European Union
International Standa...
NGOs
United Nations
Afghanistan
Aland Islands
Albania
Algeria
American Samoa
Andorra
Angola
Anguilla
Antarctica
Antigua & Barbuda
Argentina
Armenia
Aruba
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belgium
Belize
Benin
Bermuda
Bhutan
Bolivia
Bosnia & Herzegovina
Botswana
Bouvet Island
Brazil
British Indian Ocean...
British Virgin Islands
Brunei
Bulgaria
Burkina Faso
Burma (Myanmar)
Burundi
Cambodia
Cameroon
Canada
Cape Verde Islands
Cayman Islands
Central African Republic
Chad
Chile
China
Christmas Island
Cocos (Keeling) Islands
Colombia
Comoros
Congo (Brazzaville)
Congo, Democratic Re...
Cook Islands
Costa Rica
Cote d'Ivoire
Croatia
Cuba
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominica
Dominican Republic
East Timor
Ecuador
Egypt
El Salvador
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Falkland Islands
Faroe Islands
Fiji
Finland
France
French Guiana
French Polynesia
French Southern Terr...
Gabon
Gambia
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Gibraltar
Greece
Greenland
Grenada
Guadeloupe
Guam
Guatemala
Guernsey
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Guyana
Haiti
Hawai
Heard and McDonald I...
Honduras
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Ireland
Isle of Man
Israel
Italy
Jamaica
Japan
Jersey
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Kiribati
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Laos
Latvia
Lebanon
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Macao
Macedonia
Madagascar
Malawi
Malaysia
Maldives
Mali
Malta
Marshall Islands
Martinique
Mauritania
Mauritius
Mayotte
Mexico
Micronesia
Moldova
Monaco
Mongolia
Montenegro
Montserrat
Morocco
Mozambique
Namibia
Nauru
Nepal
Netherlands
Netherlands Antilles
New Caledonia
New Zealand
Nicaragua
Niger
Nigeria
Niue
Norfolk Island
North Korea
Northern Marianas Islands
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Palau
Palestinian Authority
Panama
Papua New Guinea
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Pitcairn Island
Poland
Portugal
Puerto Rico
Qatar
Reunion
Romania
Russia
Rwanda
Samoa
San Marino
Sao Tome & Principe
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Serbia
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Slovakia
Slovenia
Solomon Islands
Somalia
South Africa
South Georgia
South Korea
Spain
Sri Lanka
St-Barthelemy
St-Martin
St. Helena
St. Kitts & Nevis
St. Lucia
St. Pierre et Miquelon
St. Vincent & the Gr...
Sudan
Suriname
Svalbard & Jan Mayen...
Swaziland
Sweden
Switzerland
Syria
Taiwan (Republic of ...
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
Togo
Tokelau
Tonga
Trinidad & Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Turkmenistan
Turks & Caicos Islands
Tuvalu
Uganda
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
United States (Minor...
United States of America
Uruguay
US Virgin Islands
Uzbekistan
Vanuatu
Vatican City State (...
