A disciplinary analysis of Internet Science

Internet Science is an interdisciplinary field. Motivated by the unforeseen scale and impact of the Internet, it addresses Internet-related research questions in a holistic manner, incorporating epistemologies from a broad set of disciplines. Nonetheless, there is little empirical evidence of the levels of disciplinary representation within this field.This paper describes an analysis of the presence of different disciplines in Internet Science based on techniques from Natural Language Processing and network analysis. Key terms from Internet Science are identified, as are nine application contexts. The results are compared with a disciplinary analysis of Web Science, showing a surprisingly low amount of overlap between these two related fields. A practical use of the results within Internet Science is described. Finally, next steps are presented that will consolidate the analysis regarding representation of less technologically-oriented disciplines within Internet Science

How can heat maps of indexing vocabularies be utilized for information seeking purposes?

The ability to browse an information space in a structured way by exploiting similarities and dissimilarities between information objects is crucial for knowledge discovery. Knowledge maps use visualizations to gain insights into the structure of large-scale information spaces, but are still far away from being applicable for searching. The paper proposes a use case for enhancing search term recommendations by heat map visualizations of co-word relation-ships taken from indexing vocabulary. By contrasting areas of different "heat" the user is enabled to indicate mainstream areas of the field in question more easily.Comment: URL workshop proceedings: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1311

European Parliament Preparatory Action: "Actual and desired state of the economic potential in regions outside the Greek capital Athens" Final Report

This is the final report of the European Parliament Preparatory Action: "Actual and desired state of the economic potential in regions outside the Greek capital Athens" (hereafter Preparatory Action or PA). It reviews the key activities of this preparatory action, its impacts, the remaining barriers to RIS3 implementation and presents a perspective on the way forward. Providing hands-on support to the refinement and implementation of the RIS3 strategy in the Greek Region of Eastern Macedonia and Thrace (REMTh) has entailed the following activities: • Mutual learning: this has at core element of the preparatory action, and has offered a unique opportunity to all the stakeholders involved to share experiences and build a common understanding of RIS3, its potential and the real challenges to its implementation. • Optimisation of the Entrepreneurial Discovery Process (EDP) – the design, implementation and adaptation of a systematic participatory methodology for the EDP, centred on thematic focus groups. These events enabled the generation and articulation of innovation ideas and initiated the first necessary steps towards concrete projects. • Capacity building - two dedicated working groups were organised: one centred on issues of human resources mobility and one on RIS3 governance. Relevant stakeholders, under the guidance of an expert, discussed and formulated plans on how to tackle the different challenges at stake. • Identification of bottlenecks and systemic failures in RIS3 implementation - the region has good potential for diversification, but faces a wide set of legal and administrative barriers, which need to be addressed to enable the allocation of structural funds and other resources to support RIS3 implementation in an optimal way. • Communication and codification of activities - with the aim of replicating or adapting the activities of the preparatory action and the emerging learning opportunities for other regions, outcomes of all the events have been published on-line, as have methodological guidelines for the EDP process. Furthermore, further publications from these activities are foreseen in the near future. • Supporting tools for internationalisation and collaboration. The preparatory action has developed a set of online resources that aim at guiding the region in increasing its international outlook to RIS3 and its collaboration between research and industry. The Preparatory Action generated some very concrete impacts on the regions, among which the main ones are: • The mobilisation of a critical mass of researchers and business people (600+ people), which actively participated to the EDP focus groups and PDL events. This bottom-up process has increased mutual trust, created a 'momentum' in initiating change and increased the understanding of what RIS3 can contribute to this change. • The appreciation of networking and research-business collaboration across stakeholders and especially between research and business. Indeed, some informal networks have been organised, for instance in the wine and marble sector. • The creation of an action plan for both RIS3 governance and mobility of human resources. • Both the Managing Authority and regional stakeholders have better access to international counterparts, both in governance of RIS3 and in performing research and innovation. • The project has also determined a shift in perception as far as the European Commission is concerned, which is now perceived more as a collaborator. • The PA has stimulated and accelerated a discussion between the EC, regional and national authorities which has help to clarify – for the whole country – several aspects of RIS3 and Structural Funds. • The preparatory action has significantly influenced the way to design and implement the development strategy for the Region by engaging all relevant stakeholders from the outset.JRC.J.2-Knowledge for Growt

Energy Research Governance in the European Union

A major share of Europe’s knowledge about its incumbent energy cultures is pre-defined in closed spaces of negotiations. One such space are the negotiations surrounding the European Union´s research and innovation Framework Programmes, which are the focus of this thesis. With these programmes, the European Union not only funds energy research across Europe, but likewise produces guiding energy research narratives that act beyond their scope into the research agendas of its Member States. Energy research governance, considered as the wider scope surrounding the Framework Programmes negotiations in the European Union, takes place in hybrid spaces, were science and politics meet and are influencing each other, inheriting limiting, and enabling effects on both sides. This study aims to determine how these spaces are organised, who is participating under which conditions, and how decisions on energy research agendas and research funding conditions are taken. Therefore, this thesis enfolds the emergence history of energy policy, research policy and the governance of its overlap, namely energy research. It then examines in depth the negotiations that took place during the reform process of the Frame-work Programmes between its seventh and eighth repetition. The perspective of scientific, political and hybrid social worlds is taken to draw an encompassing picture of the situation of energy research governance of the European Union. The methodological background of this study is a situational analysis, which was conducted based on narrative expert interviews, participant observations and documents, drawing on sensitizing concepts from the fields of Science and Technology Studies, sociology, and political sciences. The investigated hybrid spaces revealed the importance of historical rooted (energy) re-search narratives, that are combined with a set of standards and standardized governance practices making the Framework Programmes a robust governance tool, despite changing political climates. Moreover, the role of so far largely overlooked boundary social worlds became apparent. Whereas strategies of narrative governance were found to be a structuring element across all social worlds and hybrid spaces. The newly developed continuum of implicatedness disclosed movements of visibility and agency among the participating negotiators of energy research governance. These results have in common that they bear diverse forms of ambivalences a collective, an individual or a group of collectives is confronted with. The author concludes that these the ambivalences must be met with strategies of disclosure and debate, rather than with vain attempts to resolve irresolvable contradictions