with a request that the cull be suspended and more efficient and humane methods deployed instead.

Thank you for your help.
 
Follow me @glynmoody on "http://twitter.com/glynmoody">Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+