Search

The HEcoPerMed[1] project has the twofold aim of responding to the demand for health economic models that evaluate treatments made possible through innovations in personalised medicine (PM), as well as studying existing shortcomings in stimulating the adoption of personalised medicine in health care systems. In addition to funding and reimbursement mechanisms which are certainly an essential part of implementation and institutionalisation of personalised medicine, this report takes a complementary perspective in exploring challenges and drivers in the implementation of personalised medicine in health care from a wider angle. The current report aims at capturing a real-time perspective of citizens, patients and other stakeholders on the current challenges and drivers around anchoring personalised medicine approaches in health care systems. Hence, the tasks leading up to this report had process aims – identifying and approaching stakeholders and including them in a debate, as well as explorative aims in seeking to identify their perspectives on drivers and challenges. [1] www.hecopermed.eu

The HEcoPerMed project (Healthcare and pharma economics in support of the International Consortium for Personalised Medicine – ICPerMed) is a cooperation and support action (CSA) funded by the European Commission (EC). It is part of the socalled ICPerMed “family” of projects and initiatives that support the research and implementation of personalised medicine in Europe and beyond. This position paper discusses the contribution that economic evaluations can make to decisions surrounding the allocation of limited health care resources in personalised medicine (PM). In particular, the paper examines the role that health economic models can play in the context of Health Technology Assessment (HTA).

Establish a typology of green social innovation

Recent research has come up with a definition of the subject matter, criteria for agility in R&I policy and provided an array of elements already implemented in several R&I policy areas in different countries. While this enables a characterization of agile R&I policy practices already in place and the further development of basic recommendations and conducive measures, it leaves us with the paradox that the implementation of the sum of all agile practices and resulting recommendations would most likely result in increased administration, vast complexity and a large amount of resources needed. This leads us to the overall question guiding this paper: Can we identify patterns, contexts or particular framings that make single practices in agile R&I policy or combinations of practices more effective? A number of selected German and international case studies were used as examples of agile R&I policy in order to examine them for their elements and patterns. In our set of illustrative examples from existing policies we find recurring elements of agile R&I policy. We present a framework that turned out to be useful to categorise current practices of agile R&I policy, and to effectively support the sense-making process.

The Austrian Startup Monitor (ASM) 2020 is the third report about the status, development, and perspectives of the startup ecosystem in Austria. The report is based on a survey of 595 founders and CEOs of Austrian startups conducted in fall 2020. In addition, the team incorporated data on all startups that have been identified as such since 2009 in Austria.

Konzept, Definition, Operationalisierung Mit der Beschleunigung des technologischen Wandels und der verstärkten Ausrichtung auf gesellschaftliche Herausforderungen ist die F&I-Politik gefordert agiler zu handeln. Das betrifft sowohl die strategische Ebene der F&I-politischen Begründung und Prioritätensetzung als auch die operativen Ebene der Politikumsetzung. Unter Rückgriff auf relevante sozial- und wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Konzepte wird im vorliegende Projektbericht das Konzept einer agilen F&I-Politik samt zugehöriger Agilitätsdimensionen und -kriterien entwickelt. Anhand von aktuellen Pilotanwendungen und Fallstudien wird das Konzept für die Politikanalyse herangezogen, um Bestimmungsfaktoren für die Agilität F&I-politischer Praktiken herauszuarbeiten. Neben den drei deutschen Pilotanwendungen (KMU Innovationsförderung, nachfrageseitigen F&I Politik für den Strommarkt in der Energiewende, Antworten der F&I-Politik auf die Corona Krise) werden zehn internationale Fallbeispiele agilen F&I politischen Handelns herangezogen, um Hinweise und neue Impulse für die Agilitätsdebatte in Deutschland auf strategischer und operativer Ebene zu geben.

This deliverable builds on the results provided in other deliverables of the FIT4FOOD2030 project. To avoid duplication, not all the concepts already explored within that work are included in this deliverable, thus the reader is expected to know part of the project and its activities. The focus of this working group (for task 4.4) has been on the instruments for the identification of R&I breakthroughs for the future. In this deliverable, we (1) reflect on the outcome of the methods developed through the project, (2) try to set the recommendations that could be made for anyone attempting a similar task, and (3) provide materials that could be used in workshops, events, or educational modules in which a similar exercise is performed.

The second phase of the FIT4FOOD2030 project aims at contributing to an agenda to transform the Food and Nutrition System in integrating the results of the analysis of showcases and breakthroughs. Picking up the work of Deliverable 4.1, the inventory of R&I breakthroughs, further literature study, a workshop and input from City Lab multi-stakeholder workshops aiming at the identification of pathways that innovation take in their implementation and diffusion, deliverable 4.2. describes: (1)Conceptual background of (R&I) breakthroughs,(2)Analysis of potential breakthroughs in different areas, and (3)Clusters and overall patterns of success factors for potential breakthroughs.

