STUDIES AND REPORTS
Philippe Rixhon, Florian Berger, Alfred Radauer, Alain Strowel, Sari Depreeuw, Luc Desaunettes-Barbero, María del Carmen Calatrava Moreno
Study on copyright and new technologies: copyright data management and artificial intelligence Technical Report
2022, ISBN: 978-92-76-39967-4.
@techreport{Rixhon2022,
title = {Study on copyright and new technologies: copyright data management and artificial intelligence},
author = {Philippe Rixhon, Florian Berger, Alfred Radauer, Alain Strowel, Sari Depreeuw, Luc Desaunettes-Barbero, María del Carmen Calatrava Moreno},
editor = {European Commission (Directorate-General Communications Networks, Content & Technology)},
url = {https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2759/570559},
doi = {10.2759/570559},
isbn = {978-92-76-39967-4},
year = {2022},
date = {2022-03-16},
urldate = {2022-03-16},
abstract = {New digital technologies have become essential tools to facilitate and improve the management of copyright-related data. Some technologies can substantially improve the management of rights linked to protected content and thereby enhance better remuneration for creators and development of new content services. Moreover, technologies such as AI have a great potential to contribute to the production and distribution of copyright-protected content (e.g. books, films, sound recordings or videogames). This study analyses two issues linked to copyright and technology. The first part looks into the potential use of new technologies to improve the management of data linked to copyright-protected content by European creative industries. The second part concentrates on the copyright-related challenges raised by the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI).},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}
New digital technologies have become essential tools to facilitate and improve the management of copyright-related data. Some technologies can substantially improve the management of rights linked to protected content and thereby enhance better remuneration for creators and development of new content services. Moreover, technologies such as AI have a great potential to contribute to the production and distribution of copyright-protected content (e.g. books, films, sound recordings or videogames). This study analyses two issues linked to copyright and technology. The first part looks into the potential use of new technologies to improve the management of data linked to copyright-protected content by European creative industries. The second part concentrates on the copyright-related challenges raised by the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI).
Norbert Maier, Federico de Michiel, Viola Peter, María del Carmen Calatrava Moreno, Chiara Pancotti, Francesca Monaco, Maurice Schellekens, Inge Graef, Nadya Purtova
Study to support an impact assessment for the review of the Database Directive Technical Report
2022, ISBN: 978-92-76-46550-8.
@techreport{Maier2022,
title = {Study to support an impact assessment for the review of the Database Directive},
author = {Norbert Maier, Federico de Michiel, Viola Peter, María del Carmen Calatrava Moreno, Chiara Pancotti, Francesca Monaco, Maurice Schellekens, Inge Graef, Nadya Purtova},
editor = {European Commission (Directorate-General Communications Networks, Content & Technology)},
url = {https://calatravamoreno.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/FINAL-REPORT-CE-TP-CSIL-TU-2022-02-03-for-publishing-2.pdf},
doi = {10.2759/647387},
isbn = {978-92-76-46550-8},
year = {2022},
date = {2022-01-10},
urldate = {2022-01-10},
abstract = {Access to data and the ability to use it have become an EU policy priority as they are considered essential for innovation and economic growth in an increasingly data-driven society. Particular attention is given to broadening access to and use of data generated/collected by sensors and machines in the Internet of Things (IoT) environment. As part of the actions to achieve this objective, the European Commission is reviewing the Directive 96/9/EC on the legal protection of databases (“Database Directive” or “Directive”), within the broader Data Act initiative.
The Database Directive aims to stimulate the creation of databases in the EU by providing legal protection (through a sui generis right) to database makers that made substantial investments in obtaining, verifying or presenting the contents of a database. Currently, there is legal uncertainty around the scope of the Directive, in particular in relation to machine-generated data. The study supports the impact assessment for the review of the Database Directive in the context of the Data Act initiative to ensure that the Directive is fit for the new data economy and does not risk becoming an obstacle to sharing and usage of data within the EU and across sectors.
Based on information gathered from stakeholders and legal experts through an online survey, in-depth interviews and a closed workshop, and further complemented with desk research, this study offers a set of policy options for the Commission’s consideration to review the Directive and provides an assessment for their expected effectiveness, efficiency, and coherence.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}
Access to data and the ability to use it have become an EU policy priority as they are considered essential for innovation and economic growth in an increasingly data-driven society. Particular attention is given to broadening access to and use of data generated/collected by sensors and machines in the Internet of Things (IoT) environment. As part of the actions to achieve this objective, the European Commission is reviewing the Directive 96/9/EC on the legal protection of databases (“Database Directive” or “Directive”), within the broader Data Act initiative.
The Database Directive aims to stimulate the creation of databases in the EU by providing legal protection (through a sui generis right) to database makers that made substantial investments in obtaining, verifying or presenting the contents of a database. Currently, there is legal uncertainty around the scope of the Directive, in particular in relation to machine-generated data. The study supports the impact assessment for the review of the Database Directive in the context of the Data Act initiative to ensure that the Directive is fit for the new data economy and does not risk becoming an obstacle to sharing and usage of data within the EU and across sectors.
Based on information gathered from stakeholders and legal experts through an online survey, in-depth interviews and a closed workshop, and further complemented with desk research, this study offers a set of policy options for the Commission’s consideration to review the Directive and provides an assessment for their expected effectiveness, efficiency, and coherence.
The Database Directive aims to stimulate the creation of databases in the EU by providing legal protection (through a sui generis right) to database makers that made substantial investments in obtaining, verifying or presenting the contents of a database. Currently, there is legal uncertainty around the scope of the Directive, in particular in relation to machine-generated data. The study supports the impact assessment for the review of the Database Directive in the context of the Data Act initiative to ensure that the Directive is fit for the new data economy and does not risk becoming an obstacle to sharing and usage of data within the EU and across sectors.
Based on information gathered from stakeholders and legal experts through an online survey, in-depth interviews and a closed workshop, and further complemented with desk research, this study offers a set of policy options for the Commission’s consideration to review the Directive and provides an assessment for their expected effectiveness, efficiency, and coherence.
Katharina Warta, Tobias Dudenbostel, María del Carmen Calatrava Moreno, Francesca Guadagno, Simon Zingerle, Sandra Skok, Harald Grill
Evaluierung des COMET-Programms Technical Report
2021.
@techreport{Warta2021,
title = {Evaluierung des COMET-Programms},
author = {Katharina Warta, Tobias Dudenbostel, María del Carmen Calatrava Moreno,
Francesca Guadagno, Simon Zingerle, Sandra Skok, Harald Grill},
url = {https://calatravamoreno.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Eval-COMET_Endbericht_2021.pdf},
year = {2021},
date = {2021-06-01},
urldate = {2021-06-01},
abstract = {Technopolis wurde im Mai 2020 vom Bundesministerium für Klimaschutz, Umwelt, Energie, Mobilität, Innovation und Technologie (BMK) und dem Bundesministerium für Digitalisierung und Wirtschaftsstandort (BMDW) mit der Evaluierung des COMET-Programms beauftragt. Die vorliegende Evaluierung bezieht sich auf die 25 aktuell existierenden Zentren. Der Fokus der Evaluierung liegt auf der Charakterisierung der COMET-Zentren und auf dem Monitoring- und Kennzahlensystem von COMET. Im Jahr der Corona-Pandemie wurden die Methoden angepasst, Interviews mit Stakeholdern und den Zentren wurden meist per Videocalls oder telefonisch geführt, geplante on-site Visits sowie internationale Workshops konnten nicht durchgeführt werden. Zentrale Quellen der Evaluierung sind eine Befragung der Zentren und der Unternehmens- und Wissenschaftspartner sowie die Datenbasis der FFG, die wir durch diverse Harmonisierungsschritte für neuwertige Auswertungen nutzbar machten. Dies umfasst insbesondere einen historischen Rückblick sowie eine Cluster- und Netzwerkanalyse. Die Auswartungen sind in zwei Dashboards angelegt, das Dashboard zur COMET-Befragung ist anonymisiert und daher öffentlich zugänglich. },
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}
Technopolis wurde im Mai 2020 vom Bundesministerium für Klimaschutz, Umwelt, Energie, Mobilität, Innovation und Technologie (BMK) und dem Bundesministerium für Digitalisierung und Wirtschaftsstandort (BMDW) mit der Evaluierung des COMET-Programms beauftragt. Die vorliegende Evaluierung bezieht sich auf die 25 aktuell existierenden Zentren. Der Fokus der Evaluierung liegt auf der Charakterisierung der COMET-Zentren und auf dem Monitoring- und Kennzahlensystem von COMET. Im Jahr der Corona-Pandemie wurden die Methoden angepasst, Interviews mit Stakeholdern und den Zentren wurden meist per Videocalls oder telefonisch geführt, geplante on-site Visits sowie internationale Workshops konnten nicht durchgeführt werden. Zentrale Quellen der Evaluierung sind eine Befragung der Zentren und der Unternehmens- und Wissenschaftspartner sowie die Datenbasis der FFG, die wir durch diverse Harmonisierungsschritte für neuwertige Auswertungen nutzbar machten. Dies umfasst insbesondere einen historischen Rückblick sowie eine Cluster- und Netzwerkanalyse. Die Auswartungen sind in zwei Dashboards angelegt, das Dashboard zur COMET-Befragung ist anonymisiert und daher öffentlich zugänglich.
Xavier Potau, Martin Wain, María del Carmen Calatrava, Felix Dijkstal, Cristina Rosemberg, Paul Simmonds, Stephen Roper, Karen Bonner
LEP Outlook Report 2019: An assessment of economic performance of Local Enterprise Partnership geographical areas Technical Report
2020.
@techreport{Potau2020,
title = {LEP Outlook Report 2019: An assessment of economic performance of Local Enterprise Partnership geographical areas},
author = {Xavier Potau, Martin Wain, María del Carmen Calatrava, Felix Dijkstal, Cristina Rosemberg, Paul Simmonds, Stephen Roper, Karen Bonner},
url = {https://www.technopolis-group.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/LEP-Outlook-Report-2019.pdf},
year = {2020},
date = {2020-07-01},
abstract = {(Study commissioned by BEIS (Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy) UK)
Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) are private sector led partnerships between businesses and local public sector bodies responsible for establishing priorities for public funding in the local area that they cover. Following their inception in 2011, LEPs have delivered over £9 billion worth of publicly funded projects through their management of Growth Deals, and other policies channelled through them.
The motivation for this LEP Economic Outlook report was two-fold. First was to bring together accessible open data that can be used to represent aspects of economic performance in LEP geographies under a single public resource. Such data can be used by the LEPs themselves in developing their economic strategies and by others interested in economic performance in LEPs.
The second motivation was to propose a framework of economic performance that arranges the 83 selected indicators alongside dimensions of productivity corresponding to the foundations of the Industrial Strategy White Paper: Ideas, People, Infrastructure, Business Environment, and Place. Such structure enables LEPs and other users to assess relative economic performance for many purposes but specifically for Local Industrial Strategies committed in the White Paper.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}
(Study commissioned by BEIS (Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy) UK)
Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) are private sector led partnerships between businesses and local public sector bodies responsible for establishing priorities for public funding in the local area that they cover. Following their inception in 2011, LEPs have delivered over £9 billion worth of publicly funded projects through their management of Growth Deals, and other policies channelled through them.
The motivation for this LEP Economic Outlook report was two-fold. First was to bring together accessible open data that can be used to represent aspects of economic performance in LEP geographies under a single public resource. Such data can be used by the LEPs themselves in developing their economic strategies and by others interested in economic performance in LEPs.
The second motivation was to propose a framework of economic performance that arranges the 83 selected indicators alongside dimensions of productivity corresponding to the foundations of the Industrial Strategy White Paper: Ideas, People, Infrastructure, Business Environment, and Place. Such structure enables LEPs and other users to assess relative economic performance for many purposes but specifically for Local Industrial Strategies committed in the White Paper.
Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) are private sector led partnerships between businesses and local public sector bodies responsible for establishing priorities for public funding in the local area that they cover. Following their inception in 2011, LEPs have delivered over £9 billion worth of publicly funded projects through their management of Growth Deals, and other policies channelled through them.
The motivation for this LEP Economic Outlook report was two-fold. First was to bring together accessible open data that can be used to represent aspects of economic performance in LEP geographies under a single public resource. Such data can be used by the LEPs themselves in developing their economic strategies and by others interested in economic performance in LEPs.
The second motivation was to propose a framework of economic performance that arranges the 83 selected indicators alongside dimensions of productivity corresponding to the foundations of the Industrial Strategy White Paper: Ideas, People, Infrastructure, Business Environment, and Place. Such structure enables LEPs and other users to assess relative economic performance for many purposes but specifically for Local Industrial Strategies committed in the White Paper.
María del Carmen Calatrava Moreno, Katharina Warta, Erik Arnold, Peter Kolarz, Sandra Skok
Science Europe Study on Research Assessment Practices Technical Report
2019.
@techreport{delMoreno2019,
title = {Science Europe Study on Research Assessment Practices},
author = {María del Carmen Calatrava Moreno, Katharina Warta, Erik Arnold, Peter Kolarz, Sandra Skok},
url = {https://www.scienceeurope.org/our-resources/science-europe-study-on-research-assessment-practices/},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-12-27},
abstract = {(Study commissioned by Science Europe)
This report explores practices used for the selection of research proposals in competitive research funding programmes and in the selection of researchers for promotion within research organisations.
The findings of this study are based on the information provided by 31 research funding organisations (RFO), 4 research performing organisations (RPO) and 1 organisation with a dual function (research
funding and performing organisation) through a questionnaire and semi-structured interviews. The following questions have guided the study:
1) What approaches are used to assess and select proposals and researchers in a robust, fair and transparent manner?
2) What are the challenges that research organisations face during the assessment processes?
3) What are the current developments in the assessment of research proposals and researchers? },
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}
(Study commissioned by Science Europe)
This report explores practices used for the selection of research proposals in competitive research funding programmes and in the selection of researchers for promotion within research organisations.
The findings of this study are based on the information provided by 31 research funding organisations (RFO), 4 research performing organisations (RPO) and 1 organisation with a dual function (research
funding and performing organisation) through a questionnaire and semi-structured interviews. The following questions have guided the study:
1) What approaches are used to assess and select proposals and researchers in a robust, fair and transparent manner?
2) What are the challenges that research organisations face during the assessment processes?
3) What are the current developments in the assessment of research proposals and researchers?
This report explores practices used for the selection of research proposals in competitive research funding programmes and in the selection of researchers for promotion within research organisations.
The findings of this study are based on the information provided by 31 research funding organisations (RFO), 4 research performing organisations (RPO) and 1 organisation with a dual function (research
funding and performing organisation) through a questionnaire and semi-structured interviews. The following questions have guided the study:
1) What approaches are used to assess and select proposals and researchers in a robust, fair and transparent manner?
2) What are the challenges that research organisations face during the assessment processes?
3) What are the current developments in the assessment of research proposals and researchers?
Maria del Carmen Calatrava Moreno, Sebastian Otte, Viola Peter
Technical assistance with the public consultation on EU summertime arrangements Technical Report
2019, ISBN: 978-92-76-09254-4 .
@techreport{fortheforMarket2018,
title = {Technical assistance with the public consultation on EU summertime arrangements},
author = {Maria del Carmen Calatrava Moreno, Sebastian Otte, Viola Peter},
url = {https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/3cada343-b33d-11e9-9d01-01aa75ed71a1/language-en/format-PDF},
doi = {10.2832/571245 },
isbn = {978-92-76-09254-4 },
year = {2019},
date = {2019-06-30},
abstract = {(Project for the European Commission, Directorate-General for Mobility & Transport)
EU legislation on summertime arrangements was first introduced in 1980 with the objective of harmonising diverging national summertime schedules within the single market. Since 2001, EU summertime arrangements have been governed by Directive 2000/84/EC, which stipulates a switch to summertime for all Member States on the last Sunday of March and a switch back to wintertime for all on the last Sunday of October. In February 2018, the European Parliament adopted a resolution asking the Commission to conduct an assessment of the Directive, and if necessary, provide a proposal for its revision. As part of this assessment, the Commission decided to launch a public consultation to gather the views of European citizens, stakeholders and Member States on the current EU summertime arrangements and on a potential change to these. The results of this consultation are by no means binding but are considered as input to the assessment process. The public consultation ran between 04/07/2018 and 16/08/2018. The consultation reached a wide public: more than 4.7 million
responses were submitted online. Under framework contract PO/2016-06/01-Lot1, Technopolis Group
was asked by the European Commission, DG MOVE, to help with quality checks and cleaning of the
data, and with an independent analysis of the responses.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}
(Project for the European Commission, Directorate-General for Mobility & Transport)
EU legislation on summertime arrangements was first introduced in 1980 with the objective of harmonising diverging national summertime schedules within the single market. Since 2001, EU summertime arrangements have been governed by Directive 2000/84/EC, which stipulates a switch to summertime for all Member States on the last Sunday of March and a switch back to wintertime for all on the last Sunday of October. In February 2018, the European Parliament adopted a resolution asking the Commission to conduct an assessment of the Directive, and if necessary, provide a proposal for its revision. As part of this assessment, the Commission decided to launch a public consultation to gather the views of European citizens, stakeholders and Member States on the current EU summertime arrangements and on a potential change to these. The results of this consultation are by no means binding but are considered as input to the assessment process. The public consultation ran between 04/07/2018 and 16/08/2018. The consultation reached a wide public: more than 4.7 million
responses were submitted online. Under framework contract PO/2016-06/01-Lot1, Technopolis Group
was asked by the European Commission, DG MOVE, to help with quality checks and cleaning of the
data, and with an independent analysis of the responses.
EU legislation on summertime arrangements was first introduced in 1980 with the objective of harmonising diverging national summertime schedules within the single market. Since 2001, EU summertime arrangements have been governed by Directive 2000/84/EC, which stipulates a switch to summertime for all Member States on the last Sunday of March and a switch back to wintertime for all on the last Sunday of October. In February 2018, the European Parliament adopted a resolution asking the Commission to conduct an assessment of the Directive, and if necessary, provide a proposal for its revision. As part of this assessment, the Commission decided to launch a public consultation to gather the views of European citizens, stakeholders and Member States on the current EU summertime arrangements and on a potential change to these. The results of this consultation are by no means binding but are considered as input to the assessment process. The public consultation ran between 04/07/2018 and 16/08/2018. The consultation reached a wide public: more than 4.7 million
responses were submitted online. Under framework contract PO/2016-06/01-Lot1, Technopolis Group
was asked by the European Commission, DG MOVE, to help with quality checks and cleaning of the
data, and with an independent analysis of the responses.
Friedrich W. Hesse; Ina Matt; Falk Reckling; Thomas Völker; Nikolaus Possanner; Manfred Prisching; Lisa Hönegger; Mark Neijssel; Alfredo Yegros; Carole de Bordes; Maria del Carmen Calatrava Moreno; Brigitte Tiefenthaler; Katharina Warta
Standortbestimmung der Bildungsforschung in Österreich / Determination of the State of Educational Research in Austria Technical Report
2019.
@techreport{Hesse2019,
title = {Standortbestimmung der Bildungsforschung in Österreich / Determination of the State of Educational Research in Austria},
author = {Friedrich W. Hesse and Ina Matt and Falk Reckling and Thomas Völker and Nikolaus Possanner and Manfred Prisching and Lisa Hönegger and Mark Neijssel and Alfredo Yegros and Carole de Bordes and Maria del Carmen Calatrava Moreno and Brigitte Tiefenthaler and Katharina Warta
},
url = {https://calatravamoreno.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Educational-Research_report-and-appendices.pdf
https://calatravamoreno.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Bildungsforschung_Bericht-und-Anhaenge.pdf},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-06-18},
urldate = {2019-06-18},
abstract = {The Austrian Science Fund (FWF) was commissioned by the Innovation Foundation for Education (ISB) to determine the status of Austrian educational research and its institutional structure, performance and international standing. The FWF conducted this study in collaboration with the Austrian Science Council (ÖWR).
The evidence gathered for this report shows that educational research in Austria, while facing considerable challenges is also characterized by a number of positive features that can be built upon:
Strengths: Austria already has a number of excellent research groups working on topics such as educational psychology, educational technology, dyslexia or phoniatrics. These groups, however, mostly operate at the ‘margins’ of educational research. Apart from that, the participants in this study described (only) a few methodological approaches such as participatory research methods and action research as particular strong points with a clear focus on practical application predominantly on a local/federal state level. There appears to be a focus on teacher education and didactics, too.
