Search results

The construction industry is one of the least automated industries. In the aspect of automation, the technical understanding is very dominant. Focus has mostly been on tools, robots and industrialisation. sociomaterial design shows us that what may first appear technologically deterministic can be replaced and actually call for reinvisioning the traditional focus. The purpose of this study is to introduce the agency of a sociomaterial designer in construction.

This is a conceptual paper with an empirical example. To understand the sociomaterial complexity and dynamics of automation, practice theories are applied. To test this approach, the authors give an example from a Danish (global) supplier engaged in a development project about technical aid (tools) in mounting and assembling gypsum walls.

The sociomaterial-designer can help to understand and make innovation happen when doing automation in construction; as the centre of innovation in construction processes, she works all day with practice, together with practitioners, focusing on material arrangements as located not only in practice, but also in the artefacts. She can help the supplier of construction materials in understanding different professional practices and the transformation to use smarter tools.

This research is within a new practice domain “sociomaterial-design” and it has to follow up with an empirical study that covers a development project with a sociomaterial-design approach.

Developing competences (agency) as a sociomaterial-designer when linking the sociotechnical understanding of Automation with practice.

This research showcases how sociomaterial perspectives can inform automation in construction.

Presently the whole world has been experiencing a pandemic threat of coronavirus diesease 2019 (COVID-19) and at the same time facing unprecedented changes in everything including education. E-learning has evolved as the only alternative of knowledge transmission even in third world nations, and e-assessment has been playing an increasingly important role in this digital transformation of education. But how far and of what depth it has made its place among students' minds need to be studied to leverage its full potential to transform students' learning needs. This study reports an investigation made in this direction.

An online survey consisting of 40 questions in Google Forms was conducted to collect primary data on students' perception of e-assessment among 200 Indian students pursuing higher education from several geographical locations. The quantitative methodological approach was followed. The data were analyzed descriptively and inferentially.

The results were analyzed based on the model of acceptance and usage of e-assessment (MAUE), and findings revealed that students' overall perception toward e-assessment was of moderate level and this perception varies depending on their gender, academic level, nature of the stream of study and their economic condition. Of the eight domains investigated, students showed better perception in the perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, compatibility, subjective norms and self-efficacy domains, while they cut a sorry figure in domains like awareness, resource facilitation and information technology (IT) support. It became evident from their responses that COVID was instrumental in enhancing their interest in e-assessment.

The implication of this study lies in strengthening e-assessment by attending to the factors as noted in the MAUE in India and alike developing nations having huge space left for e-learning to reach a boom.

This is an empirical investigation conducted in India on the state of students' perception of the e-assessment in the backdrop of the COVID-19 outbreak. To do this work, the authors conducted online surveys, and the write-up of the findings focus on the survey data only.

Response to suggestion that EU-wide cash payment limits would assist in the control of terrorism finance and money laundering.

Desk review and interviews

The inception impact assessment (IIA) is ill-conceived, not grounded on firm empirical evidence and harmful to both crime control and the legitimate interests and rights of the EU citizens. The action under discussion is presented as a measure against terrorism finance, serious crime and tax evasion. The problem is that these criminal acts correspond to very different methods, volumes, perpetrators, causes and control challenges. Cash payment limitations (CPLs) are nowhere near a panacea that can address all of them and cannot make any of them go away magically. Even when each of these crime challenges are considered on their own, the empirical linkage of CPLs to effective controls is not there. The evidence from EU countries with CPLs in place shows higher levels of informal economy, corruption, tax evasion and terrorism risks than those without. There is substantial evidence of non-cash, very serious and organized crime, while the amounts needed and used by terrorists in Europe are usually very small in cash transactions, way below the thresholds under consideration. In fact, determined offenders will shift to other methods and become more sophisticated, posing new problems to controllers. Displacement and incentives for better-organized crime may well be the main products of such measures.

It counters the argument that the cash payment limits can help reduce serious crime, while pointing to several adverse consequences on legitimate interests and human rights.