The strategic impact of META-NET on the regional, national and international level

This article provides an overview of the dissemination work carried out in META-NET from 2010 until 2015; we describe its impact on the regional, national and international level, mainly with regard to politics and the funding situation for LT topics. The article documents the initiative's work throughout Europe in order to boost progress and innovation in our field.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

The strategic impact of META-NET on the regional, national and international level

This article provides an overview of the dissemination work carried out in META-NET from 2010 until early 2014; we describe its impact on the regional, national and international level, mainly with regard to politics and the situation of funding for LT topics. This paper documents the initiative’s work throughout Europe in order to boost progress and innovation in our field.Postprint (published version

RIO Country Report Latvia 2014

This analytical country report is the first of a series of annual RIO Country Reports. This Country Report builds on the series of ERAWATCH reports. The report offers an analysis of the R&I system in Latvia for 2014, including relevant policies and funding, with particular focus on topics critical for two EU policies: the European Research Area and the Innovation Union. The report was prepared according to a set of guidelines for collecting and analysing a range of materials, including policy documents, statistics, evaluation reports, websites etc. The report identifies the structural challenges of the Latvian research and innovation system and assesses the match between the national priorities and those challenges, highlighting the latest policy developments, their dynamics and impact in the overall national context.JRC.J.6-Innovation Systems Analysi

Assessing the Effectiveness of the EU’s and Russia’s Cultural Diplomacy towards Central Asia. EL-CSID Working Paper Issue 2018/9 • February 2018

This paper attempts to analyse the European Union’s (EU) cultural diplomacy (CD) efforts in five Central Asian countries (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan, hereinafter ‘Central Asia’). Beginning in the early 2000s, EU Member States looked at the region with increased interest. Aside from major engagements on trade, energy and security, education and intercultural dialogue were stressed as priority areas in the 2007 EU Strategy for Central Asia. To measure EU effectiveness as a CD actor in Central Asia, a comparative dimension is proposed by analysing the role Russia has pursued. At law and policy level, since Putin’s return to the Presidency in 2012, Russia has reaffirmed its ambitions to strengthen both hard and soft presence in Central Asia, viewing the region within its sphere of influence. This engagement was reiterated in the 2015 Strategy of National Security and in the 2016 Foreign Policy Concept. To draw a comparison, actors’ CD effectiveness is measured in terms of willingness, capacity, and acceptance, based on the theoretical framework proposed by Kingah, Amaya and Van Langenhove1. This paper finds that European CD efforts had mixed results due to an inconsistent policy towards the region. Although EU cultural heritage and educational influence are widely acknowledged, Russia remains today the major foreign actor in Central Asia, displaying strong levels of attractiveness among citizenry and elites. Historical and cultural ties, but also institutional and economic efforts allowed Moscow to keep its leading position. However, Russia’s future regional leadership should not be taken for granted, as all Central Asian states have been looking at Moscow’s cultural engagement with increased scepticism

Social Justice in the EU – Index Report 2016 Social Inclusion Monitor Europe

1. Social justice in the EU – participation opportunities have improved in the majority of EU member states, but are still a long way behind precrisis levels Social justice has improved slightly in the majority of EU member states compared with last year’s Social Justice Index (SJI 2015). It appears that, after years of decline, the majority of countries reached their lowest point between 2012 and 2014. Whether the improvement is a genuine, stable turnaround or just a slight temporary easing will only become apparent in future reports. At least the downward trend observed since 2008 in terms of equal participation opportunities has halted in the majority of member states. However, even seven years after the global economic crisis first hit, participation opportunities in the vast majority of EU states – with a few exceptions – are still noticeably worse than before the crisis. Only five of the 28 EU countries – the Czech Republic, Germany, Luxembourg, the UK, and Poland – are showing moderate improvements in terms of participation opportunities, compared with the situation before the economic and financial crisis

Factors predicting the scientific wealth of nations

It has been repeatedly demonstrated that economic affluence is one of the main predictors of the scientific wealth of nations. Yet, the link is not as straightforward as is often presented. First, only a limited set of relatively affluent countries is usually studied. Second, there are differences between equally rich countries in their scientific success. The main aim of the present study is to find out which factors can enhance or suppress the effect of the economic wealth of countries on their scientific success, as measured by the High Quality Science Index (HQSI). The HQSI is a composite indicator of scientific wealth, which in equal parts considers the mean citation rate per paper and the percentage of papers that have reached the top 1% of citations in the Essential Science Indicators (ESI; Clarivate Analytics) database during the 11-year period from 2008 to 2018. Our results show that a high position in the ranking of countries on the HQSI can be achieved not only by increasing the number of high-quality papers but also by reducing the number of papers that are able to pass ESI thresholds but are of lower quality. The HQSI was positively and significantly correlated with the countries’ economic indicators (as measured by gross national income and Research and Development expenditure as a percentage from GDP), but these correlations became insignificant when other societal factors were controlled for. Overall, our findings indicate that it is small and well-governed countries with a long-standing democratic past that seem to be more efficient in translating economic wealth into high-quality science

Impacts of the Crisis on Access to Healthcare Services in the EU

[Excerpt] This report is the first output of Eurofound’s research project on the impacts of the recent financial and economic crisis on access to publicly financed healthcare services in the EU. It aims to provide an overview of context and developments, setting the scene for the ongoing research project. A final overview report, incorporating findings from various country studies, will be published in 2014. Following a description of the policy context, this report goes on to explore how the crisis has impacted demand for and supply of healthcare services. It characterises different dimensions of access and discusses how the crisis may have impacted on barriers to access. It highlights groups that have traditionally been in vulnerable situations with regard to access, as well as those that may have been particularly affected by the crisis. Examples of past initiatives that have sought to enhance access to healthcare are identified. The final section presents how this research project aims to improve understanding of the impacts of the crisis on access to healthcare and of the ways in which access may be maintained. This report takes a broad perspective on access to healthcare services, referring to different understandings of access and various indicators. It draws on a review of the literature and primary data analysis. One key indicator concerns people’s perceptions of difficulties they face in accessing a doctor; in this regard, data are analysed from Eurofound’s 2007 and 2011 European Quality of Life Surveys (EQLS). A second key indicator concerns people’s perceptions of not having received medical care when they felt they needed it. Here, the main source of data is the ‘EU Statistics on Income and Living Conditions’ (EU-SILC). These indicators are used to explore how access has changed since the onset of the crisis in autumn 2007. Other perspectives on access are also discussed, including for example legal entitlements and views on appropriate care provision by service providers. Sources of data include complaints to the Ombudsman and surveys of general practitioners (GPs). The forthcoming overview report will expand on such sources, and will include more in-depth information from studies of specific countries