Search results

This chapter considers the implications of the lack of uniformity, consistency and harmonisation in defining and regulating research integrity across Europe. In view of this, recent initiatives of the Council of Research Ministers and of the European Commission aim to provide a common point of reference in institutional terms and legal terms. However researchers and institutions themselves remain ultimately responsible for detecting, investigating and adjudicating any allegations of scientific misconduct through their established procedures. Therefore, a complementary approach between the Commission’s initiatives and the self-regulatory approach of local/national structures is desirable. A major step towards this direction could be the formulation of a single European-wide definition of research integrity.

This article aims to develop an original conceptual approach for the research and analysis of European works councils (EWCs) through a critical examination of the theoretical debate on the Europeanization of industrial relations and the main results of the huge body of quantitative and qualitative empirical studies of these transnational bodies for effective worker participation.

Starting from the authors' own experiences in qualitative case‐study research, they summarise the main developments of EWCs as the most advanced institutional piece in the emerging dimension of European industrial relations and discuss the strength and weakness of the different approaches employed in EWC research.

From a perspective of “political economy of European integration” the development of EWCs shows the changing power constellations at the micro‐ and meso‐level of transnational firm complexes. More than 800 EWCs councils with thousands of workers' representatives generate hope for an emergent system of industrial relations, but globalization, economic crisis, intensification of regime competition or the consequences on employment of relocation, restructuring and downsizing are threatening advances in this fundamental piece of the European social project.

The paper offers not only a comprehensive state of the art of theoretical debate and empirical research on EWCs, but develops an original and innovative analytical approach for future research. In a meso‐political perspective, linking together micro‐politics with the interaction of the firm with other collective actors, namely public authorities, trade unions and employers' associations at different levels, transnational industrial relations at company level are best analysed as dynamic networks of actors embedded in the framework of the transnational corporation, conceived as a political complex with different actors struggling for increasing their influence on corporate decision‐making processes.

The development of Research Management and Administration (RMA) in Europe is strongly connected with the development of the Science and Technology (S&T) policy of the European Union (EU). These policies were the result of a continuous debate between the member states and the European Commission and European Parliament.

Although there is no data on the early development of RMA, there are some publications on the history of the development of the S&T policy in Europe: the excellent publication ‘A History of European Union Research Policy’ by Luca Guzzetti (Guzzetti, 1995). Guzzetti’s book investigates the history of EU research policies from 1948 up to the preparation of the Fourth Framework Programme (FP) (1994–1998).

The RMA aspects are constructed mainly by oral history complemented with some written sources. The history shows a gradual development of the profession unevenly spread in time and European geography. This has mainly with the EU enlargement in the same period, when new member states were connected to the FP. The profession started with a few colleagues’ way back in the eighties of the last century as financial people were dealing with the first European financial reporting up to the present day where RMA is becoming a field of work attracting many new colleagues.

The ambition of human rights-based research is to generate an evidence base aligned to specific rights and rights holders. This chapter addresses the question ‘How does the ethical communication of research evidence support the achievement of this ambition?’ It outlines a Communication of Evidence For Impact (CEFI) approach that is focused on the realisation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). CEFI proposes that human rights-based communication is: a public good; a legal imperative in States that have ratified CRPD, and a moral imperative in States yet to sign or ratify; a core research competency and ethical requirement; participatory; and grounded in a culture of inclusion, intersectionality, and allyship. This chapter explores how five actors – States, research ethics committees, researchers, funders, and publishers – can each contribute to ethical communication. Recommendations are made for including and futureproofing CEFI in a disability research ethics framework.

Turkey has been an active member of the Bologna Process (BP) since 2001. This chapter focuses on the impact of the BP on higher education (HE) in Turkey by outlining the reforms that were carried out and the narratives surrounding the changes. The focus of the chapter will be on how the BP has been accommodated, negotiated debated or rejected in Turkey and the societal and political tensions surrounding the process. The chapter is based on the findings of semi-structured interviews conducted with the Bologna experts and the officials of universities in Turkey, who were responsible for the reforms between 2009 and 2016, as well as a review of updated data and the analysis of secondary literature and official texts, such as the National Reports of the BP and the relevant policy documents in Turkey. After a very intense reform process, the policy transfer in Turkey slowed down, and Turkey's discussions, specifically about the BP both at the policy and the university level, became close to non-existent. The chapter aims to analyse the reasons behind the loss of interest in the BP in Turkey by focusing on the critical voices and discussions surrounding the neoliberalisation of HE. The chapter will also refer to how Euroscepticism in Turkey impacted the reform process in HE.

The political discussion on the best way for Europe to build its future on science and technology should not be confined to what will come after the 5th Framework Programme. A reappraisal of the institutional inheritance in the European area must face squarely our inability to turn Europe’s considerable assets in science and technology into a science system as effective as that of the USA or Japan. It must also face the obfuscating role of the subsidiarity principle in shaping EU versus national responsibilities, thereby preventing the rise of a truly European perspective and, incidentally, neglecting a better integration of the resources of the former Soviet area. Such a new perspective is presented. It will entail a European policy for the science base on which the European Research Councils, the European Science Foundation and the EU could start working now, a determined focus on sustainability, full acceptance of science’s place in society where the advancement of science and its uses occurs in a framework of ethical considerations, regulation and democratic debate on uncertainties. A Europe‐wide system of technology foresight and assessment would be a great boon.

This chapter discusses recent information policy activities and initiatives in the European Union (EU). EU information policy refers to the legislation and strategies pertaining to the creation of the European information society. It is concerned with economic and industrial competitiveness, with an emphasis on the role that information and communication technologies play in revolutionizing everyday life. This discussion focuses on the information policy areas of greatest interest to information professionals. It addresses the EU's struggles with the concept of transparency with regard to the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, the application of privacy measures to the Internet of Things, and open-access to EU-funded research.