E-health is an emerging field in the intersection of information systems, healthcare and business management, referring mainly to healthcare services delivered and enhanced through the use of information and communication technologies (ICT). In a broader sense, the term characterizes not only a technical development, but also a wider way of thinking, an attitude, and a commitment for a network to improve and connect provider, patients and governments. Such a network will be used to educate and inform healthcare professionals, managers and healthcare users; to stimulate innovation in care delivery and health system management; and to improve the healthcare system locally, regionally, and globally. The evaluation of e-health services in both theory and practice has proved to be important and complex. E-health evaluation will help achieve better user services utilization, justify the enormous investments of governments on delivering e-health services, and address the aspects that are hampering healthcare services from embracing the full potential of ICT towards successful e-health initiatives. The complexity of evaluation is mostly due to the challenges faced at the intersection of three areas, each well-known for its complexity; healthcare services, information systems, and evaluation methodologies. However, despite the importance of the evaluation of e-health services, literature shows that e-health evaluation is still in its infancy in terms of development and management. The aim of this research study is to develop, and assess a cross disciplinary evaluation framework for e-health services and to propose evaluation criteria for better user’s utilization and satisfaction of e-health services. The evaluation framework is criteria based, while the criteria are determined by an evaluation matrix of three elements, the evaluation rationales, the evaluation timeframes, and the evaluation stakeholders. The evaluation criteria have to be multi-dimensional as well as grounded in, or derived from, one or more specific perspectives or theories. The framework is designed to deal effectively with the challenges of e-health evaluation and overcome the limitation of existing evaluation frameworks. The cross disciplinary evaluation framework has been examined and validated by adopting an interpretive case study methodology. The chosen case study is NHS direct which is currently one of the largest e-health services in the world. The data collection process has been carried out by using three research methods; archival records, documentation analysis and semi-structured interviews. The use of multiple methods is essential to generate comparable data patterns and structures, and enhance the reliability of conclusions through data triangulation. The contribution of the research study is in bridging the gap between the theory and practice in the evaluation of e-health services by providing an efficient evaluation framework that can be applied to a wide range of e-health application and able to answer real-world concerns. The study also offers three sets of well-argued and balanced hierarchies of evaluation criteria that influence user’s utilization and satisfaction of e-health services. The evaluation criteria can be used to help achieve better user services utilization, to serve as part of e-health evaluation framework, and to address areas that require further attention in the development of future e-health initiatives.

Wind power is often presented as a technique for energy production with many environmental benefits, especially since it does not emit any carbon dioxide. Most people are generally positive towards wind power. But when a wind farm is to be implemented on a local level, often resistance occurs. This study investigates how and why local perceptions of a wind farm differ. A qualitative method using interviews was chosen, and the focus has been on an area where a wind farm was planned. The results reveal that advocates have a users’ perspective on nature, while opponents have a conservation perspective. Advocates believe wind power can contribute to a better environment, while opponents believe that preserving natural areas is the best for the environment. Moreover, living in a calm landscape is part of the opponents’ identity, while the identities of the advocates, who often are active farmers, are connected to their ability to live from the land. Thirdly, whether a person recognizes the need for a change towards a renewable energy system or not also matters for the attitude. According to previous research, a person’s relationship to the landscape is of crucial importance for her/his attitude towards wind power implementation, and this is confirmed in the current study. Research also stresses that the visual impact of wind turbines is usually what creates most resistance, but this is not supported. The roles of information and citizen participation, which previous research found significant, are not confirmed as important either: Both were deficient, but this study cannot determine whether a better managed planning process would have made some of the interviewees more positive to it or not. Definitely, the claims from earlier research that Not-In-My-Back-Yard (NIMBY) motives are rarely the reason for resistance are supported.