An Analytical Framework to Study Multi-Actor Partnerships Engaged in Interactive Innovation Processes in the Agriculture, Forestry, and Rural Development Sector

Communities of practice (CoPs) interact with a range of external stakeholders who collectively influence the direction of the community and the achievement of its goals. In the case of multi-actor co-innovation partnerships, which are perceived as a type of combination between a community of practice and innovation network in this paper, internal and external interactions consequently influence the ability of these partnerships to co-innovate. The aim of this contribution is to develop an analytical framework to understand the factors and processes that enable or hinder interactions, both within and external to multi-actor co-innovation partnerships. The analytical framework was built around interactions with funding mechanisms, external stakeholders, the context/environment, and societal challenges, along with interactions within the partnership. Each of these five interactions is influenced by structures and capacity, along with how these combine to overcome the challenges faced by the partnership. For this study, 30 case study multi-actor co-innovation partnerships from across Europe were selected and analysed according to the framework. The results show that interactions with funding bodies can lead to partnerships adapting to what they perceive to be the goals of the funding body, and sometimes to the overpromising of expected outputs in an effort to win scarce funding. The reflection of societal needs in the goals of funding bodies could thereby capitalize on the motivations and aspirations of partnerships to combine socio-economic and environmental benefits at both individual and societal levels. Factors that enable partnerships to achieve their own goals are commonly based around the inclusion or recruitment of experienced partners with existing networks, in which the partnership may be embedded, that can facilitate internal collaboration and navigate the external environments, such as political structures and market condition

Airway management in neonates and infants: European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care and British Journal of Anaesthesia joint guidelines.

Airway management is required during general anaesthesia and is essential for life-threatening conditions such as cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Evidence from recent trials indicates a high incidence of critical events during airway management, especially in neonates or infants. It is important to define the optimal techniques and strategies for airway management in these groups. In this joint European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC) and British Journal of Anaesthesia (BJA) guideline on airway management in neonates and infants, we present aggregated and evidence-based recommendations to assist clinicians in providing safe and effective medical care. We identified seven main areas of interest for airway management: i) preoperative assessment and preparation; ii) medications; iii) techniques and algorithms; iv) identification and treatment of difficult airways; v) confirmation of tracheal intubation; vi) tracheal extubation, and vii) human factors. Based on these areas, Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) questions were derived that guided a structured literature search. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology was used to formulate the recommendations based on those studies included with consideration of their methodological quality (strong '1' or weak '2' recommendation with high 'A', medium 'B' or low 'C' quality of evidence). In summary, we recommend: 1. Use medical history and physical examination to predict difficult airway management (1С). 2. Ensure adequate level of sedation or general anaesthesia during airway management (1B). 3. Administer neuromuscular blocker before tracheal intubation when spontaneous breathing is not necessary (1С). 4. Use a videolaryngoscope with an age-adapted standard blade as first choice for tracheal intubation (1B). 5. Apply apnoeic oxygenation during tracheal intubation in neonates (1B). 6. Consider a supraglottic airway for rescue oxygenation and ventilation when tracheal intubation fails (1B). 7. Limit the number of tracheal intubation attempts (1C). 8. Use a stylet to reinforce and preshape tracheal tubes when hyperangulated videolaryngoscope blades are used and when the larynx is anatomically anterior (1C). 9. Verify intubation is successful with clinical assessment and end-tidal CO2 waveform (1C). 10. Apply high-flow nasal oxygenation, continuous positive airway pressure or nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation for postextubation respiratory support, when appropriate (1B)

Evaluating the Effects of SARS-CoV-2 Spike Mutation D614G on Transmissibility and Pathogenicity.

Global dispersal and increasing frequency of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein variant D614G are suggestive of a selective advantage but may also be due to a random founder effect. We investigate the hypothesis for positive selection of spike D614G in the United Kingdom using more than 25,000 whole genome SARS-CoV-2 sequences. Despite the availability of a large dataset, well represented by both spike 614 variants, not all approaches showed a conclusive signal of positive selection. Population genetic analysis indicates that 614G increases in frequency relative to 614D in a manner consistent with a selective advantage. We do not find any indication that patients infected with the spike 614G variant have higher COVID-19 mortality or clinical severity, but 614G is associated with higher viral load and younger age of patients. Significant differences in growth and size of 614G phylogenetic clusters indicate a need for continued study of this variant

Evaluating the Effects of SARS-CoV-2 Spike Mutation D614G on Transmissibility and Pathogenicity

Global dispersal and increasing frequency of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein variant D614G are suggestive of a selective advantage but may also be due to a random founder effect. We investigate the hypothesis for positive selection of spike D614G in the United Kingdom using more than 25,000 whole genome SARS-CoV-2 sequences. Despite the availability of a large dataset, well represented by both spike 614 variants, not all approaches showed a conclusive signal of positive selection. Population genetic analysis indicates that 614G increases in frequency relative to 614D in a manner consistent with a selective advantage. We do not find any indication that patients infected with the spike 614G variant have higher COVID-19 mortality or clinical severity, but 614G is associated with higher viral load and younger age of patients. Significant differences in growth and size of 614G phylogenetic clusters indicate a need for continued study of this variant

Moving forward together? Exploring the functioning and politics of Knowledge and Innovation co-production partnerships in the European agri-food systems

