IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v39y2012i1p88-98.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integration modes in EU research: Centrifugality versus coordination of national research policies

Author

Listed:
  • Liv Langfeldt
  • Helge Godø
  • Åse Gornitzka
  • Aris Kaloudis

Abstract

In the past decade, EU research policy has become more central to the EU's political ambitions and its instruments are expanding in scale and scope. Recently there has been mounting apprehension over the EU's R&D efforts, such as the Framework Programmes, and their adequacies in meeting European and global 'grand challenges'. How European-level and national research efforts interact is a key condition for enhancing Europe's research competitiveness and responsiveness. This paper presents data from Norway indicating that the R&D institutions adapt to European-level priorities directly, whereas the national authorities have a limited impact on the country's European research portfolio. It points to a need for thorough analysis of national path-dependencies, and how the nation states organise and coordinate their participation in European programmes, specifically for facing present and future 'grand challenges'. Copyright The Author 2012. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Liv Langfeldt & Helge Godø & Åse Gornitzka & Aris Kaloudis, 2012. "Integration modes in EU research: Centrifugality versus coordination of national research policies," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 88-98, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:39:y:2012:i:1:p:88-98
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scs001
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Beata Raszka & Halina Dzieżyc & Maria Hełdak, 2021. "Assessment of the Development Potential of Post-Industrial Areas in Terms of Social, Economic and Environmental Aspects: The Case of Wałbrzych Region (Poland)," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-17, July.
    2. Howoldt, David, 2024. "Characterising innovation policy mixes in innovation systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(2).
    3. Simen G. Enger & Fulvio Castellacci, 2016. "Who gets Horizon 2020 research grants? Propensity to apply and probability to succeed in a two-step analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1611-1638, December.
    4. Dimitrios Pontikakis & Mathieu Doussineau & Nicholas Harrap & Mark Boden, 2018. "Mobilising European Structural and Investment Funds and Horizon 2020 in support of innovation in less developed regions," JRC Research Reports JRC112442, Joint Research Centre.
    5. Stephen Brammer & Layla Branicki & Martina Linnenluecke & Tom Smith, 2019. "Grand challenges in management research: Attributes, achievements, and advancement," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 44(4), pages 517-533, November.
    6. Ben R. Martin, 2015. "R&D Policy Instruments: A Critical Review of What We Do & Don't Know," Working Papers wp476, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    7. Laura Cruz-Castro & Koen Jonkers & Luis Sanz-Menéndez, 2015. "The internationalisation of research institutes," Working Papers 1513, Instituto de Políticas y Bienes Públicos (IPP), CSIC.
    8. Lepori, Benedetto & Reale, Emanuela & Larédo, Philippe, 2014. "Logics of integration and actors’ strategies in European joint programs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 391-402.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:39:y:2012:i:1:p:88-98. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.