Weakness: The main challenge identified by the various reports is a lack of funding of basic research. Compared to countries like Germany or Switzerland, the resources invested into educational research are quite small. This also goes hand in hand with very few proposals for FWF funding from educational researchers. The participants in the interview study and online survey stated that they did neither have the time nor the resources to produce high-quality proposals. The bibliometric study shows that the output in terms of international peer-reviewed journal articles is comparatively low. In addition, the journal articles are mainly produced by a small number of research groups that operate at the margins of educational research: 44% of all publications came from five groups in Austria. Educational research is fragmented and spread over different universities and departments. As a consequence, it is a challenge to develop coherent structures for the training of educational researchers.
Opportunities: There is a basic level of educational research in Austria that can be built upon. This is visible in the bibliometric study as well as in the fact that there are several researchers active in Austrian educational research who show high potential. What is needed is to draw the actionable conclusions from the evaluation of what is already there and take advantage of the current ‘window of opportunity’ (new funding through an excellence initiative). The university colleges of teacher education have the potential of becoming more research-intensive institutions that cooperate to strengthen the link between research and practice (transfer and application).
Threats: One of the main threats identified by the international panel is ‘doing nothing’ as this would mean letting this particular ‘window of opportunity’ close again. The current trend towards a dependency on a few ‘high-potential’ individuals dominating the research landscape could become problematic if they left the system and if this were not accompanied by coherent and structured career paths for early-stage researchers.
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}
The Austrian Science Fund (FWF) was commissioned by the Innovation Foundation for Education (ISB) to determine the status of Austrian educational research and its institutional structure, performance and international standing. The FWF conducted this study in collaboration with the Austrian Science Council (ÖWR).
The evidence gathered for this report shows that educational research in Austria, while facing considerable challenges is also characterized by a number of positive features that can be built upon:
Strengths: Austria already has a number of excellent research groups working on topics such as educational psychology, educational technology, dyslexia or phoniatrics. These groups, however, mostly operate at the ‘margins’ of educational research. Apart from that, the participants in this study described (only) a few methodological approaches such as participatory research methods and action research as particular strong points with a clear focus on practical application predominantly on a local/federal state level. There appears to be a focus on teacher education and didactics, too.
Weakness: The main challenge identified by the various reports is a lack of funding of basic research. Compared to countries like Germany or Switzerland, the resources invested into educational research are quite small. This also goes hand in hand with very few proposals for FWF funding from educational researchers. The participants in the interview study and online survey stated that they did neither have the time nor the resources to produce high-quality proposals. The bibliometric study shows that the output in terms of international peer-reviewed journal articles is comparatively low. In addition, the journal articles are mainly produced by a small number of research groups that operate at the margins of educational research: 44% of all publications came from five groups in Austria. Educational research is fragmented and spread over different universities and departments. As a consequence, it is a challenge to develop coherent structures for the training of educational researchers.
Opportunities: There is a basic level of educational research in Austria that can be built upon. This is visible in the bibliometric study as well as in the fact that there are several researchers active in Austrian educational research who show high potential. What is needed is to draw the actionable conclusions from the evaluation of what is already there and take advantage of the current ‘window of opportunity’ (new funding through an excellence initiative). The university colleges of teacher education have the potential of becoming more research-intensive institutions that cooperate to strengthen the link between research and practice (transfer and application).
Threats: One of the main threats identified by the international panel is ‘doing nothing’ as this would mean letting this particular ‘window of opportunity’ close again. The current trend towards a dependency on a few ‘high-potential’ individuals dominating the research landscape could become problematic if they left the system and if this were not accompanied by coherent and structured career paths for early-stage researchers.
The evidence gathered for this report shows that educational research in Austria, while facing considerable challenges is also characterized by a number of positive features that can be built upon:
Strengths: Austria already has a number of excellent research groups working on topics such as educational psychology, educational technology, dyslexia or phoniatrics. These groups, however, mostly operate at the ‘margins’ of educational research. Apart from that, the participants in this study described (only) a few methodological approaches such as participatory research methods and action research as particular strong points with a clear focus on practical application predominantly on a local/federal state level. There appears to be a focus on teacher education and didactics, too.
