European Research Area in Action:
Senior Lecturer, 6th English Language Department, MGIMO-University, email@example.com
The European community’s response to a sweeping growth of value of intellectual resources in late the late XX – early XXI century was to initiate seven consecutive framework programs, aimed at support and intensification of European scientific co-operation during the period from 1983 till 2013. The new phase, which influenced higher education and the European scientific community, was the Lisbon Process, aimed at increase of Europe’s competitiveness and creation of Europe of Knowledge. European scientific community’s goal became the achievement of a unified research and area. In the article the author offers a detailed analysis of the most voluminous program for support of research and innovation in the history of the EU – “Horizon 2020” with a total budget of 80 billion euro aimed at the completion of European Research Area. The author considers three pillars, which the program is based on: excellent science, industrial leadership, and societal challenges. The article examines economic and political circumstances, which have led to the adoption of the Horizon 2020. The author concludes that the program reflects the interests of the scientific community: it consistently accentuates such problems as climate change and Europe’s technological gap in relation to the U.S., both of which threaten dire consequences and can only be addressed by scientists. However, it prioritizes the interests of a small group of leading researchers connected to leading universities and transnational corporations, which become to be identified as the European scientific community.
Avdulov A.N., Kul’kin A.M. Finansirovanie nauki v razvityh stranah mira [Funding Science in Developed Countries]. Moscow: INION RAN. 2007. 113 p. (In Russ.)
Aznar M., Garcia E. Horizon 2020: The New European R&D and Innovation Framework Programme. Madrid: RTDI. 2014. 148 p.
Balyshev A.V., Konnov V.I. Global Academia and National Scholarly Cultures. Points of Contention. – International Trends. 2016. No. 3. P. 96-111. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17994/IT.2016.14.3.46.7
Blinov A.N., Talagaeva D.A. Scientific Community as a Political Actor: Role of International Scientific Associations. – Politeia. 2014. No. 1. P. 174-183. (In Russ.)
Communication from the Commission to The European Parliament, The Council, The European Economic and Social Committee and The Committee of the Regions. Horizon 2020 – The Framework for Research and Innovation. Brussels 30.11.2011. URL: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:52011DC0808 (accessed 18.09.2017).
Dahrendorf R. Science, Policy and Science Policy. – Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy: Archaeology, Culture, History, Literature. 1975. Vol. 75. P. 33-44.
Etzkowitz H. MIT and the Rise of Entrepreneurial Science. New York: Routledge. 2007. 232 p.
Etzkowitz H. The Triple Helix. New York: Routledge. 2008. 180 p. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203929605
Fairclough N. Language and Power. New York: Routledge. 2014. 274 p.
Gibbons M., Limoges C., Nowotny H., Schwartzman S., Scott P., Trow M. The New Production of Knowledge. London: Sage. 1994. 192 p.
Institutionalization of World-Class Universities in Global Competition. Ed. by J. Shin, B. Kehm. London: Springer. 2013. 304 p. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4975-7
Konnov V.I., Repina M.I. Evolution of University Management Models from “Studium Generale” to “Entrepreneurial University”. – International Trends. 2015. No. 1. P. 35-47. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17994/IT.2015.13.40.3
Merton R. The Sociology of Science. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 1973. 605 p.
National Innovation and the Academic Research Enterprise. 2010. Ed. by D. Dill, F. Van Vught. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press. 578 p.
Osipov G.V., Stepashin S.V. Ekonomika i sotsiologiia znanii [Economics and Sociology of Knowledge]. Moscow: Nauka. 2009. 220 p. (In Russ.)
Parmar I. Foundations of the American Century. New York: Columbia University Press. 2014. 356 p.
Shestopal A.V., Konnov V.I. Practical Epistemology: The Role of Peer Review in Organizing Scientific Research. – Vestnik MGIMO-University. 2014. No. 1. P. 198-207. (In Russ.)
Slaughter S., Cantwell B. Transatlantic Moves to the Market: the United States and the European Union. – Higher Education. 2012. No. 5. P. 583-603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-011-9460-9
Slaughter S., Rhoades G. Academic Capitalism and the New Economy. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press. 2003. 384 p.
Talagayeva D.A. Norway: the State Science Policy. – Polis. Political Studies. 2014. No. 1. P. 155-165 (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2014.01.11
van Dijk T.A. Discourse and Power. (Russ. ed.: van Dijk T.A. Diskurs i vlast’. Moscow: URSS. 340 p.)
Norway: the state science policy. – Polis. Political Studies. 2014. No1
Influence of Cultural Context on Formation of Science Policy (French Experience). – Polis. Political Studies. 2015. No5
Science Policy Programs: a Paradigm-Based Analysis. – Polis. Political Studies. 2020. No1
The Gifted Youth, and Development of New Educational Technologies as a Political Problem. – Polis. Political Studies. 2018. No2
European Cooperation in Social Science Data Dissemination .. – Polis. Political Studies. 1997. No6