scholarly journals A Comprehensive Analysis of Public and Private Funding for Photovoltaics Research and Development in the European Union, Norway, and Turkey

Energies ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 2743 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan Francisco De Negri ◽  
Simon Pezzutto ◽  
Sonia Gantioler ◽  
David Moser ◽  
Wolfram Sparber
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Research And Development ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Private Investment ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Private Funding ◽  
Member States ◽  
Horizon 2020 ◽  
European Investment ◽  
National Budgets

This study aimed to examine the financing of photovoltaics research and development by analyzing funding from public (European Union and national budgets) and private sources (enterprises), Strategic Energy Technology Plan participating countries being the main focus (European Union Member States plus Norway and Turkey). In the coming years, photovoltaics are expected to heavily contribute towards the achievement of audacious climate and energy objectives. Continuous monitoring of the effects is of great importance to assess a course of action taken at such a large scale. It will be revealed that the distribution of funding provided by national budgets highly concentrates on a few Member States, which is part of a general trend in Research and Development within Europe. Approximately 85% of the current European investment provided by the EU budget is administered in the framework of the Horizon 2020 (2014–2020) program; private investment behaves differently. The European photovoltaics manufacturing market has been obliterated by low-budget imported goods. A major characteristic is that the remaining companies are almost exclusively privately held. Gathering data has consequently been a challenge, as opposed to the readily available public datasets.

scholarly journals Using Patent Development, Education Policy and Research and Development Expenditure Policy to Increase Technological Competitiveness of Small European Union Member States

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (78) ◽  
pp. 97-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simona Ferraro ◽  
Pawan Kumar Dutt ◽  
Tanel Kerikmäe
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Education Policy ◽  
Research And Development ◽  
High Tech ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Development Education ◽  
Member States ◽  
Trade Routes ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Development Expenditure

Abstract The Chinese Belt and Road Initiative will open new trade routes between China and the European Union (EU) and increase competition pressures on smaller EU member states. This article ranks where states like Estonia stand internationally in terms of innovativeness (and consequent competitiveness) by conducting an econometric study of patent development, education policy and research and development (R&D) expenditure policy. The authors claim that small member states such as Estonia should follow the example of countries such as Germany and adopt policies which focus more on increased public spending on R&D and innovation in public universities of science and technology, and raise support for high tech startups with a strong focus on international patenting. Member States must go further and subsidise R&D activities by focusing, inter alia, on filing of foreign patents such as triadic patents.

Policy framing and resistance: Gender mainstreaming in Horizon 2020

2020 ◽  
pp. 135050682093549
Author(s):  
Bianka Vida
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Research And Development ◽  
Gender Equality ◽  
Gender Mainstreaming ◽  
Advisory Group ◽  
Framework Programme ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Policy Framing ◽  
Horizon 2020 ◽  
Policy Frame

Scholarship on gender mainstreaming (GM) in the European Union (EU) consistently highlights the disappointing implementation of gender mainstreaming. This article contributes to that discussion through the analysis of the first policy frame on gender equality in the work programmes of the EU’s Framework Programme for Research and Development, Horizon 2020, from 2014 until 2016. This article analyses how GM as a transformative strategy is contextualised by advisory group experts, and what is being achieved within Horizon 2020 work programmes. In opposition to the Commission’s rhetorical commitment to GM, this article demonstrates that Horizon 2020 work programmes exemplify a failure of implementing GM, further depoliticising gender equality in the Commission’s neoliberal context.

scholarly journals Polityka w zakresie badań i rozwoju technologicznego Unii Europejskiej jako przykład integracji formalnie i faktycznie zróżnicowanej

Politeja ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (54) ◽  
pp. 79-92
Author(s):  
Leszek Kwieciński
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Research And Development ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Development Policy ◽  
Technological Development ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Structural Policy ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Differentiated Integration

Research and Development Policy of the European Union as an Example of Formal and Real Differentiated IntegrationIn this paper has been analysed a concept of the differentiated integration and their main criteria. This allows to show the formal and legal sphere of this concept, especially in the Research and Technological Development Policy of the European Union. As a result it was noted that the described EU structural policy is an area of deep formal and real diversity that runs both between EU Member States and other public‑private stakeholders, such as universities or enterprises. This fact contributed to present two scenarios for the further evolution of European integration in the area of Research and Technological Development Policy.