This document isintended to serve as the basis for a common understanding within the FIT4FOOD2030 consortium when it comes to potential R&I breakthroughs, but also to stimulate the discussion taking place at the three interconnected structures of the FIT4FOOD2030 platform (City Labs, Policy Labs and the EU Think Tank) and support their roadmap definition.The process to develop this report started with initial desk research and discussion within the project consortium to define key terms, in close cooperation with WP2 and WP3 to clearly distinguish trends, breakthroughs and showcases. The compilation of an inventory for past R&I breakthroughs was based on desk research and an internal meeting with WP4 partners. Findings from WP2 and WP3 were also used in the identification of potential R&I breakthroughs. Furthermore, the survey conducted in WP3 was used to direct questions on potential R&I breakthroughs to the participants.

The deliverable is intended as the basis for a common understanding of visions, trends and drivers and serves the emerging instruments of the FOOD 2030 platform, namely the FIT4FOOD2030 EU Think Tank, Policy Labs and City Labs. These instruments are engaging in the foreseen processes of vision development, system understanding, road-mapping and action planning. We do not claim that this selection of trends and the short descriptions are complete and cover all aspects, as the intention behind these descriptions is rather to serve as resource for information and stimulate discussions within the instruments of FIT4FOOD2030.

This report investigates wholesale as one of the main service industries in the European economy. Wholesale is the resale of new and used goods to retailers, industrial, commercial, institutional or professional users, or to other wholesalers on their own account or for third parties. It plays a pivotal role in the European Single Market by bridging national markets and connecting producers, retail trade and industrial demand across Europe. Wholesale employs about 10 million persons in the EU-28 and accounts for a share of 7-9% in total employment in most EU Member States. The share of micro and small enterprises is considerably higher than in manufacturing. The sector reveals considerable heterogeneity in terms of firm size, productivity and profitability across EU Member States and wholesale sub-sectors. Moreover, the report sheds light on the integration of the wholesale sector in value chains with upstream manufacturers and downstream retailers, and on the role of technology and innovation in wholesale.

International audience; The research fields of service innovation and social innovation have, until now, been largelydisconnected. At the most basic level, a great many social innovations are services, oftenpublic sector services with social entrepreneurs organizing and delivering serviceinnovations. As well as this overlap in the focus of research, scholars in both research fieldsaddress socioeconomic concerns using multidisciplinary perspectives. This paper provides aframework that can bridge the two research fields.

This paper provides new evidence for the servitization of European manufacturing – the trend that manufacturing firms increasingly offer services along with their physical products. We employ input-output data as well as data from a company survey to give a comprehensive picture of servitization across countries and industries. The share of services in the output of manufacturing industries increased in the large majority of European countries between 1995 and 2005 and between 2000 and 2005. Service output of manu-facturing, however, is still small compared to the output of physical products. The highest service shares are found in small countries with a high degree of openness and R&D intensity. EU-12 Member States have lower shares of service output compared to the EU-15. There is a strong link between servitization and technological innovation at different levels. Countries with the highest shares of services on manufacturing output have also the highest R&D intensities at the aggregate level. The service output of these countries consists predominantly of knowledge-intensive services. Highly innovative sectors reveal also the highest share of firms that offer services and the highest turnover generated with services. Examples are electrical and optical equipment, machinery, or the chemical and pharmaceutical industry. At the firm level, we find a U-shaped relationship between firm size and service output, which indicates that small, but also large manufacturing firms have advantages in servitization. Producers of complex, customized products tend to have a higher share of services in output than producers of simple, mass-produced goods. Moreover, firms which have launched products new to the market during the last two years are more likely to realize higher shares of turnover from services compared to companies which launched no products new to the market.

With the publication of the booklet “Food2030 Pathways for Action” on 16 October 2020 (World Food Day) , the European Commission officially started the operationalisation process of the Food2030 framework in view of deploying the R&I action, as well as the investments needed to achieve the objectives of the European Green Deal , the Farm to Fork and the Bioeconomy strategies . The clustering exercise, led by DG Research and Innovation with contributions from DG SANTE, DG MARE, DG AGRI and from relevant food value chain stakeholders, has led the European Commission to identify ten focus areas which are considered ‘levers of change’: Governance & Systems Change; Urban Food System Transformation; Food from the Oceans & Freshwater Resources; Alternative Proteins & Dietary Shift; Food Waste & Resource Efficiency; The Microbiome World; Healthy, Sustainable & Personalised Nutrition; Food Safety Systems of the Future; Food Systems Africa; Food Systems & Data. The object of Deliverable 3.4 is to build on the D. 3.3 analysis of the R&I action needed in each pathway and provide concrete R&I recommendations for policy makers at the EU and Member States level. Particular attention is dedicated to expose the interconnectedness of the pathways to identify the most relevant and urgent cross-pathway actions to adopt.

