Johannes Simons
University of Bonn
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Johannes Simons.
Journal of Nanoparticle Research | 2009
Johannes Simons; René Zimmer; Carl Vierboom; Ingo Härlen; Rolf Hertel; Gaby-Fleur Böl
According to numerous surveys the perceived risk of nanotechnology is low and most people feel that the benefits outweigh the risks. This article provides greater insight into risk perception and concludes that the positive attitude to nanotechnology is based not on knowledge but on hope and fascination. The perceived risk is low because of a lack of vivid and frightening images of possible hazards. If news flashes were to link nanotechnology to concrete hazards or actual harm to people, attitudes might suddenly change. Risk communication faces the problem of dealing with a public at large that has little or no knowledge about the technology. As it takes time and extensive additional research to develop appropriate communication strategies and disseminate them to the relevant institutions, this exercise should be started immediately.
International Journal of Services Technology and Management | 2006
Tzong Ru Lee; Jan Mou Li; Johannes Simons; Chia Hsiu Sophie Lee
Mobile commerce (m-commerce) is emerging, and a knowledge of the differences in different areas is of great importance because it offers a direct communication with each other anytime anywhere. On the basis of the classification of m-commerce and mobile applications proposed by Lehner and Watson, this paper reports three studies on the usage of m-commerce. Using the Grey Relation Analysis (GRA), the respective patterns of m-commerce in Germany, USA and Taiwan are distinguished. The results show that (1) the patterns change over area, and thus no single application checklist is good for globalisation in this industry, (2) GRA can be used as a framework for identifying the usage and patterns of m-commerce and (3) consumers in different areas do not regard the applications as equally important.
Proceedings in Food System Dynamics | 2018
Euan Fleming; Garry R. Griffith; Stuart Mounter; Monika Hartmann; Johannes Simons
Food value chain businesses form alliances with horizontal and/or vertical partners to take collective action to either overcome or ameliorate chain failure, or to take advantage of new opportunities available due to innovations in products or processes. The desired outcomes from the collective action would not be possible to achieve if these businesses acted independently. While such alliances may take many forms, depending on degree of commitment and infrastructure linkages, they can often be considered to be clubs. Four such types of clubs can be identified (1) horizontal clubs comprising businesses that take collective action across a single cross-section or an aggregate of multiple cross-sections in the value chain; (2) vertical clubs, which consist of businesses that form a strategic alliance for collective action along a single value chain within a network of chains; (3) clubs that specialise in a single product or multiple products in the value chain; or (4) clubs focusing on a single input/activity or multiple inputs/activities. Thus the path to collective action chosen by clubs may vary according to existing capabilities and the scope for collaboration, particularly in relation to the potential for value-creating innovation. The result of the collective action is the provision of a chain good or service which usually leads to greater and more valuable chain coordination. By collectively identifying, funding and acting to capture positive externalities associated with innovation, businesses in many parts of a food value chain can widen opportunities to increase whole-of-chain surplus as well as increase private profits. In this paper four mini-case studies are presented which demonstrate the breadth of past collective actions that have been undertaken by a substantial proportion of businesses in food value chains, two in Europe and two in Australia. These are (1) the Euro Pool System, (2) Global Standards certification in Europe and globally, (3) Meat Standards Australia, and (4) the OBE Beef organic producer alliance in Australia. Each case study yields insights into the rationale of how businesses in different food value chains in different countries have acted as a club to use their joint resources to internalise positive innovation and coordination externalities that would not have been possible to achieve were these businesses to act independently.
British Food Journal | 2013
Monika Hartmann; Sarah Heinen; Sabrina Melis; Johannes Simons
Food Policy | 2015
Monika Hartmann; Jeanette Klink; Johannes Simons
Food Quality and Preference | 2015
Bettina Anne-Sophie Lorenz; Monika Hartmann; Johannes Simons
German Journal of Agricultural Economics | 2008
Monika Hartmann; Anne Katrin Lensch; Johannes Simons; Sylvia Thrams
Papers in Regional Science | 2017
Julia Hoffmann; Stefan Hirsch; Johannes Simons
German Journal of Agricultural Economics | 2001
Johannes Simons; Carl Vierboom; Ingo Härlen
Aktuelle Ernährungsmedizin | 2010
Johannes Simons