Current Issues in Software Re-Usability: A Critical Review of the Methodological &Legal Issues

The main objective of this research is to discuss the current legal and methodological issues in the field of software Re-Usability. Though there are enormous online forums discussing such issues via Q&A but this paper is an attempt to raise the awareness about the legal issues, which a software engineer may trap into. The paper discussed the current issues with software reusability within the legal and methodological context. This paper applied an extensive literature review to critically appraise the past studies to come to a collective conclusion. Prior to discussing the issues, the benefits of reuse were mentioned, including the saving of time and cost for users. But legally the reuse of software assets creates complexities for the user in relation to meeting all the licensing requirements and dealing with the liability in case of a breach. Methodologically, there are major barriers to reused software when it comes to technical competence and managerial issues such as a lack of resources. Even when reusing software to save time, and leverage off the specialization of other authors, the end-user must also have the technical expertise to search, adapt and merge these reusable assets into the larger software infrastructure. The review ultimately shows the high barriers still remain to software reuse which could mean that smaller developers and businesses will still be reluctant to fully utilize open-source components to the best advantage.

Slow and Steady Wins the Race;Lessons Learned from a Psychological Intervention in Cancer Care:The Importance of Conducting a Pilot and/or Feasibility Study in Complex Interventions

This article chronicles a failed research project.We designed and carried out a psychological intervention aimed at increasing esogastric and lung cancer patients’emotional competencies after treatments.We present the final protocol of the study,a randomized controlled trial in a public hospital,and describe the difficulties encountered and our subsequent reflections,to provide researchers and clinicians with advice for the implementation of such interventions.Firstly,the role of psychology,emotions,and emotional competencies,is still underacknowledged in cancer care.Pedagogical efforts must be made to convince both physicians and patients of the importance of those elements.Secondly and consequently,even distressed patients sure to benefit from such an intervention,do not take it up.In particular,male patients often declined the intervention due to gender stereotypes,and as such creativity is needed to present such interventions in a motivating way for patients.Finally,and most importantly,even if there is a good rationale for a psychological intervention and all favorable conditions are present,it is essential to first conduct a feasibility/pilot study.Indeed,even the most thorough preparation is no guarantee of anticipating all issues due to important gaps between theory and practice.

The Challenges of Identifying and Managing Epistemic Inequalities in PHIR(Population Health Intervention Research):An Illustration in the Conception and Implementation of a TPE(Therapeutic Patient Education)Program in Oncology

Aims:The joint dynamics of knowledge(of patients,health professionals,decision-makers,researchers)and of the powers(of speech and action,asymmetries,and hierarchies established between individuals and their knowledge)of the people who carry them at the heart of the PHIR,are analyzed from the perspective of the management of epistemic inequalities.We study the nature of knowledge sharing or non-sharing between these different categories of agents involved in health interventions.Procedure:The qualitative methodology is based on 36 interviews and six years of ethnographic observations of the TPE program(design or implementation),as well as steering committees and workshops of the PHIR where researchers,decisionmakers,health professionals,and patients share their experiences and knowledge.Results:The research highlights three major theoretical and methodological issues of PHIR concerning epistemic inequalities.We argue for broadening the spectrum of health expertise(researchers,decision-makers,health professionals,patients)and for their pluralization.To account for the nature and evolution of collaborations,it is necessary to closely study the dynamics of the avenues of coordination between these fields of expertise.Finally,we call to identify the resources(knowledge,values,material elements,etc.)and strengths that enable these hybrid groups to bind(or not)and to potentially generate co-learning.Conclusion:Considering these three major issues allows PHIR to reflect and take action to reduce inequalities by linking epistemic and social issues.

Rural Landscape as Heritage: Reasons for and Implications of Principles Concerning Rural Landscapes as Heritage ICOMOS-IFLA 2017

In 2011,the ICOMOS-IFLA International Scientific Committee on Cultural Landscapes(ISCCL)began the World Rural Landscapes Initiative(WRLI)project to develop a complete and systematic approach to cultural heritage for rural areas.Rural landscapes need further study in terms of methodology,operation and internationally recognised documents:protection and promotion,knowledge,methodology and management at international,national and local levels.The goals of the WRLI were:a principles text containing theoretical,methodological and operational criteria;a website;a glossary;an atlas of rural landscapes;and a general bibliography.The first goal has been achieved:Principles Concerning Rural Landscapes as Heritage was adopted as a doctrinal text by ICOMOS(2017).This paper presents the main cultural premises and contents of the Principles text:(I)the theoretical concepts of the‘Rural Landscape’and‘Rural Landscape as Heritage’;and(II)‘Action criteria’which guide the development of policies for rural landscapes as heritage and resources:knowledge,protection,sustainable management,communication and transmission of physical places and associated heritage values.This paper covers:the importance of time in policy strategy;the(false)contradiction of conservation and innovation and the concept of‘appropriate’transformation;the role of stakeholders;value recognition;knowledge;information;communication and public reception.