Selected aspects of innovation of companies functioning in the countries of the European Union

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-98
Author(s):  
Dr inż. Jerzy Baruk
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Research And Development ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Conducting Research ◽  
Innovation Processes ◽  
Varied Level ◽  
The Eu

In the publication, the Author discusses two issues: the essence of innovations and their role in the development of enterprises and the increase of their competitiveness together with empirical aspects of the level of innovation described by three measures – universali-ty of introducing innovations, the influence of introduced innovations on turnover of en-terprises, universality of conducting research and development, treated as a source of knowledge in innovation processes. The results of the study indicate a relatively low and varied level of these measures in the enterprises from the EU Member States.

Sharing Is Caring? Exploring the Relationship Between Preferences for Online Participation and Support for Solidarity Between EU Member States

2019 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 523-537
Author(s):  
Verena K. Brändle ◽  
Olga Eisele
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Social Inclusion ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Burden Sharing ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Online Participation ◽  
Member States ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Eu Member States

The article explores the influence of online participation on individual-level support for burden-sharing measures among EU member states. The analysis is set against the backdrop of the discussion about solidarity in times of EU crises and follows an innovative approach by operationalizing social inclusion in the European Union via online participation. It is argued that the specific nature of the European Union favors the use of online channels for political information and participation, but that despite its inclusive potential, online participation does not necessarily mean public support for the European Union. Instead, we hypothesize that people who make more use of online participation channels—thus are supposedly better equipped to participate in EU politics—are more critical in their evaluation of burden-sharing measures. Based on a large-scale survey among EU citizens in late 2016, we conduct a regression analysis taking into account the influence of EU support and general considerations on solidarity. Results lend support to our hypothesis that people who participate in political affairs online do not express greater support for EU burden-sharing measures but are more critical. Results are interpreted as an expression of the constraining dissensus regarding EU politics: Negative effects are read as criticism of how solidarity in the European Union is implemented, not as opposition to solidarity in the European Union as such.

scholarly journals Current status of habitat monitoring in the European Union according to Article 17 of the Habitats Directive, with an emphasis on habitat structure and functions and on Germany

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 57-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Götz Ellwanger ◽  
Stephan Runge ◽  
Melanie Wagner ◽  
Werner Ackermann ◽  
Melanie Neukirchen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Conservation Status ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Habitats Directive ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Habitat Types ◽  
Member States ◽  
Structure And Functions

Since the beginning of the 1990s, monitoring of habitats has been a widespread tool to record and assess changes in habitat quality, for example due to land use change. Thus, Article 11 of the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) requires, inter alia, monitoring of the conservation status of habitat types listed in Annex I of the Habitats Directive, carried out by the Member States of the European Union (EU). This monitoring provides the foundation for the National Reports on the measures implemented and their effectiveness (Art. 17 Habitats Directive), which Member States have to submit to the European Commission every six years. Based on these requirements, Member States have developed different monitoring programmes or have adapted previously existing monitoring schemes to include relevant aspects of the Habitats Directive. The parameter ‘structure and functions’ is a key parameter for the assessment of the conservation status of habitat types as it provides information on the quality of the habitats. A standardised questionnaire was developed and sent to the competent authorities of Member States to compare and analyse the assessment methods of the quality of habitat types. Responses were received from 13 of the 28 Member States, while it was possible to include another Member State in the analysis by evaluating appropriate literature. The analysis revealed very different approaches and progress amongst the Member States in the development and implementation of monitoring programmes tailored to the reporting obligations of Article 17 of the Habitats Directive. Some Member States established a special standardised monitoring programme for Article 11 of the Habitats Directive, while others used data from already existing programmes (e.g. habitat mapping, large-scale forest inventories, landscape monitoring). Most Member States responding to the questionnaire use monitoring based on samples but the data collection, sample sizes and level of statistical certainty differ considerably. The same applies to the aggregation of data and the methods for the assessment of the parameter ‘structure and functions’. In contrast to the assessment of conservation status as part of the reporting obligations according to Article 17 of the Habitats Directive, no standardised EU guidelines exist for monitoring. The present study discusses differences in the monitoring programmes and evaluates them with regard to the objectives of comparable assessments of conservation status of habitat types in the National Reports of Member States or at a biogeographical level.

scholarly journals Russia and the European Union: sociological notes on the role of culture and prospects for dialogue

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Irina Leskova ◽  
Galina Osadchaya ◽  
Tatʹyana Yudina
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Cultural Policy ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Practical Interest ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
Strategic Culture ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Economic Market ◽  
Member States