Venezuela
Vietnam
Wallis & Futuna Islands
Western Sahara
Yemen
Zambia
Zimbabwe
|
European Commission Directorate-General for Research
| Report Title: |
4th Joint EC-NSF Workshop on Nanotechnology: Tools and Instruments for Research |
| Report ID: |
404 |
| Date: |
6/1/2002 |
| Author: |
edited by Anne de Baas and Hervé Péro |
| Report Type: |
Workshop Report |
| Publication: |
European Communities |
| URL: |
[nano_grenoble_proceedings_en_1102.pdf] |
| Country: |
European Union |
| Organization: |
European Commission Directorate-General for Research |
| Summary: |
The NSF-EC Nanotechnology Workshop on Tools and Instruments for Research and
Manufacturing was held 12-13 June 2002 and included around ninety experts, leading researchers and investigators in the field of nanomanufacturing, coming from academia, industry and government laboratories. Its aim was that of fostering international collaboration in research and education by the identification of future co-operative activities and joint actions in the entire area of nanoscale processing and manufacturing. As such, the workshop highlighted approaches to help generating real breakthroughs for radical changes in current production and consumption patterns. It is envisioned that the ongoing NSF-EC cooperation, and in particular this series of workshops, will provide a critical thrust for new scientific developments and engineering applications that will have a mutually beneficial impact for both the U.S. and European research partners. |
| Archived Copy: |
nano_grenoble_proceedings_en_1102_404_8808.pdf |
| See Also: |
403 |
 |
|
| Report Title: |
3rd Joint EC- NSF Workshop on Nanotechnology: Nanotechnology Revolutionary Opportunities & Societal Implications |
| Report ID: |
403 |
| Date: |
1/1/2002 |
| Author: |
edited by Mihail Roco and Renzo Tomellini |
| Report Type: |
Workshop Report |
| Publication: |
European Communities |
| URL: |
[nano_lecce_proceedings_05062002.pdf] |
| Country: |
European Union |
| Organization: |
European Commission Directorate-General for Research |
| Summary: |
Approximately seventy participants from the EC and US attended the 3rd Joint EC- NSF Workshop on Nanotechnology, which consisted of three poster sessions focusing on the future technical opportunities of, educational implications for, and societal implications of nanotechnology. The workshop revealed that the EC and US nanotechnology communities face common technical, educational, and societal challenges that would benefit from enhanced collaborations. Several specific recommendations came to light during the course of this workshop. For instance, there are opportunities in the application of nanotechnology to energy usage, protection of the environment, information technology, and biotechnology that can be promoted through EC-US technical partnerships. The connection of these applications to commercial opportunities and public policy is an area that is furthermore ripe for joint exploration with industry and government. Additionally, models for technical workforce recruitment and training that are compatible with the US and EC educational systems are needed, as are models for professional development. |
| Archived Copy: |
nano_lecce_proceedings_05062002_403_8188.pdf |
|
|
| Report Title: |
Joint EC/NSF Workshop on Nanotechnologies |
| Report ID: |
401 |
| Date: |
10/1/2001 |
| Author: |
Philippe Busquin, et. al. |
| Report Type: |
Workshop Report |
| Publication: |
European Communities |
| URL: |
[nano_workshop_001020_proceedings.pdf] |
| Country: |
European Union |
| Organization: |
European Commission Directorate-General for Research |
| Summary: |
Jointly organized by the European Commission and the National Science Foundation of the United States, The EC/NSF Workshop on Nanotechnology brought together some of the most eminent European and American scientists in this field in order to survey the state of the art in nanotechnology, determine the prospects for development and identify areas for fruitful EU/USA co-operation in research. Following a presentation from spokesmen for the EC and NSF on their respective approaches to the support of nanotechnology research and the mechanisms for its funding, a series of presentations outlined recent work and future prospects in the four main nanotechnology sectors – electronics, biotechnology, materials and nanofabrication. These presentations were followed by group discussions in which the European and American participants sought to establish priorities, define areas of common interest, and suggest practical ways to increase collaboration. The results indicate that the workshop made a valuable contribution by identifying complementary expertise in the EU and USA, highlighting areas where shared initiatives could be mutually beneficial and clarifying the criteria for funding such projects. Though certain practical problems still remain to be resolved, it was concluded that the EC (DG RTD)/NSF Implementing Arrangement in the area of Materials Sciences provides an effective and promising basis for continuing transatlantic co-operation. |
