Search results

This article’s purpose is to develop The Model for Smart, Self-learning and Adaptive Resilience Building (SARB).

Products and patents of methods and systems analysis was carried out in the fields of BIM application, Smart, Self-learning and Adaptive Resilience Building. Based on other researchers’ findings, The SARB Model was proposed.

Analysis of the literature showed that traditional decisions on the informational modelling do not satisfy all the needs of smart building technologies owing to their static nature. The SARB Model was developed to take care of its efficiency from the brief stage to the end of its service life.

The SARB Model was developed to take care of its efficiency from the brief stage to the end of its service life. The SARB Model does have some limitations: (1) the processes followed require the collection of much unstructured and semi-structured data from many sources, along with their analyses to support stakeholders in decision-making; (2) stakeholders need to be aware of the broader context of decision-making and (3) the proposal is process-oriented, which can be a disadvantage during the model’s implementation.

Two directions can be identified for the practical implications of the SARB Model. The initial expectation is the widespread installation of SARB Model within real estate and construction organisations. Furthermore, development of the SARB Model will be used to implement the ERASMUS+ project, “Advancing Skill Creation to ENhance Transformation—ASCENT” Project No. 561712-EPP-1-2015-UK-EPPKA2-CBHE-JP.

The practical implications of this paper are valuable.

This chapter, based on a sociological approach, addresses the ethical issues of surveillance research from the perspective of the profound transformations that science and innovation are undergoing, as part of a broader shift from modern to post-modern society, affecting also other major social institutions (such as government, religion, family, and public administration). The change occurring in the science and technology system is characterised by diminishing authority, uncertainty about internal mechanisms and standards, and a declining and increasingly difficult access to resources. Such changes, also related to globalisation and new digital technologies, have transformed the way research is conducted and disseminated. Research is now more open and its results more easily accessible to citizens.

Scientific research is also put under increased public scrutiny, while, at the same time, public distrust and disaffection towards science is rising. In such a context, it is more important than ever to make sure that research activities are not compromised by fraudulent and unethical practices. The legitimate expectations of citizens to enjoy their rights, including the ability to protect their private sphere, are growing. Scientific and technological development is deeply interrelated with the widespread awareness of these rights and the possibility of exercising them, but it produces also new risks, while a widespread sense of insecurity increases. The digital revolution, while improving people’s quality of life, offers at the same time new opportunities for crime and terrorism, which in turn has produced a demand to strengthen security systems through increasingly advanced and intrusive surveillance technologies. Misconduct in the field of surveillance may not only undermine the quality of research, but also further impair society’s trust in research and science as well as in the State and its institutions.

This paper aims to explore smart facilities services in the context of university campus by aiming to understand how the service development processes can be classified.

The qualitative study is based on literature review about smart facilities services and a case study about developing visualisation, data and smart service in one building in Finnish campus. The case study data were gathered by diverse methods and analysed by content analysis.

Three smart facilities service processes were identified: experience processes for users, data-based service processes and technology processes. All the processes require more than only technocratic approach.

Single case study without longitudinal data gathering is not strong in terms of generalisation.

The process classification can help different stakeholders to identify their role and tasks in smart facilities service development.

The research aims to understand how to develop smart services in addition to more investigated topic what the services include.

Rights and duties are involved in every area of business and markets, and society and governments. Most often, rights and duties involve serious ethical and moral issues of conflict. A good theory of the ethics of rights and duties, obligations, and responsibilities will empower us to understand the impact of our actions on various stakeholders. Additionally, a deep understanding of rights and duties could help us to analyze better the impact of our executive actions on various stakeholders and, in particular, to fathom the damaging effects of rights and duties violated by the man-made current financial crisis when seen from an ethical and moral point of view. Our coverage on the ethics of corporate rights and duties will comprise of two parts: Part 1: The Nature of Corporate Business Rights and Duties, and Part 2: Respecting Corporate Rights and Duties. The chapter will feature Newcomb Wellesley Hohfeld’s framework of legal interests such as claims, privileges, power, and immunity and its various applications to contemporary market and corporate executive situations. We illustrate the theory of rights and duties using several cases from the current turbulent markets.

In light of the many crises and catastrophes faced in the modern world, policymakers frequently make claims to be ‘following the science’ or being ‘governed by the data’. Yet, conflict based on inequalities continue to fuel dissatisfaction with the decisions and actions of authorities. Research into public security may require surveillance and covert observations, all of which are subject to major ethical challenges. Any neat distinction between covert and overt research is difficult to maintain given the variety of definitions used for all the terms addressed here. Covert research may be ethically justified and is not necessarily deceptive. In any case, deception may be ethical if engaged in for the ‘right’ reasons. Modern research sites and innovative research methods may enhance opportunities for covert work. In all surveillance and covert work, care must be taken about how consent is managed, how observed subjects are protected and harm to all involved minimised in all situations.