Lifesource XL-18 pedometer for measuring steps under controlled and free-living conditions

The primary aim was to examine the criterion and construct validity and test–retest reliability of the Lifesource XL-18 pedometer (A&D Medical, Toronto, ON, Canada) for measuring steps under controlled and free-living activities. The influence of body mass index, waist size and walking speed on the criterion validity of XL-18 was also explored. Forty adults (35–74 years) performed a 6-min walk test in the controlled condition, and the criterion validity of XL-18 was assessed by comparing it to steps counted manually. Thirty-five adults participated in the free-living condition and the construct validity of XL-18 was assessed by comparing it to Yamax SW-200 (YAMAX Health & Sports, Inc., San Antonio, TX, USA). During the controlled condition, XL-18 did not significantly differ from criterion (P > 0.05) and no systematic error was found using Bland–Altman analysis. The accuracy of XL-18 decreased with slower walking speed (P = 0.001). During the free-living condition, Bland–Altman analysis revealed that XL-18 overestimated daily steps by 327 ± 118 than Yamax (P = 0.004). However, the absolute percent error (APE) (6.5 ± 0.58%) was still within an acceptable range. XL-18 did not differ statistically between pant pockets. XL-18 is suitable for measuring steps in controlled and free-living conditions. However, caution may be required when interpreting the steps recorded under slower speeds and free-living conditions.     

In search of systemic innovation for sustainable development: A design praxis emerging from a decade of social learning inquiry

Processes of designing for systemic innovation for sustainable development (SD) through the lens of three long-term case studies are reported. All case studies, which originated from the SLIM (Social Learning for the Integrated Management and Sustainable Use of Water at Catchment Scale) Project, funded within the EU Fifth Framework Program (2001–2004), constitute inquiry pathways that are explored using a critical incident approach. The initial starting conditions for each inquiry pathway are compared; significant pathway dependencies are identified which foster the development of social learning processes locally, but constrain their uptake and embedding across the wider system of interest. In the first case study, in England & Wales, promising developments in the application of social learning approaches to river basin planning over an initial 3-year period were subsequently marginalised, only to resurface towards the end of the 10-year period of study. In the second, South African case study, significant spaces for social learning and innovation in integrated water resources management were opened up over a five year period but closed down again, primarily as the result of lack of policy support by national government. The third, Italian, case study was designed to assess options for adapting to climate change by opening up new learning spaces between researchers, stakeholders and policy makers. A case for investing in local level systemic innovation through social-learning praxis design approaches and in learning processes around well contextualised case-studies is supported. However, concomitant investment by policy makers in social learning as an alternative, but complementary, governance mechanism for systemic innovation for SD is needed.     

Where are the Missing Masses? The Quasi-Publics and Non-Publics of Technoscience

The paper offers a political-philosophical analysis of the state and publics in the age of technoscience to propose three distinct categories of publics: scientific-citizen publics constituted by civil society, quasi-publics that initiate another kind of engagement through the activation of ??political society,?? and non-publics cast outside these spheres of engagement. This re-categorization is possible when the central role of the state in its citizens?? engagement with technoscience is put upfront and the non-Western empirical contexts are taken seriously by Science, Technology and Policy (STP) studies. The paper argues that in most of the world the state maintains a political contract with technoscience to form a functional coupling as the state-technoscience duo, which shapes public engagement with science through different functional modalities of government. Civil society is the sphere of legitimate engagement and participation in technoscientific issues for the scientific-citizen publics. The quasi-publics choose to be in the shady zone of political society establishing a paralegal relationship with the state-technoscience duo, while the non-publics come into being due to conditions of extra-legality created by the duo. The non-publics are implicated in the political community paradoxically as an excluded category who cannot be included in deliberation because of their status as being expelled from political community in a ??state of exception.?? The paper proposes that the scientific-citizen publics are mobilized in contrast to the quasi-publics and with reference to the non-publics, helping STP studies to identify the ??missing masses?? of technoscience.