| Archived Copy: |
nano_workshop_001020_proceedings_401_1017.pdf |
|
|
| Report Title: |
European Union and China Sign Cooperation Agreement |
| Report ID: |
389 |
| Date: |
11/29/2001 |
| Author: |
Daniel Descoutures, Michel Claessens |
| Report Type: |
Press Release |
| URL: |
[nano_pressrelease_011129_en.pdf] |
| Country: |
European Union |
| Organization: |
European Commission Directorate-General for Research |
| Summary: |
On 22 October, the EU Research Commissioner, Philippe Busquin, and the Chinese Minister for Science and Technology, Xu Guanhua, will sign a cooperation agreement in the field of material sciences. This agreement will facilitate the participation of Chinese research organizations, including companies, in European research projects with Chinese funding and vice versa. Mr Busquin and Mr Xu Guanhua will also discuss the future of China-EU scientific cooperation within the context of the European Research Area and the New Framework Programme 2002-2006, and the preparation of a China-EU Science and Technology Forum that is due to take place in Beijing in 2002. International scientific cooperation, in particular with Europe, is one of the major priorities for China. It contributes to the necessary opening of the country to the outside world and to its integration in the world. From the EU’s point of view, the agreement provides access to a high-level scientific and technological expertise and should create markets for the research to be carried out. |
| Archived Copy: |
nano_pressrelease_011129_en_389_1809.pdf |
|
|
| Report Title: |
From Scientific Excellence to Innovative Business: Is Europe on Track to Make the Nanotechnology Transition? |
| Report ID: |
256 |
| Date: |
3/1/2003 |
| Report Type: |
Information Sheet |
| Publication: |
Third European Report on S&T Indicators 2003 |
| URL: |
[3rd_report_snaps5.pdf] |
| Country: |
European Union |
| Organization: |
European Commission Directorate-General for Research |
| Summary: |
For Europe to secure its position in tomorrow’s global knowledge-based economy it has to demonstrate excellence in key technologies such as nanotechnology. These emerging key technologies potentially have large social and economic benefits. In the nanotech industry, however, the move from the academic to the commercial stage has not yet been made. Will Europe be able to successfully make this transition? Indications are that it will. Partially because of the wide availability in the 1990s of European public (including substantial European Commission) funding, Europe is currently leading the way in terms of scientific performance and performing well in terms of patenting. But will we be able to keep up this performance? Research Commissioner Philippe Busquin strongly believes that it should. Nanotechnology has been declared a priority under the 6th Framework Programme for Research (FP6), and is being allocated substantial budgetary means (Indicative budget FP6: 1 300 million Euro). The European Commission is also continuing its key support for European wide nanotechnology research networks. Some 49 of which were identified in 2000. |
| Archived Copy: |
3rd_report_snaps5_256_2509.pdf |
|
|
| Report Title: |
Third European Report in Science and Technology Indicators 2003 |
| Report ID: |
255 |
| Date: |
1/1/2003 |
| Author: |
Phillipe Busquin, Ugur Muldur, Jean-François Marchipont |
| Report Type: |
General Report |
| Publication: |
European Commission Studies |
| URL: |
[3rd_report.pdf] |
| Country: |
European Union |
| Organization: |
European Commission Directorate-General for Research |
| Summary: |
Since the recent summits at Lisbon and Barcelona where EU governments affirmed the status of research policy as a central pillar of Europe’s strategy towards the knowledge-based economy, research policy has been cited among the core missions of the Union. In order to improve the coordination and effectiveness of research policies in Europe, it is essential that policy makers have at their disposal a common information base about European research trends and performances. The European Report on Science and Technology plays a valuable role in this respect, providing a shared information resource which presents policy-relevant S&T indicators and analyses. The in-depth analyses in this report are intended to complement the more compact Key Figures publication which DG Research also produces every year. This 3rd edition of the European Report has changed in content and layout compared with its predecessor. The new structure focuses on Europe’s investment and performance in the knowledge based economy, and pivots around the policy challenges emerging from the Lisbon and Barcelona summits. The analyses are generally based on the latest internationally comparable data, but there is a permanent need to develop new and better indicators. With that in mind, they have, for this issue, tried to introduce some innovative measures, such as the new composite indicators for the knowledge-based economy. |
| Archived Copy: |
3rd_report_255_2387.pdf |
|
|
| Report Title: |
Social Values, Science, and Technology |
