Search results

This paper aims to share how the Centre for Ageing and Dementia Research co-designs research within a national programme of work to improve the lives of older adults and those affected by dementia. Through examples of this work, the authors identify the barriers and enablers to participatory approaches and lessons to inform future involvement activities.

This study reflects on implementing the UK National Standards for Public Involvement into practice. Of international relevance, the observations span the research process from research prioritisation and design to research implementation and knowledge exchange.

This study demonstrates the importance of using a relational approach, working toward a common purpose and engaging in meaningful dialogue. Only through offering choice and flexibility and actively learning from one another can co-design lead to synergistic relationships that benefit everyone.

Key implications for researchers engaged in patient and public involvement are be receptive to other people’s views and acknowledge expertise of those with lived experience alongside those with academic expertise. Training, resources and time are required to effectively support involvement and meaningful relationships. A nominated contact person enables trust and mutual understanding to develop. This is an ongoing collective learning experience that should be embedded throughout the entire research process.

This paper demonstrates how the standards are implemented with people who are often excluded from research to influence a national programme of work.

The purpose of this paper is to share the learning concerning how services and the paid carers working in them can support people living with dementia (PLWD) and their unpaid carers to overcome social isolation. This learning comes from the key findings from a Social Return on Investment (SROI) evaluation of a Shared Lives (SL) Day support service, known as TRIO.

SROI is a form of cost-benefit analysis that captures and monetises stakeholder outcomes. The SROI evaluation included a rapid evidence review, an interview study and a questionnaire study. The learning shared is drawn from the interview and questionnaire data that explored the reported outcomes relating to social connection, which included data related to participating in meaningful activities, confidence and independence.

PLWD who accessed the SL Day support service experienced better social connection, a sense of control over their activities (including their social activities) and community presence. A key foundation of these outcomes was the meaningful relationship that developed between the PLWD, their unpaid carer and the paid carer.

This evaluation was a pilot study with a small, albeit representative sample size.

The learning suggests feasible and effective ways for paid carers to support the social connection of PLWD and their unpaid carers with their wider community.

There has been little exploration of how community-based short breaks (like SL Day support) can enhance social connection. The authors drew on a social relational model lens to illustrate how this service type had supported successful outcomes of community and social inclusion for PLWD.

This paper aims to present the findings of a government-initiated project that sought to explore the possibility of incorporating cultural connections to land within the federal national accounting system using the United Nations Systems of Environmental-Economic Accounting (UN-SEEA) framework as a basis.

Adopting a critical dialogic approach and responding to the calls for critical accountants to engage with stakeholders, the authors worked with two Indigenous groups of Australia to develop a system of accounts that incorporates their cultural connections to “Country”. The two groups were clans from the Mungguy Country in the Kakadu region of Northern Territory and the Ewamian Aboriginal Corporation of Northern Queensland. Conducting two-day workshops on separate occasions with both groups, the authors attempted to meld the Indigenous worldviews with the worldviews embodied within national accounting systems and the UN-SEEA framework.

The models developed highlight significant differences between the ontological foundations of Indigenous and Western-worldviews and the authors reflect on the tensions created between these competing worldviews. The authors also offer pragmatic solutions that could be implemented by the Indigenous Traditional Owners and the government in terms of developing such an accounting system that incorporates connections to Country.

The paper contributes to providing a contemporary case study of engagement with Indigenous peoples in the co-development of a system of accounting for and by Indigenous peoples; it also contributes to the ongoing debate on bridging the divide between critique and praxis; and finally, the paper delves into an area that is largely unexplored within accounting research which is national accounting.

Digitalisation is perceived as a new process that may add value to firms. Current theoretical understanding assumes it should be part of a firm's strategy to respond to multiple pressures in the business environment. This paper explores the occurrence of digitalisation in a rare context, that of the English agricultural industry in the United Kingdom, a place disproportionality filled with family firms. The general understanding of digitalisation in family firm settings remains embryonic. The authors' explorations make theoretical contributions to research at the intersection of rural entrepreneurship, family business and innovation.

Utilising a purposive, qualitative approach, primary data was collected from multiple interviews with 28 UK family farms, and secondary data from another 164. Interview transcripts were coded using NVivo, along with secondary data from reports, observations and websites.

The authors present empirical evidence illustrating how digitalisation manifests incrementally and radically in different types of family farms. The authors present a model that shows the areas of farming that have, and continue to be, digitalised. This increases analytical precision when identifying digitalisation activities that differ depending on the strategy to either scale or diversify. The authors propose that incremental digitalising occurs to a great extent during a scaling strategy, and that radical digitalising occurs to a smaller extent during diversification strategies in family farms.

This research uses a sample of family-run farms from the UK agricultural sector to explore nuanced elements of digitalisation. It should therefore be explored in other types of family firms located in different sectors and geographies.

This research is important because family farms are under increasing pressure and have limited financial resources to deal with the digitalisation agenda. Therefore, empirical evidence helps other farms in similar situations. The authors found digitalisation investments, that tend to be capital intensive, only matter for scalers and less so for diversifiers. Family farms can use the model presented as a tool to evaluate their farm. The tool helps them define what to do, and ideate the potential activities that might be digitalised, to feed into their wider strategy.

Family firms, in particular farms, are critical to many economies. The general consenses currently assumes all family firms should digitalise, yet the authors' evidence suggests that this is not the case. It is important to create policies that are sensitive to the needs of different types of businesses, in this case between family firm scalers and diversifiers, instead of simply incentivising digitalisation using a blanket approach usually by offering financial aid. Understanding how digitisation can support (or not) family firm resilience and growth in an effective and efficient manner can have significant benefit to individual firms, and across industries.

The proposed model extends theoretical understanding linking strategy, digitalisation activity and innovation in family farms. It shows that digitalisation is a key building block of scaling strategies, maximising digitalisation to increase efficiency. Yet, diversifying family farms minimise digitalisation, whereby they only digitalise a small amount of the farming activity. This empirical evidence contrasts with the wider narrative that farmers are slower at using new technology. This research found that some are slower because it does not align with their strategy. However, sometimes digitalisation aligns with their strategy during external changes, in which case the diversifiers are quick to act.

The family is one of the foundations of society; its significance for societal redistribution in modern societies, though, remains particularly unclear. A major reason for this is that theoretical approaches to societal redistribution have not adequately included family either in social philosophy or in welfare state theory. As a consequence, also empirical analyses of differences and developments in societal redistribution have not included family or only in as far as family is affected by other redistributive principles. This paper contributes to filling this theoretical gap.

This paper theorises family as a redistributive principle. With reference to the major theoretical concepts of redistribution, it identifies the relevant dimensions of family in societal redistribution and develops a typology of its inclusion in societal redistribution.

Approaches to redistribution are shaped by distinct concepts of equal or unequal exchange, the relevant actors they identify and by different understandings of the economy. These distinctions are central to understanding the position of family in societal redistribution. With reference to the major theoretical concepts of redistribution, this paper identifies the relevant dimensions of family in societal redistribution and develops a typology of its inclusion in societal redistribution. Further investigations might draw on this typology and detect the theoretical foundations of its conceptualisations and its similarities to and deviations from the developed types.

This paper provides a theoretical groundwork for theoretical and empirical investigations of societal redistribution and for better comprehending its international variation. It aims to initiate a fundamental rethinking of the usual understanding of societal redistribution that widely ignores family as a redistributive principle of its own.

This article draws upon our perspective as academic-practitioners working in the fields of food insecurity, food systems, and inequality to comment, in the early stages of the pandemic and associated lockdown, on the empirical and ethical implications of COVID-19 for socio-economic inequalities in access to food in the UK. The COVID-19 pandemic has sharpened the profound insecurity of large segments of the UK population, an insecurity itself the product of a decade of “austerity” policies. Increased unemployment, reduced hours, and enforced self-isolation for multiple vulnerable groups is likely to lead to an increase in UK food insecurity, exacerbating diet-related health inequalities. The social and economic crisis associated with the pandemic has exposed the fragility of the system of food charity which, at present, is a key response to growing poverty. A vulnerable food system, with just-in-time supply chains, has been challenged by stockpiling. Resultant food supply issues at food banks, alongside rapidly increasing demand and reduced volunteer numbers, has undermined many food charities, especially independent food banks. In the light of this analysis, we make a series of recommendations. We call for an immediate end to the five week wait for Universal Credit and cash grants for low income households. We ask central and local government to recognise that many food aid providers are already at capacity and unable to adopt additional responsibilities. The government's – significant – response to the economic crisis associated with COVID-19 has underscored a key principle: it is the government's responsibility to protect population health, to guarantee household incomes, and to safeguard the economy. Millions of households were in poverty before the pandemic, and millions more will be so unless the government continues to protect household incomes through policy change.

The authors investigate how COVID-19 has influenced the amount, type or topics of abuse that UK politicians receive when engaging with the public.

This work covers the first year of COVID-19 in the UK, from March 2020 to March 2021 and analyses Twitter abuse in replies to UK MPs. The authors collected and analysed 17.9 million reply tweets to the MPs. The authors present overall abuse levels during different key moments of the pandemic, analysing reactions to MPs by gender and the relationship between online abuse and topics such as Brexit, the government’s COVID-19 response and policies, and social issues.

The authors have found that abuse levels towards UK MPs were at an all-time high in December 2020. Women (particularly those from non-White backgrounds) receive unusual amounts of abuse, targeting their credibility and capacity to do their jobs. Similar to other large events like general elections and Brexit, COVID-19 has elevated abuse levels, at least temporarily.

Previous studies analysed abuse levels towards MPs in the run-up to the 2017 and 2019 UK General Elections and during the first four months of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. The authors compare previous findings with those of the first year of COVID-19, as the pandemic persisted, and Brexit was forthcoming. This research not only contributes to the longitudinal comparison of abuse trends against UK politicians but also presents new findings, corroborates, further clarifies and raises questions about the previous findings.

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-07-2022-0392

As a typical nature-based solution to climate change, forestry carbon sinks are vital to achieving carbon neutrality in China. However, regulations in China are insufficient to promote the development of carbon offset projects in forestry. This study aims to identify the regulatory obstacles impeding the development of forestry offsets under China’s certified emission reduction (CCER) and explore ways to improve the regulatory system.

This study conducts a qualitative analysis using a normative legal research method. This study conducted a synthetic review of national and local regulatory documents to gain insights into the regulatory landscape of forestry offsets in China. The main contents and characteristics of these documents are illustrated. Furthermore, related secondary literature was reviewed to gain further insight into forestry offset regulations and to identify significant gaps in China’s CCER regulation.

Forestry offset regulations under the CCER are characterized by fragmentation and a relatively lower legally binding force. There is no systematic institutional arrangement for forestry offset development, impeding market expectations and increasing transaction costs. The main challenges in China’s regulation of forestry carbon sinks include entitlement ambiguity, complicated rules for registration and verification, a lack of mechanisms for incentives, risk prevention and biodiversity protection.

Forestry carbon sinks’ multiple environmental and social values necessitate their effective development and utilization. This study assessed forestry offset regulations in China and proposed corresponding institutional arrangements to improve forestry carbon sink regulations under the CCER.