Search results

The purpose of the paper is to present a framework for moving cross-border ePrescription (eP) and Patient Summary (PS) services forward, bearing in mind the needs and requirements of the European e-health space for cross-border eP and PS services, the limitations of the already developed solutions, as well as outcomes available from other domains.

The outcomes of previous and current large-scale pilot projects, aiming toward the delivery of electronic cross-border services, are examined. Integration of generic building blocks (BBs) is considered for the further development of cross-border eP and PS, in line with the European Directive on patients’ rights in cross-border health care.

The e-health domain is expected to greatly benefit from mitigating non-domain concerns such as those for electronic identification, end point detection, non-repudiation and the use of electronic signatures and trust establishments for basic cross-border public services in Europe.

Research limitations are related to the fact that electronic identification, electronic signature and semantic issues have not been fully addressed yet at a European level to support cross-border services.

Practical implications are related to the cooperation, European level compatibility and sustainability of the underlying national infrastructures required to support reliable and secure exchange of medical data, as well as the readiness to address continuously evolving interoperability, legal and security requirements in a cross-border setting.

The need for consolidating the existing outcomes of non-health specific BBs is examined for two high-priority e-health services. Ongoing progress is presented, together with related issues that need to be resolved for improving technical certainty and making it easier to use health-care services abroad in cases of emergency.

Economic growth is defined as growth in the capacity to meet individual and collective consumption demands. Decline in economic growth for a longer period (i.e. recession) occurs as a part of the “The Limits of Growth” concept. During such an economic crisis, three policy concepts can be implemented: “austerity”; “business as usual”; and “fiscal stimulus”. The purpose of this paper is to examine the economic response to the 2008 recession, in the area of sustainable transport system development, in Europe.

The study assesses and identifies the need for investments in transport infrastructure, in particular rail, to remove barriers to developing a sustainable multimodal transport system. Towards this, by analysing secondary data collected from relevant online sources, the paper explores the prospects for sustainable rail freight transport development in Europe, during the recession period. For this, eight EU countries were selected, based on the length of railway lines in use: France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Romania, Spain, Sweden and the UK.

Investment in five transport infrastructures were examined – road, rail, IWT, maritime ports and airports – and the research finds that overall, the “austerity” policy was implemented for investment in rail infrastructure, whereas a modest “stimulus” policy can be observed for investment in road infrastructure. The average investment in IWT infrastructure had a “stimulus” policy, whereas the average investment in Maritime port and Airport infrastructure suggests a “business as usual” policy. Of the various approaches taken in the recent recession period, European rail transport appears to have fared least well.

To some extent, the research is limited by lack of some data (e.g. data unavailability on the UK airport infrastructure investment from year 2006).

The findings of the research will encourage policy makers in national government to invest in sustainable transport infrastructure.

The study suggests that there is a lack of uniform policy response to the recession, in terms of investment in transport infrastructure, and that there is a significant difference between the policy goals set by the EU – modal shift from road to rail and/ IWT to develop a sustainable transport system – and their practice. The author argues for an integrative, common and action-oriented approach to sustainable rail freight system development, by European countries, to develop effective, Europe-wide rail freight corridors, under schemes such as Horizon 2020 and Shift2Rail.

European spatial governance underwent substantial changes over the past two decades with the expansion of European territorial cooperation programmes, the introduction of new instruments for cooperation and an increasing role of financial and regulatory framework in sector policies. Against this background the paper develops the argument that today’s European spatial governance has become more diversified and fragmented, leading to an increasing role for sector policies, and that the cumulative effect of these diverse activities on domestic planning processes are under researched.

This paper summarises the legal recognition of spatial planning and categorises European spatial governance as being composed of spatial policies, financial instruments and governance frameworks. This paper then presents three explorative case studies: the Common Transport policy as one European Union (EU) sector policy, a cross-border cooperation supported by the European Regional Development Fund and macro-regional cooperation.

This paper concludes that the increasing regulatory impact of European spatial governance on domestic spatial planning goes far beyond the pure Europeanisation of narratives and agendas or “ways of doing things”. Furthermore, this paper illustrates that European spatial governance is characterised by a process of sectoralisation, supported by the EU’s regional policy and the provision of governance tools. The paper calls for further investigation of the interrelatedness of these processes and their reciprocal influences on planning practices.

The value lies in recognising the incremental changes that have come alongside European integration, and highlighting the importance of these processes for domestic planning processes. This paper highlights the hidden process of sectoralisation that leads to an increase in planning competences at the European level.

The purpose of this viewpoint paper is to reflect on both the technological and the humanities aspects of working in the digital humanities.

The author completed her academic career as Professor of Digital Humanities (DH) at the University of Brighton, UK. In terms of approach, she looks back over 25 years of working in this domain, which she entered as a scientist in contrast to most of the other academics at that time who came from the humanities. She delineates her academic journey that passed through various disciplines/fields.

The author reflects upon her entire career, starting with decisions made at school, to see how they have affected her contribution to DH. She concludes that a deep understanding of technological issues is fundamental to making sense of such complex fields as Big Data and its effect on humanities research in particular and society in general. She also draws attention to the loss of several highly technical, specialised and practical DH teams, which were replaced with ones whose focus is on DH discourse.

The author is writing as one of the very few scientists who belonged to the new area of history and computing in the mid-1990s.

Some specialized consultancies have been making the case of an “API economy”. This study aims to investigate the issue, marshalling data on the economic dimension, to better understand the environments of APIs. It offers an overview of the functions and definition of application programming interfaces (APIs) in the backdrop of the history of services computing. The paper attempt assessing the economic value (size of the market) of APIs and reviews some of the available metrics. The paper also takes a look some issues and challenges ahead for the deployment of all kind of APIs.

The paper is based on desk research and a scientific and grey literature review. However, it relies mostly on specialized consultancies although from a critical viewpoint. The paper provides an historical account of the notions of APIs and API economy.

The paper questions the idea of an “API economy” that still stands on the “hype” side and is not clearly substantiated. It reveals that the number of firms with mature API programs remains small and that there is an uneven development across industries (traditional firms are less active than digital natives) and countries (Silicon Valley is leading). It highlights that the domination of IT companies (leaders and pioneers of APIs) raises issue of competition and at some point, may prevent rather than foster innovation.

There is no robust data about the size of the API market nor about its value. Sources are highly heterogeneous and delimitations not always precise. The standard metrics or indicators are hard to find. Further research would be needed to better document this area.

The paper reviews some of the expected benefits of the use of APIs as enablers of private or public ecosystems.

The paper delineates some of the economic benefits of the public APIs based on open data. It shows some positive examples of public APIs in the EU.

There is hardly any mention of the API economy in research literature. Most of the academic literature still stems from engineering department or business-management departments, not department of economics. Consultants would usually focus on the potential of business growth, on how to design an effective API strategy but not on the very economic dimension. The paper attempts providing a synthesis of the available data.