50,470 research outputs found

    Study supporting the interim evaluation of the innovation principle. Final Report November 2019

    Get PDF
    The European Commission has recognised the importance of a more innovation- oriented EU acquis, gradually exploring the ways in which EU rules can support innovation. The ‘innovation principle’ was introduced to ensure that whenever policy is developed, the impact on innovation is fully assessed. However, as further discussed in this Study, the exact contours of the innovation principle have been shaped very gradually within the context of the EU better regulation agenda: originally advocated by industry in the context of the precautionary principle, the innovation principle has gradually been given a more articulate and consistent role, which aims at complementing the precautionary principle by increasing the salience of impacts on innovation during all phases of the policy cycle. This Study presents an evaluation of the current implementation of the innovation principle, limited to two of its three components, i.e. the Research and Innovation Tool included in the Better Regulation Toolbox, and the innovation deals. As a preliminary caveat, it is important to recall that the implementation of the innovation principle is still in its infancy, and thus the Study only represents a very early assessment of the extent to which the innovation principle is being correctly implemented, and whether changes would be required to make the principle more effective and useful in the context of the EU better regulation agenda. The main finding is that the innovation principle has the potential to contribute to the quality and future-proof nature of EU policy, but that significant changes and effort will be needed for this potential to fully materialise. The most evident areas for improvement are related to the lack of a clear legal basis, the lack of a widely acknowledged definition, the lack of awareness among EU officials and stakeholders, and the lack of adequate skills among those that are called to implement the innovation principle. As a result of these problems, the impact of the innovation principle on the innovation-friendliness of the EU acquis has been limited so far. The Commission should clarify in official documents that the Innovation principle does not entail a de- regulatory approach, and is not incompatible with the precautionary principle: this would also help to have the principle fully recognised and endorsed by all EU institutions, as well as by civil society, often concerned with the possible anti-regulatory narrative around the innovation principle in stakeholder discussions. Apart from clarifications, and further dissemination and training, major improvements are possible in the near future, especially if the innovation principle is brought fully in line with the evolving data-driven nature of digital innovation and provides more guidance to the Commission on how to design experimental regulation, including inter alia so-called ‘regulatory sandboxes’. Finally, the Commission should ensure that the innovation principle is given prominence with the transition to the Horizon Europe programme, in particular due to the anticipated launch of ‘missions’ in key domains

    Governance for sustainability: learning from VSM practice

    Get PDF
    Purpose – While there is some agreement on the usefulness of systems and complexity approaches to tackle the sustainability challenges facing the organisations and governments in the twenty-first century, less is clear regarding the way such approaches can inspire new ways of governance for sustainability. The purpose of this paper is to progress ongoing research using the Viable System Model (VSM) as a meta-language to facilitate long-term sustainability in business, communities and societies, using the “Methodology to support self-transformation”, by focusing on ways of learning about governance for sustainability. Design/methodology/approach – It summarises core self-governance challenges for long-term sustainability, and the organisational capabilities required to face them, at the “Framework for Assessing Sustainable Governance”. This tool is then used to analyse capabilities for governance for sustainability at three real situations where the mentioned Methodology inspired bottom up processes of self-organisation. It analyses the transformations decided from each organisation, in terms of capabilities for sustainable governance, using the suggested Framework. Findings – Core technical lessons learned from using the framework are discussed, include the usefulness of using a unified language and tool when studying governance for sustainability in differing types and scales of case study organisations. Research limitations/implications – As with other exploratory research, it reckons the convenience for further development and testing of the proposed tools to improve their reliability and robustness. Practical implications – A final conclusion suggests that the suggested tools offer a useful heuristic path to learn about governance for sustainability, from a VSM perspective; the learning from each organisational self-transformation regarding governance for sustainability is insightful for policy and strategy design and evaluation; in particular the possibility of comparing situations from different scales and types of organisations. Originality/value – There is very little coherence in the governance literature and the field of governance for sustainability is an emerging field. This piece of exploratory research is valuable as it presents an effective tool to learn about governance for sustainability, based in the “Methodology for Self-Transformation”; and offers reflexions on applications of the methodology and the tool, that contribute to clarify the meaning of governance for sustainability in practice, in organisations from different scales and types

    Priority Directions of the Regional Food Complex Effectiveness Increase

    Full text link
    In the article, the modern trends of management integration as a solution of food and sectoral problems are considered. On the basis of national and foreign experience of development of integration, the classification of integration in economic systems is developed. Based on the given classification, the concept of integration is conducted. In the article, much attention is given to the food problem solution, which depends more on the agro-industrial complex based on metaintegration. The leading place of a food complex in the system of agro-industrial complex is caused by a role of food and food raw materials in life of the population of the country. The ratio of the sectors participating in the food production and consumer goods makes the sectoral structure of agro-industrial complex. In the conditions of the resource limitation necessary for the production and food delivery to the domestic market, the role of trade will increase not only in agro-industrial complex, but in all national economy. Also, in this article, the phenomenon of clusters is studied. The attention to clusters as to innovation systems reflects a rising tide of interest of economic science to the questions of economics functioning in regional level and understanding of a role of specific local resources in stimulation of innovative opportunities and competitiveness of small and medium business. Creating a cluster, participants develop the spatial and organizational integrated structure, in interaction of legal entities the status is saved and cooperation provides competitive advantages with other business entities. The role of the state in integration of cluster formations in the Russian Federation is more significant, than in any other country. The state represented by regional authorities actively participates in decision-making process by the business located in its catchment area not only through membership in governing bodies of large joint stock companies