| Report ID: |
249 |
| Date: |
6/1/2005 |
| Author: |
Eurobarometer |
| Report Type: |
Study |
| URL: |
[ebs_225_report_en.pdf] |
| Country: |
European Union |
| Organization: |
European Commission Directorate-General for Research |
| Summary: |
European society is a rich cultural tapestry, made up of heterogeneous ethical, religious, historical and philosophical backgrounds, which can often lead to divergent positions on ethical issues in science. While respecting cultural differences within Europe, the European Commission is aiming to promote science and research which respects fundamental ethical principles. Since the early 1990s, the European Group on Ethics has been helping to find common European positions, while respecting national identities. In this context, the Directorate-General Research commissioned a poll on Europeans views on ethics in science and technology. Interviews were conducted face-to-face in people’s homes in their national language between January 3rd and February 15th 2005. The underlying objective of this analysis was to determine Europeans’ views on social values and ethics, and citizens’ perceptions of actors involved in science and technology as well as the decision-making procedure. The final objective is to assess the perceived influence of ethics on science and technology in the
future. |
| Archived Copy: |
ebs_225_report_en_249_2750.pdf |
|
|
| Report Title: |
Europeans, Science, and Technology |
| Report ID: |
248 |
| Date: |
6/1/2005 |
| Author: |
Eurobarometer |
| Report Type: |
Study |
| Publication: |
Eurobarometer |
| URL: |
[ebs_224_report_en.pdf] |
| Country: |
European Union |
| Organization: |
European Commission Directorate-General for Research |
| Summary: |
In light of the consistent problem of transparency
between scientific and technological issues and the information and perception European citizens have on these, the Directorate-General Research has commissioned a new poll on Europeans’ experience and perception of science and technology, similar to those already conducted in 2002, 2001 and 1992. Interviews were conducted face-to-face in people’s homes in their national language over a month-long period. The report presents the principal results obtained and attempts to highlight the main changes noted since the earlier Eurobarometer surveys. Particular emphasis is placed on European citizens’ interest and level of information, image and knowledge of science and technology, attitudes towards science and technology, responsibilities of scientists and policy-makers, and the public’s perception of European scientific research. |
| Archived Copy: |
ebs_224_report_en_248_4649.pdf |
|
|
| Report Title: |
A European Plan for Sustainable Chemistry |
| Report ID: |
244 |
| Date: |
7/1/2004 |
| Author: |
Cefic and EuropaBio |
| Report Type: |
Concept Paper |
| URL: |
[tp_sust_chem.pdf] |
| Country: |
European Union |
| Organization: |
European Commission Directorate-General for Research |
| Summary: |
The EU is world-leading in chemicals production. Its chemical industry is more than just a supplier of chemicals; it is a continuous source of product and process innovations, and an engine for innovation for downstream sectors. Nonetheless, the competitiveness of the sector in Europe is at risk, mainly due to relatively high cost of production, low market growth, and delocalization of customer industries. The sector’s role as an enabler of innovation to the downstream industry is therefore also in danger. What will be the key difference for the EU is the role of innovation, which in turn is heavily reliant on Research and Development. However, EU chemical R&D expenditures are decreasing and are structurally lower than in competing regions. In light of this need to boost chemical research and innovation in Europe, it is recommended to establish a European Technology Platform on Sustainable Chemistry to galvanize and focus collaborative research, development and innovation activities relating to the European chemicals industry. Such a platform should provide a management process to integrate multiple stakeholder perspectives into a shared vision of a sustainable future EU chemical industry, a European strategy for research and innovation in key chemical technology areas, and an action plan to implement this strategy. The later component should include mobilization of resources for collaborative R&D, alignment of relevant EU policies and initiatives, and recommendations on EU innovation framework improvements. |
| Archived Copy: |
tp_sust_chem_244_8199.pdf |
|
|
| Report Title: |
Converging Technologies - Shaping the Future of European Societies |
| Report ID: |
243 |
| Date: |
8/1/2004 |
| Author: |
Alfred Normann |
| Report Type: |
Concept Paper |
| URL: |
[final_report_en.pdf] |
| Country: |
European Union |
| Organization: |
European Commission Directorate-General for Research |
| Summary: |