European agri-food systems face a number of ‘grand societal challenges’: the impacts of climate change, soil quality degradation and, more generally, the transition to more sustainable and socially just agri-food systems. These challenges are difficult to tackle due to their highly complex nature and the far-reaching and diverse impacts they have on societal actors. Often, expert knowledge on these topics is incomplete, fragmented and/or contested. Therefore, this thesis pays particular attention to ‘Knowledge and Innovation (KI) co-production partnerships’ which have a transdisciplinary character, i.e., they bring together a variety of societal actors, ranging from researchers, agricultural advisors and farmers to policy-makers or small businesses. In this way, they aim to integrate and produce knowledge and innovation and to create a shared ownership to tackle complex problems. A rich empirical foundation is used, including 200 key informant interviews with as many ‘KI co-production partnerships’ throughout Europe, 30 in-depth case studies comprising 283 in-depth interviews and 7 focus groups with actors directly or indirectly involved in these 30 partnerships. A wide and diverse range of ‘KI co-production partnerships’ are explored by integrating different theoretical and analytical approaches. In this way, insight is gained into the links and interactions between the processes within the partnerships and external factors. Throughout the thesis, a structured analytical approach is developed to account for differences in institutional, cultural and social contexts that influence the KI co-production process: the Multi-level Innovation Systems (MINOS) framework. Furthermore, the integration of a political perspective in the form of ‘power dynamics’ supported the identification of effective barriers to entry which affect the functioning and inclusivity of KI co-production processes

EU CAP 2014-2020 policy implementation choices: Is there a Member State typology?

In this study an attempt was made to develop a typology, grouping Member States based on their implementation choices in Pillar 1 and Pillar 2, which extends previous analysis that were limited to only one of the CAP pillars. The outcomes of the analysis are five clusters consisting of 5 to 8 countries. It turned out to be difficult to detect an overarching pattern in terms of the use of different instruments and measures. From the typology analysis it can be concluded that for the majority of the Member States, the main focus of the CAP remains viable food production. The analysis did not allow to establish a clear link between the implementation choices (in terms of measures chosen) under Pillar 1 and the decisions made in Pillar 2

Multi-actor Horizon 2020 projects in agriculture, forestry and related sectors : a Multi-level Innovation System framework (MINOS) for identifying multi-level system failures

CONTEXT - The key European Union (EU) policy instrument in support of innovation in agriculture, forestry and related sectors is the European Innovation Partnership for Agricultural Productivity and Sustainability. It applies the ‘interactive innovation model’ which brings together actors with complementary types of knowledge. This policy instrument is implemented inter alia through multi-actor projects funded via the Horizon 2020 (H2020) Research and Innovation (R&I) programme. OBJECTIVE - Although the multi-actor H2020 projects account for a substantial part of EU project funding for agriculture, forestry and related sector R&I, systematic and comparative research on the multi-actor H2020 projects is scarce. This is partly due to a lack of a structured analytical approach to accommodate the differences in institutional, cultural and social contexts which influence the co-innovation and social learning processes in these multinational, multi-actor partnerships. To this end, we argue that the analytical integration of the micro- and macro-level innovation system (IS) perspectives is necessary to understand fully the mechanisms underlying the functioning of, and the co-innovation process within, multi-actor H2020 projects. METHODS - This analytical gap is addressed with the development of an integrated, Multi-level Innovation System framework (MINOS) and its application to 50 multi-actor H2020 projects. MINOS recognises the presence, influence of and interaction between multiple levels of IS in such projects. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS - We distinguish four levels of IS: the European Agricultural Innovation System (EU AIS), the National Agricultural Innovation System (NAIS), the H2020 project and the partner organisations involved in the project (Partner). Our analysis of the system failures that occurred across most of the 50 cases allowed us to identify and conceptualise two categories of ‘multi-level system failures’, namely multipliers and stackers, and the presence of mitigating factors. SIGNIFICANCE - The MINOS analytical framework enabled a) a better understanding of the underlying mechanisms of co-innovation in multi-actor H2020 projects and b) contributed to addressing the theoretical and conceptual gaps in terms of studying the interconnection and interdependence of different IS levels

Organisational innovation systems for multi-actor co-innovation in European agriculture, forestry and related sectors : diversity and common attributes

Innovation rests not only on discovery but also on cooperation and interactive learning. In agriculture, forestry and related sectors, multi-actor partnerships for 'co-innovation' occur in many forms, from international projects to informal 'actor configurations'. Common attributes are that they include actors with 'complementary forms of knowledge' who collaborate in an innovation process, engage with a 'larger periphery' of stakeholders in the Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System (AKIS) and are shaped by institutions. Using desk research and interviews, we reviewed, according to the Organisational Innovation Systems framework, the performance of 200 co-innovation partnerships from across Europe, selected for their involvement of various actors 'all along the process'. Many of the reviewed partnerships were composed of actors that had previously worked together and most interviewees believed that no relevant actors had been excluded. In almost all cases, project targets and objectives were co-designed to a great or some extent, and the mechanisms applied to foster knowledge sharing between partners were considered to be very effective. Great importance was attached to communication beyond the partnership, not simply for dissemination but also for dialogue, and most interviewees evaluated the communication/outreach performance of their partnership very highly. Most partnerships received external funding, most did not use innovation brokers during the proposal writing process and two thirds had access to information they needed. We discuss the implications of these findings and question whether the AKIS concept as currently interpreted by many policy makers can adequately account for the regional differences encountered by co-innovation partnerships across Europe