The dialogue between Russia and the European Union is a relationship between two major geopolitical actors, which has never been unambiguous and simple in history, although it is due to the proximity of the geographical location and mutual interest in long-term cooperation. The EU’s cultural policy is quite pragmatic, in comparison with the significance of the factors of the economic space and the presence of the Euro zone, culture is not considered by Europeans as a binding factor in the development of the two countries. In order to enter the common European economic market, States are forced to apply for participation in cultural programs and grants funded by the EU. The article emphasizes the idea that any attempts to block the development of national cultures will inevitably lead to conflicts. Only through culture is it possible to achieve true self-expression of each nation and dialogue among civilizations. The concept of «strategic culture» is considered as a tool of analysis and a way of knowledge, and identity and national character as a predisposition to a certain type of policy. As part of the study of strategic culture, the analysis of national ideology is of great practical interest. At the governmental level, Russia and the European Union follow the course of a long-term strategic partnership, primarily in the fields of culture, education, science, and the humanitarian sphere. Large-scale challenges and the ongoing systemic transformation of the European Union add politicization and uncertainty to Russian-European relations. At the same time, cultural, scientific and humanitarian ties are seen as promising, and the Russian-European dialogue in the field of culture will promote and stimulate the expansion of Russia’s cooperation with both EU member States and the EEU member States. The article examines the cultural policy and cultural diplomacy of the European Union. It is proved that full-fledged cooperation between Russia and the European Union is possible only within the framework of a common humanitarian space – a value-ideological communication environment determined by equal and mutual respect of the participants and the nature of the relationship between the ideologies of independent international actors, excluding unilateral ideological expansion of any of the parties.

scholarly journals The Volume and Dynamics of Domestic Expenditures on Research and Development in the European Union

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 21-48
Author(s):  
Jerzy Baruk
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Research And Development ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Indirect Measure ◽  
Non Profit ◽  
New Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Secondary Material ◽  
Efficient Management

AbstractIn the article, whose construction is of theoretical and empirical nature, the author attempted to achieve the following objectives: 1) identification and critical assessment of expenditures on research and development (GERD index), expressed in euro per inhabitant, incurred by statistical units concentrated in the sectors: business enterprises, government, higher education, private non-profit organizations and jointly in all sectors in countries members of the European Union. The level and dynamics of these expenditures are treated as an indirect measure of senior management’s involvement in creating R&D policy and efficient management in R&D phases; 2) an attempt to verify theses that R&D expenditures are variable and diversified in EU Member States, which indicates the lack of a rational R&D policy focused on the systematic generation of new knowledge materialized in innovations providing customers the expected value in a systemic way; 3) developing models of innovative R&D activities management. To develop the article, research methods are used, such as: critical-cognitive analysis of literature, statistical-comparative analysis of Eurostat’s empirical secondary material, projection method. The level of the GERD meter indicates a significant differentiation of R&D expenditure in individual sections of the analysis. The member states of the old EU had relatively higher outlays for this purpose compared to the new member states.

Article 343 TFEU

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcus Klamert
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Central Bank ◽  
European Central Bank ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Investment Bank ◽  
Member States ◽  
European Investment Bank ◽  
European Central ◽  
European Investment

Article 291 EC The Union shall enjoy in the territories of the Member States such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the performance of its tasks, under the conditions laid down in the Protocol of 8 April 1965 on the privileges and immunities of the European Union. The same shall apply to the European Central Bank and the European Investment Bank.

scholarly journals Trends in the circular economy development in the European Union

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Polina Nosko
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Circular Economy ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Raw Materials ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
Public Funding ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Horizon 2020 ◽  
The Eu

The article examines current trends in the circular economy development in the European Union, which is justly considered to be the leader in this area. The author enlists priority sectors, which are targeted by the Circular Economy Action Plan adopted in 2015. The paper examines a European strategy for plastics, which has ambitious targets till 2030, and a Critical Raw Materials initiative that is important for the EU as for an importer of many commodities. The latter leads to such benefits as supply risks mitigation and savings in energy and water. European Union’s key instruments aimed at making products more sustainable are discussed. Specifically, Ecodesign and energy labelling, Green Public Procurement, Ecolabel, and Enhanced Producer Responsibility scheme are presented. The author touches upon financing of circular economy innovations and adaptation of the industrial base in the EU. Over the 2016–2020 period, more than 10 billion euro in public funding has been provided. Half of this amount is designated for the purpose of the waste legislation support. Horizon 2020, Europe’s largest research and innovation programme, is one of the circular economy financing tools. 257 circular economy related projects were selected as a result of three calls for projects proposals amounting to 1,45 bln. The author’s review shows the large scale of changes in the European Union driven by implementation of the circular economy principles, which is important for the region’s trade partners.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document