In light of the urgent need to identify concrete R&I actions to feed into the upcoming Horizon Europe Programme, the European Commission has developed an approach structured around10 focus areasthat are considered pathways with the potential to deliver impact on EU food systems transformation (European Commission, 2020). This report aims to deepen and expand the analysis of pathways areas building on the experience and results of previous activities from the FIT4FOOD2030 project, including the findings contained in the policy briefs produced by the EU Think Tank; the training modules developed by City and Policy Labs; and the previous mapping of trends, barriers, enablers & potential breakthroughs for transformation.This in-depth analysis of 10 pathway areas is one of the first European reports to include a discussion of the potential impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic–and the measures EU Member States have taken to contain it–on food systems. While the Covid-19 event is too recent to predict its full impact and produce tailored R&I recommendations to exploit its potential to accelerate the food systems transformation, the analysis produced in this report takes the current context into account. Whenever possible and appropriate, the most recent scientific evidence has been used to substantiate the arguments made in the areas researched.

In light of the urgent need to identify concrete R&I actions to feed into the upcoming Horizon Europe Programme, the European Commission has developed an approach structured around 10 focus areas that are considered pathways with the potential to deliver impact on EU food systems transformation (European Commission, 2020). This report aims to deepen and expand the analysis of pathways areas building on the experience and results of previous activities from the FIT4FOOD2030 project, including the findings contained in the policy briefs produced by the EU Think Tank; the training modules developed by City and Policy Labs; and the previous mapping of trends, barriers, enablers & potential breakthroughs for transformation. This in-depth analysis of 10 pathway areas is one of the first European reports to include a discussion of the potential impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic – and the measures EU Member States have taken to contain it – on food systems. While the Covid-19 event is too recent to predict its full impact and produce tailored R&I recommendations to exploit its potential to accelerate the food systems transformation, the analysis produced in this report takes the current context into account. Whenever possible and appropriate, the most recent scientific evidence has been used to substantiate the arguments made in the areas researched.

With the publication of the booklet “Food2030 Pathways for Action” on 16 October 2020 (World FoodDay) , the European Commission officially started the operationalisation process of the Food2030framework in view of deploying the R&I action, as well as the investments needed to achieve theobjectives of the European Green Deal , the Farm to Fork and the Bioeconomy strategies . The clusteringexercise, led by DG Research and Innovation with contributions from DG SANTE, DG MARE, DG AGRI and from relevant food value chain stakeholders, has led the European Commission to identify ten focus areas which are considered ‘levers of change’: Governance & Systems Change; Urban Food System Transformation; Food from the Oceans & Freshwater Resources; Alternative Proteins & Dietary Shift; Food Waste & Resource Efficiency; The Microbiome World; Healthy, Sustainable & Personalised Nutrition; Food Safety Systems of the Future; Food Systems Africa; Food Systems & Data. The object of Deliverable 3.4 is to build on the D. 3.3 analysis of the R&I action needed in each pathway and provide concrete R&I recommendations for policy makers at the EU and Member States level. Particular attention is dedicated to expose the interconnectedness of the pathways to identify the most relevant and urgent cross-pathway actions to adopt.

Purpose: The research fields of service innovation and social innovation have, until now, been largely disconnected. At the most basic level, a great many social innovations are services, often public sector services with social entrepreneurs organizing and delivering service innovations. As well as this overlap in the focus of research, scholars in both research fields address socio-economic concerns using multidisciplinary perspectives. The purpose of this paper is to provide a framework that can bridge the two research fields.Design/methodology/approach: Inter-linkages between service and social innovation are shown by identifying research areas in which both find a joint heuristic field. This approach has been illustrated in a set of case studies in the health sector in Europe.Findings: The bridge between social innovation and service innovation research can be built when social innovation is examined through a multi-agent framework. The authors focus on social innovations where the co-creation of novel services is guided by the prominent position taken by citizens, social entrepreneurs or third sector organizations (NGOs or charities) in the innovation process. Of particular interest are the ways in which the interests of individual users and citizens are “represented” by third sector organizations.Practical implications: The case study of the Austrian nationwide public access defibrillation programme provides an exemplar of the process of co-creation by which this social innovation was developed, implemented and sustained. Here the Austrian Red Cross acted on behalf of citizens, organizing an innovation network capable of creating both the demand and the supply side of a sustainable market for the production and safe application of portable automated external defibrillators (AEDs) in Austria. This process involved, first, raising public awareness of the need for portable defibrillators and acting as a user representative when inducing changes in the design of portable AEDs. Later, there was the institutionalization of AED training in every first aid training in Austria, work with local manufacturers to produce this device, and with large user organizations to install AEDs on their premises.Originality/value: The paper develops multi-agent model of innovation that enables one to synthesize key concepts in social and service innovation literatures and, thereby, examine the dynamics of invention and diffusion of social innovations.