The COVID-19 crisis has exposed some of the most pressing challenges affecting healthcare and highlighted the benefits that robust integration of digital and AI technologies in the healthcare setting may bring. Although medical solutions based on AI are growing rapidly, regulatory issues and policy initiatives including ownership and control of data, data sharing, privacy protection, telemedicine, and accountability need to be carefully and continually addressed as AI research requires robust and ethical guidelines, demanding an update of the legal and regulatory framework all over the world. Several recently proposed regulatory frameworks provide a solid foundation but do not address a number of issues that may prevent algorithms from being fully trusted. A global effort is needed for an open, mature conversation about the best possible way to guard against and mitigate possible harms to realize the potential of AI across health systems in a respectful and ethical way. This conversation must include national and international policymakers, physicians, digital health and machine learning leaders from industry and academia. If this is done properly and in a timely fashion, the potential of AI in healthcare will be realized.

Restrictive measures, or so-called “sanctions”, were introduced by the countries of the European Union against the Russian Federation, its citizens, and legal entities in 2014. The introduction of restrictive measures was initially seen as a threat to Russia’s economic security and sovereignty, so the Russian authorities were forced to respond by introducing retaliatory measures, or counter-sanctions. The subject of this article is the various possibilities for defending or challenging the imposed restrictive measures provided for by the legislation of the European Union and its member States, as well as the most famous and significant cases of appealing against these sanctions. The aim of the study is to systematize various ways of challenging restrictive measures in the bodies of the European Union, to develop a mechanism for such a challenge, as well as to collect statistical information on completed cases in which sanctions against certain persons were successfully challenged, or the lifting of restrictive measures was refused. The relevance of the topic is expressed in the unrelenting pressure of foreign states on the sovereignty and economic security of Russia. The scientific novelty is due to the lack of systematic research on the mechanisms for challenging sanctions. The authors apply descriptive, historical, and comparative analysis methods. The authors identified a certain mechanism of opportunities and tools for challenging restrictive measures in the bodies of the European Union, as well as defined a chain of actions to launch an appeal mechanism for certain restrictive measures. The authors conclude that stakeholders should initiate and participate in sanctions appeal procedures as there is good practice in lifting restrictive measures.

Most prominent works on the subject, including k-wave theory-based research, do not elaborate on the topic of interconnectivity between economy and research on a microeconomic scale, instead of focusing on general innovation theory and macroeconomic stimuli. Present paper aims to discover k-wave theory-based decision making and potential explanation in R&D standoff between the United States, leader of fifth technological paradigm, and China – emerging leader of sixth technological paradigm. Overall conducted research shows fundamental divergence and a variety of interpretations within the framework of the k-wave theory itself, the proposed change in recourse flow stands true which in turn signifies the importance of k-wave theory in the modern decision-making process.

No abstract