Based on the findings of the July 2004 “Foresighting the New Technology Wave,” the European Commission and Member States are called upon to recognize the novel potential of Converging Technologies (CTs) to advance the Lisbon Agenda. It was recommended that preparatory action be taken to implement CT as a thematic research priority, to develop Converging Technologies for the European Knowledge Society (CTEKS) as a specifically European approach to CTs, and to establish a CTEKS research community. In this report, twenty-five members from a variety of countries and disciplinary backgrounds were charged with the task of exploring in breadth the potential and the risks of CT by delineating areas of interest and fields of application for CTs, and relating these CTs to the European environment and policy goals. After formally meeting four times, the group prepared a report on the basis of the discussions, individual written contributions by group members, a scenario exercise, and reports by four subgroups. The result of these efforts was the proposal for a European approach to converging technologies known as CTEKS: Converging Technologies for the European Knowledge Society. |
| Archived Copy: |
final_report_en_243_5158.pdf |
|
|
| Report Title: |
Technology Platforms: From Definition to Implementation of a Common Research Agenda |
| Report ID: |
241 |
| Date: |
9/21/2004 |
| Author: |
Commission Inter-Service Group on Technology Platforms |
| Report Type: |
Fact Finding Report |
| URL: |
[tp_report_defweb_en.pdf] |
| Country: |
European Union |
| Organization: |
European Commission Directorate-General for Research |
| Summary: |
According to the latest available figures, overall R&D investment in the European Union is approaching 2% of GDP, but at an average annual growth rate of 4% which is insufficient to meet the 3% target by 2010. There is a pressing need therefore to define research and technological development (RTD) priorities, timeframes and budgets on a number of strategically important issues with high societal relevance. Europe’s future growth, competitiveness and sustainable development objectives is dependent upon major research and technological advances in the medium to long-term. This is the key objective of “Technology Platforms” which are uniting stakeholders around a common vision and approach for the development of the technologies concerned, with emphasis on the definition of a Strategic Research Agenda and the mobilization of the critical mass of research and innovation effort. The implementation of these research agendas will, in many cases, be carried out with the support of existing Community research and technological development instruments. However, in a limited number of cases requiring the efficient and effective implementation of very large-scale applied and industrial research - in addition to the setting up of public-private partnerships for this purpose - the inclusion of Joint Technology Initiatives as a mechanism within FP VII is aimed at providing a response at Community level to addressing these challenges. The next steps will be to further develop and support Technology Platforms in the period leading up to the launch of FP VII, and in close collaboration with EU Member State authorities, further refine the methodology to identify and decide upon those technological fields being explored within these platforms which most merit to be supported with substantial Community funding under FP VII through use of the new mechanism of Joint Technology Initiatives. |
| Archived Copy: |
tp_report_defweb_en_241_9849.pdf |
|
|
| Report Title: |
Europeans and Biotechnology in 2005: Patterns and Trends |
| Report ID: |
232 |
| Date: |
7/1/2006 |
| Author: |
George Gaskell, Sally Stares, Agnes Allansdottir, Nick Allum, Cristina Corchero, Claude Fischler, Jürgen Hampel, Jonathan Jackson, Nicole Kronberger, Niels Mejlgaard, Gemma Revuelta, Camilla Schreiner, Helge Torgersen and Wolfgang Wagner. |
| Report Type: |
Survey |
| Publication: |
Eurobarometer |
| URL: |
[ebs_244b_en.pdf] |
| Country: |
European Union |
| Organization: |
European Commission Directorate-General for Research |
| Summary: |
The results of the 2005 survey show European citizens to be increasingly optimistic about biotechnology, as well as being more informed and more trusting of the biotechnology system. While the majority are willing to delegate responsibility on new technologies to experts, a substantial minority would like to see greater weight given to moral and ethical considerations in decision taking about science and technology and to the voices of the public. There is widespread support for medical and industrial biotechnologies, but general opposition to agricultural biotechnologies in all but a few countries. Although there is resistance to genetically modified food, it is an exception rather than the rule and is not indicative of a wider disenchantment with science and technology in general. Europeans support the development of nanotechnology, pharmacogenetics and gene therapy because they are perceived as useful to society and morally acceptable. It should be noted that neither nanotechnology nor pharmcogenetics are perceived to be risky. |
| Archived Copy: |
ebs_244b_en_232_8180.pdf |
|
|
|