Weakness: The main challenge identified by the various reports is a lack of funding of basic research. Compared to countries like Germany or Switzerland, the resources invested into educational research are quite small. This also goes hand in hand with very few proposals for FWF funding from educational researchers. The participants in the interview study and online survey stated that they did neither have the time nor the resources to produce high-quality proposals. The bibliometric study shows that the output in terms of international peer-reviewed journal articles is comparatively low. In addition, the journal articles are mainly produced by a small number of research groups that operate at the margins of educational research: 44% of all publications came from five groups in Austria. Educational research is fragmented and spread over different universities and departments. As a consequence, it is a challenge to develop coherent structures for the training of educational researchers.
Opportunities: There is a basic level of educational research in Austria that can be built upon. This is visible in the bibliometric study as well as in the fact that there are several researchers active in Austrian educational research who show high potential. What is needed is to draw the actionable conclusions from the evaluation of what is already there and take advantage of the current ‘window of opportunity’ (new funding through an excellence initiative). The university colleges of teacher education have the potential of becoming more research-intensive institutions that cooperate to strengthen the link between research and practice (transfer and application).
Threats: One of the main threats identified by the international panel is ‘doing nothing’ as this would mean letting this particular ‘window of opportunity’ close again. The current trend towards a dependency on a few ‘high-potential’ individuals dominating the research landscape could become problematic if they left the system and if this were not accompanied by coherent and structured career paths for early-stage researchers.
Florian Berger, Kathrin Enenkel, Alfred Radauer, María del Carmen Calatrava Moreno
Bedeutung des Patentwesens für die Wertschöpfungskette Bau Technical Report
2018.
@techreport{Berger2018,
title = {Bedeutung des Patentwesens für die Wertschöpfungskette Bau},
author = {Florian Berger, Kathrin Enenkel, Alfred Radauer, María del Carmen Calatrava Moreno},
url = {https://www.bbsr.bund.de/BBSR/DE/veroeffentlichungen/bbsr-online/2019/bbsr-online-01-2019-dl.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=3},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-12-03},
abstract = {(Study commissioned by Bundesinstitut für Bau-, Stadt- und Raumforschung (BBSR), Germany)},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}
(Study commissioned by Bundesinstitut für Bau-, Stadt- und Raumforschung (BBSR), Germany)
Dinusha Mendis, Jan Bernd Nordemann, Rosa Maria Ballardini, Hans Brorsen, María del Carmen Calatrava Moreno, Julie Robson, Phill Dickens
Intellectual Property implications of the development of industrial 3D printing Technical Report
2018.
@techreport{Commission2018,
title = {Intellectual Property implications of the development of industrial 3D printing},
author = {Dinusha Mendis, Jan Bernd Nordemann, Rosa Maria Ballardini, Hans Brorsen, María del Carmen Calatrava Moreno, Julie Robson, Phill Dickens},
url = {https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/e193a586-7f8c-11ea-aea8-01aa75ed71a1},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-07-01},
urldate = {2018-07-01},
abstract = {Study for the European Commission (Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship & SMEs)},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {techreport}
}
Study for the European Commission (Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship & SMEs)
Robbert Fisher, Julien Chicot, Alberto Domini, Milica Misojcic, Gabriela Bodea, Kristina Karanikolova, Alfred Radauer, María del Carmen Calatrava Moreno, Anna Gkogka, Lionel Bently, Estelle Derclaye
Study in Support of the Evaluation of the Database Directive Miscellaneous
2018, ISBN: 978-92-79-81358-0.
@misc{Fisher2018,
title = {Study in Support of the Evaluation of the Database Directive},
author = {Robbert Fisher, Julien Chicot, Alberto Domini, Milica Misojcic, Gabriela Bodea, Kristina Karanikolova, Alfred Radauer, María del Carmen Calatrava Moreno, Anna Gkogka, Lionel Bently, Estelle Derclaye},
editor = {European Commission (Directorate-General Communications Networks, Content & Technology)},
url = {https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/5e9c7a51-597c-11e8-ab41-01aa75ed71a1},
doi = {10.2759/04895},
isbn = {978-92-79-81358-0},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-04-25},
urldate = {2018-04-25},
abstract = {This study aimed at collecting evidence on the impacts of the Database Directive in support of the Evaluation Report on the Database Directive, published by the European Commission on the 25th of April as part of the third data package.
