Search

The social sciences have undergone profound changes. The causes of these changes are many, and in this article we discuss the most important ones. First, we discuss the shift to a situation where the American tradition is the norm and European and national traditions are vanishing. Secondly, we discuss the shift from a focus on the empirical context to a pure internal research focus. These and other changes cause dramatic effects for the social sciences. In our article we analyze these effects on the topics, results, methods and values of the social sciences. We especially focus on the career system and the PhD education. Our conclusion is that changes implemented to gain higher quality have instead caused decreasing quality to a point where the social sciences as a whole are at risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper seeks to provide an insider's view into the implementation of goals set by the European Commission for socio-economic research. By analysing project coordinators' responses to questionnaires (n=88), several aspects of the emergence of a European social science research community are examined. Focus is placed on three 'European Added Values', defined within two subsequent calls for research proposals and funding opportunities: framework programmes 4 and 5 (1994-1998, and 1998-2002 accordingly). These 'Added Values' will set the expected features of European-funded research projects, and will include: (1) transnationality - the involvement of researchers from a variety of EU states; (2) applied research - the potential implementation of outcomes in socioeconomic policy; and (3) interdisciplinarity - the integration and collaboration of different disciplinary perspectives. These 'ideals' were tested against reports as to the reality of the research practices, and found to have a significant compatibility, as well as several discrepancies, with the objectives set out by the EU research committee. This paper allows for an understanding of the dynamics of European research consortia, and the factors involved in the success or failure in attaining the overarching goals of the EU Commission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

'Culture' and 'change' are not words typically yoked together in social science. Indeed, the whole point of explanatory recourse to culture is to account for permanencies. Nonetheless, subject to certain conceptual precautions, middle range cultural analysis can work in conjunction with mainstream political science to clarify processes of policy change. The paper illustrates this by focusing on the case of European research policies and practices. After presenting a conceptual framework designed to bring together cultural analysis and policy science, the paper elaborates, on the basis of the framework, a theoretical scheme for the analysis of research policy. It then reports on some empirical findings from recent research and assesses the extent to which they validate the conceptual and theoretical framework. Finally, the paper offers some conclusions about the scale and innovative nature of policy change in contemporary European polities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT This brief paper provides a concise overview of the historical development of European research systems. Although social science has recently discovered national science and research systems as a topic of study, the historical origins of different national systems is as old as European science itself. The article provides a condensed tour of the major historical developments that have contributed to shaping the present European research landscape. These historical developments, which began with the establishment of the first European university in Bologna, show that the evolution of the European research system has been marked by forces pulling in opposite directions: on the one hand, the universalistic nature of science has forged co-operative relations across national boundaries; on the other hand, the national orientation of research systems embedded in nation-states has led to fierce competition. The article shows that this ambivalent historical legacy has shaped structures and practices in today's European research system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The major health problems faced by policy-makers and practitioners at national and local levels require public health approaches. However, public health research is the “poor relative” of biomedical research: it is worthy, but not rich. In the European Commission's health research programme, biomedicine gets 90% of the funding, whereas public health research gets less than 10%. This pattern is repeated nationally in most countries, reflecting public policies to support industries - pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, medical devices - where profits are to be made, rather than not-for-profit, public health research. SPHERE, a study coordinated through the European Public Health Association, conducted bibliometric analyses across public health research themes and mapped the European and national structures and priorities for research. Whilst most European countries have national strategies (and some programmes) for public health, few have public health research strategies and the coordination of public health research is weak. Three further studies are being undertaken. In STEPS, the contribution of civil society organizations in the new EU member states to public health research will be discussed at national workshops with the ministries of health, the science/research councils and the national public health associations. In PHIRE, thematic Sections and the national member associations together evaluate the impact of European-funded health projects within member states. In FAHRE, the specific theme of food and health will be addressed, bridging industry and non-profit research sectors. Arguments for public health research can be made through lobbying at European level, but researchers and practitioners also need to influence the development of public health research within individual countries - leading to a European Public Health Research Area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article discusses the findings of the INNOCULT project ‘Internationalization of Research: Institutional Innovation, Culture and Agency in the Framework of Competition and Cooperation’. The project examined the impact of the European research programmes on research policies against the background of multi-level governance, on key research actors such as universities and research organizations as well as on research collaboration and networking. The project's findings and conclusions, dating back to 2001, are revisited in view of recent developments in research programming at European level, more specifically those relating to the Sixth Framework Programme and the introduction of the so-called ‘New Instruments’ for creating the European Research Area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article argues against the thought that the Sixth Framework Programme is significant to the establishment of a European Research Area. It discusses the implications of the programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities that contribute to the European Research Area. It cites the political aim of the program and mentions its provisions. It comments on the provisions of the program concerning social sciences. The article also presents recommendations that can be considered as an alternative to the provisions of the Sixth Framework Programme.

The aim of this contribution is to look at the impact of European research policies on the European Research Area. In 2000, during the preparation of the Sixth Framework Programme for RTD, the Commission published a communication calling for the creation of this area. There are, however, good reasons to think that the European Research Area existed already prior to this communication and, not least, as a result of the five Framework Programmes that preceded the one being launched in the near future. The main hypothesis of this contribution is that these programmes have already had an effect on creating sustainable research networks which are the building blocks of a European Research Area. If the new programme and the related instruments were not to take the experiences and needs of these networks into account, the new Framework Programme could represent a step backwards and might duplicate the mistakes of national research policies during the 1980s and 1990s. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT This article examines the dimensions of research collaboration between researchers from EU and Central and East European countries in the post-communist period. The discussion draws on experience of two initiatives for research co-operation, COST and EUREKA. Following an analysis of the formal levels of participation of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe in COST and EUREKA, the quality of exchange during the collaborative projects and the networks that have been established, some benefits from and barriers to East-West co-operation in research and technology are considered. Although the collaborative arrangements have been overall successful the different groups of participants display diverging and even sometimes conflicting expectations and perceptions of benefits. Two extreme positions view the collaborative links in terms of 'master' and 'student' and as relationships between partners of equal standing. By for the most serious barriers to successful East-West research co-operation stem from broad cultural differences and from a tendency to assume that lack of information means lack of development. The benefits from research co-operation can increase many-fold, it is suggested, if the relationships are seen as a symmetrical exchange rather than as a meeting between David and Goliath. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Deals with the importance of understanding the development of a common European science and research landscape. Features of the agenda of the European Union; How the emergence of a European agenda changed the co-operation policies in science and research existing in national policies.