I read today the following tweet
and I wondered what are the KICs in the context of Horizon2020. Everything is explained on the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT) website:
Knowledge and Innovation Communities (KICs) are the independent but operational part of the EIT, the part that puts the innovation web into practise. They are highly integrated, creative and excellence-driven partnerships that bring together the fields of education, technology, research, business and entrepreneurship, in order to produce new innovations and new innovation models that inspire others to emulate it. They are to become key drivers of sustainable economic growth and competitiveness across Europe through world-leading innovation. The KICs will be driving effective “translation” between partners in ideas, technology, culture, and business models, and will create new business for existing industry and for new endeavours. KICs are legally and financially structured entities of internationally distributed but thematically convergent partners. The relationship between the KICs and the EIT in Budapest is organised on a contractual basis, leaving a great degree of autonomy to the KICs to define their own legal status, internal organisation and working methods.
So there are three already (since December 2009):
And according to that tweet there will be three more in the context of Horizon2020.
My article on the progress of the HorizonTap idea was published yesterday (23/5/2013) in ResearchEurope, in the special issue for the European Association of Research Managers and Administrators (EARMA) conference in July (http://www.earma-vienna-2013.com/index.php?id=1183).
Here is the article: http://bit.ly/horizontap
Looking at the European Science Foundation publications page, I was happy to discover a number of interesting reports that were published in the last year:
Directorate General for Communications, Networks, Content and Technology (DG CONNECT) has decided to establish a group of experts to get advice about the orientations to be adopted in the design of research and innovation activities and initiatives dealing with Research and Innovation in ICT (communication networks, computing systems, digital content and related technologies). This group will be called “CONNECT Advisory Forum for ICT Research and Innovation” (CAF).
For more information click here. This document includes list of members of the CAF for 2013-2014 (2 year mandate).
I have been absent from this blog because I have been organising the Young Europeans Discuss Sustainable Development from the point of view of science and technology event:
Young Europeans Discuss Sustainable Development
9-14 of May 2011
Advances in Science and Technology directly affectyour life, and you should have an opinion!
28 Young Europeans (18-24 years old) from 13 EU countries, will be discussing with Greek scientists about6 different aspects of Sustainable development.
Meet the 23 scientists
that will talk at the event! They work at almost all of the big Greek universities and research centres!
Learn about the issues that will be discussed:
Climate Change, Energy, Innovation, Water and Food, Biodiversity, Public Health
Check out what will be happening
during that week!
online, ask questions for the scientists to answer, vote!
The event language is English.
Please forward this to your members and whoever you think might be interested.
Dr Ino Agrafioti
So I finally finished gathering my data and did my plots. Before I get into specifics about what exactly did the Greek sample say, I want to mention four things that I found striking:
- there was significantly more emphasis in the Greek answers: Even though, in most questions their beliefs appear to be similar to those of other Europeans, their answers were more “emphatic” i.e. their answers were less divided compared to other EU countries. I noticed this by eye, and in an effort to “quantify” it, I ranked all European countries according to their responses using the graph charts presented in the Eurobarometer report. In these graphs, the countries were plotted in descending order, according to the value of the majority and minority percentages in those questions. The country on the far left was thus ranked “1” since it showed the greatest majority percentage. Similarly the country on the far right was ranked “28” (the average of all 27 EU countries was included in the ranking).
In the following graph I present the distribution of rankings of the EU27 average: