European Collaboration in Research and Development 2004
DOI: 10.4337/9781845420505.00021
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

European Union Science and Technology Policy, Research Joint Venture Collaboration and Competition Policy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0
2

Year Published

2008
2008
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
10
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, although difficult to quantify, developing cooperation between universities and firms is likely to be of considerable long-term importance to the performance of European industry (Larédo 1995). The formation of regional RTD networking activities can also be considered an important feature (Barker and Cameron, 2004). However, only little empirical work on the overall structure, dynamics and evolution of networks emerging in the context of EU FPs has so far been produced (Breschi and Cusmano 2004;Roediger-Schluga and Barber 2008).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For example, although difficult to quantify, developing cooperation between universities and firms is likely to be of considerable long-term importance to the performance of European industry (Larédo 1995). The formation of regional RTD networking activities can also be considered an important feature (Barker and Cameron, 2004). However, only little empirical work on the overall structure, dynamics and evolution of networks emerging in the context of EU FPs has so far been produced (Breschi and Cusmano 2004;Roediger-Schluga and Barber 2008).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…While much criticism has been made of EU research programmes, for instance, they have been recently criticized for putting 'too much emphasis on various types of "networking", "interactions with the local environment" or "attention to user needs" suggesting that they should be more focused on 'policy measures aimed at strengthening basic research and, at the opposite end, at strengthening European corporate actors' (Dosi, Llerena, andLabini 2006, 1451), there is enough evidence to point to positive impacts (Barker and Cameron 2004). More specifically, the FPs seem to play a role in the promotion of common technical standards and the share of costs and risks inherent the development of new technologies (Luukkonen 1998;Caloghirou, Vonortas, and Ioannides 2004).…”
Section: Eu Framework Programmesmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…In spite of their different scopes, the fundamental rationale of the FPs has remained unchanged since their launch in 1984 (see Barker and Cameron 2004). 4 The overall objectives of the FPs have been to strengthen the scientific and technological bases of the European scientific community (Maggioni et al.…”
Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In spite of their different scopes, the fundamental rationale of the FPs has remained unchanged since their launch in 1984 (see Barker and Cameron 2004). 4 The overall objectives of the FPs have been to strengthen the scientific and technological bases of the European scientific community (Maggioni et al 2007, among others) and the European economy to foster international competitiveness, and the promotion of research activities in support of other EU policies (see CORDIS 2006).…”
Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since FP4, R&D activities have been complemented with funding for the training and mobility of researchers, special support for SMEs, networking and exploitation activities. Despite the evolution of their objectives and their scope (an excellent comprehensive yet concise account is Barker and Cameron 2004), the fundamental rationale of the FPs as mid-term research programmes that support collaborative research in selected technological priority areas has remained unchanged. Moreover, all FPs share a few key structural elements (see Caracostas and Muldur 2001, p. 162).…”
Section: Rationale Objectives and Structure Of The European Framewormentioning
confidence: 99%