    Reference Models and Incentive Regulation of Electricity Distribution Networks: An Evaluation of Sweden’s Network Performance Assessment Model (NPAM)

    Get PDF
    The world-wide electricity sector reforms have led to a search for alternative and innovative approaches to regulation to promote efficiency improvement in the natural monopoly electricity networks. A number of countries have used incentive regulation models based on efficiency benchmarking of the electricity network utilities. While most regulators have opted adopted parametric and non-parametric frontier-based methods of benchmarking some have used engineering designed ‘reference firm’ or ‘norm’ models for the purpose. This paper examines the incentive properties and other related aspects of the norm model NPAM used in regulation of distribution networks in Sweden and compares these with those of frontier-based benchmarking methods. We identify a number of important differences between the two approaches to regulation benchmarking that are not readily apparent and discuss their ramifications for the regulatory objectives and process

    Organic Action Plans. Development, implementation and evaluation. A resource manual for the organic food and farming sector

    Get PDF
    In 2004, the European Action Plan for Organic Food and Farming was launched. Many European countries have also developed national Organic Action Plans to promote and support organic agriculture. As part of the EU funded ORGAP project (“European Action Plan of Organic Food and Farming - Development of criteria and procedures for the evaluation of the EU Action Plan for Organic Agriculture”) a toolbox to evaluate and monitor the implementation of national and European Action Plans has been developed. In order to communicate the results of this project as widely as possible, a practical manual for initiating and evaluating Organic Action Plans has been produced. This manual has been created to inspire the people, organisations and institutions involved, or with an interest, in the organic food and farming sector to engage in the initiation, review, revision and renewal of regional, national and European Organic Action Plans. The objectives of the manual are to provide: • a tool for stakeholder involvement in future Action Plan development and implementation processes at EU, national and regional level • a guide to the use of the Organic Action Plan Evaluation Toolbox (ORGAPET) developed through the project The manual summarises the key lessons learnt from more than 10 years experience of development, implementation and evaluation of Organic Action Plans throughout Europe. The Organic Action Plan Evaluation Toolbox (ORGAPET), which includes comprehensive information to support the Organic Action Plan development and evaluation process is included with the manual as a CD-ROM, and is also accessible on-line at www.orgap.org/orgapet. The ORGAP website www.orgap.org provides a further information on the project and the European and national organic action plans. Published by: Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Frick, Switzerland; IFOAM EU Group, Brussels Table of contents Foreword 1 1 Introduction 3 1.1 About this manual 3 1.2 Organic farming – origins, definition & principles 6 1.3 Development of organic food & farming in Europe 8 1.3.1 Organic food and farming regulation in Europe 10 1.3.2 Policy support for organic food and farming in Europe 11 2 Organic Action Plans – what are they about? 16 2.1 Why Organic Action Plans? 16 2.2 European Organic Action Plan 21 2.3 Overview of national and regional Organic Action Plans 23 3 Planning and implementing Organic Action Plans 28 3.1 Policy development 28 3.2 Defining organic sector development needs and potential 31 3.3 Defining policy goals and objectives 34 3.4 Involving stakeholders 40 3.4.1 The case for stakeholder involvement 40 3.4.2 Identifying relevant stakeholders 42 3.4.3 Participatory approaches for stakeholders involvement 44 3.5 Decision making: selecting, integrating and prioritising relevant measures 46 3.5.1 Deciding on policy instruments and action points 47 3.5.2 Priorities for action – allocating resources 50 3.6 Implementing Organic Action Plans 52 3.7 Including monitoring and evaluation of Organic Action Plans from outset 56 3.8 Managing communication 58 3.9 Development of Action Plans in countries that joined the EU in 2004 and later 59 4 Evaluating Organic Action Plans 61 4.1 Principles of evaluation 61 4.2 Conducting an evaluation 64 4.3 Evaluating Action Plan design and implementation 70 4.3.1 Evaluating programme design and implementation processes 70 4.3.2 Evaluating programme coherence 72 4.3.3 Evaluating stakeholder involvement 74 4.4 Evaluating Action Plan effects 78 4.4.1 Developing and using indicators for evaluation 78 4.5 Overall evaluation of Organic Action Plans – judging success 85 4.6 Evaluating Action Plans in countries that joined the EU in 2004 and later 89 5 Organic Action Plans – the Golden Rules 91 5.1 Key elements of Organic Action Plan development 91 5.2 The Golden rules for Organic Action Plan 93 References 96 Annex Detailed synopsis of ORGAPET 10
    • …
    corecore