The 1996 Directive on the legal protection of databases (Database Directive) aims at supporting the development of the European database industry. It created a sui generis right protecting investments of database makers, regardless of the originality of databases, and harmonised copyright law applicable to the original databases. This study investigates whether the Database Directive fulfils its objectives, especially in the current context of the fast-growing data economy.
Relevant information was gathered from a wide range of stakeholders, including database users, makers and user-makers. Legal experts in the field of database protection additionally have been consulted through in-depth interviews to ensure that the evaluation is built on solid knowledge and experience. The results of a targeted online survey, a stakeholder workshop as well as the European Commission's public consultation, contributed to building up the evidence of the study. The consultation of the legal practitioners complements the legal analysis and desk research.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {misc}
}
This study aimed at collecting evidence on the impacts of the Database Directive in support of the Evaluation Report on the Database Directive, published by the European Commission on the 25th of April as part of the third data package.
The 1996 Directive on the legal protection of databases (Database Directive) aims at supporting the development of the European database industry. It created a sui generis right protecting investments of database makers, regardless of the originality of databases, and harmonised copyright law applicable to the original databases. This study investigates whether the Database Directive fulfils its objectives, especially in the current context of the fast-growing data economy.
Relevant information was gathered from a wide range of stakeholders, including database users, makers and user-makers. Legal experts in the field of database protection additionally have been consulted through in-depth interviews to ensure that the evaluation is built on solid knowledge and experience. The results of a targeted online survey, a stakeholder workshop as well as the European Commission's public consultation, contributed to building up the evidence of the study. The consultation of the legal practitioners complements the legal analysis and desk research.
The 1996 Directive on the legal protection of databases (Database Directive) aims at supporting the development of the European database industry. It created a sui generis right protecting investments of database makers, regardless of the originality of databases, and harmonised copyright law applicable to the original databases. This study investigates whether the Database Directive fulfils its objectives, especially in the current context of the fast-growing data economy.
Relevant information was gathered from a wide range of stakeholders, including database users, makers and user-makers. Legal experts in the field of database protection additionally have been consulted through in-depth interviews to ensure that the evaluation is built on solid knowledge and experience. The results of a targeted online survey, a stakeholder workshop as well as the European Commission's public consultation, contributed to building up the evidence of the study. The consultation of the legal practitioners complements the legal analysis and desk research.
Lionel Bently; Martin Kretschmer; Tobias Dudenbostel; María del Carmen Calatrava Moreno; Alfred Radauer
Strengthening the Position of Press Publishers and Authors and Performers in the Copyright Directive Miscellaneous
2017.
@misc{Bently2017,
title = {Strengthening the Position of Press Publishers and Authors and Performers in the Copyright Directive},
author = {Lionel Bently and Martin Kretschmer and Tobias Dudenbostel and María del Carmen Calatrava Moreno and Alfred Radauer},
url = {http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/596810/IPOL_STU(2017)596810_EN.pdf},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-10-13},
abstract = {This study was commissioned by the European Parliament's Policy Department for Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the JURI committee. It reviews Art 11 and Arts 14-16 of the proposed Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market. It outlines criticisms that have been made of the proposals, includes reports of research into the operation and effects of precursors of Article 11 in Germany and Spain, a summary of the cultural economics literature on legal regulation of authors' contracts and analysis of the laws of 7 Member States to see in what way Arts 14-16 would "add value".
},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {misc}
}
This study was commissioned by the European Parliament's Policy Department for Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the JURI committee. It reviews Art 11 and Arts 14-16 of the proposed Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market. It outlines criticisms that have been made of the proposals, includes reports of research into the operation and effects of precursors of Article 11 in Germany and Spain, a summary of the cultural economics literature on legal regulation of authors' contracts and analysis of the laws of 7 Member States to see in what way Arts 14-16 would "add value".
SOFTWARE PROJECTS
- (2019-2021) Development of the WIPO IP Diagnostics. A tool for enterprises to undertake a basic diagnostic of the intellectual property (IP) situation of their business. It is in the form of a questionnaire with several sections that ask questions on different IP topics (e.g. innovative products, trademarks, licensing, designs, internationalisation, etc.). This tool was commissioned by WIPO.
- (2017-2018) Development of CEDAR: CEntral DAta Repository for the GEM Report with data from the UNESCO Institute of Statistics (UIS), OECD, the World Bank, the World Inequality Database on Education (WIDE), and other sources.