Operational Feasibility Study for STI Joint European Liaison Offices (STI JELOs) for European Research Organizations in Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Japan, New Zealand,

7/25/2019 Operational Feasibility Study for STI Joint European Liaison Offices (STI JELOs) for European Research Organizations

1/100

1

( )

, , , ,, , , ,

C FFG, A R P A, BILAT USA 2.0

O 2015


2/100

2

O F S STI J E

L O

(STI JELO)

E R O

A, A, B, C, C,J, N Z, R,

S A

USA

1 I .......................................................................................................................................... 5

BILAT .................................................................................................................................. 5

T STI JELO S ......................................................................................................................... 5

2 G O STI JELO S ............................................................................................. 7

R .............................................................................................................................................. 7

C .................................................................................................................................... 15

R ......................................................................................................................... 17

3 A ............................................................................................................................................ 18

AS R ............................................................................................................. 18

E R O R O A................................. 18

C E S A ....................................................................... 19

S I STI JELO A .................................................................................. 19

P STI JELO A ................................................. 22

C...................................................................................................................................... 24


3/100

3

4 A .............................................................................................................................................. 25

O STI JELO A .................................................................... 25

T STI JELO A .......................................................... 26

T STI JELO A ................. 27

E A ............................................................................................. 28

C...................................................................................................................................... 29

5 B ................................................................................................................................................... 30

BS R .................................................................................................................... 30

O B ............................................................................... 31

O B ..................................... 33

R STI JELO B ............................................................................. 34

M STI JELO B ..................................................................... 36

I STI JELO B ....................................................................... 36

C...................................................................................................................................... 37

6 C ................................................................................................................................................ 39

CS R ................................................................................................................ 39

C...................................................................................................................................... 39

7 C ................................................................................................................................................... 40

E C ........................................................................................ 40

E C ................................................................................................... 41

E STI JELO C ................................................................................................... 44

C...................................................................................................................................... 45

8 J ................................................................................................................................................... 47

G R J ............................................................................................ 47

O J ............................................................................... 48

O STI JELO J .......................................................................... 50

C...................................................................................................................................... 53

9 N Z ....................................................................................................................................... 54

EUROPEAN ORGANIZATIONS WITH A REPRESENTATION OFFICE IN NEW ZEALAND ........................ 54

EUROPEAN ORGANIZATIONS WHICH COOPERATE WITH NEW ZEALAND ......................................... 54

EUROPEAN ORGANISATIONS INTERESTED IN AN STI JELO IN NEW ZEALAND .................................. 57

C.......................................................................................................................................... 60

10 R ................................................................................................................................................ 61

O R: ......................................... 61


4/100

4

D R ................................. 62

M R ...................................................... 63

M R ............ 64

F R............................................................. 65

C R .............................................................. 66

E STI J E L O T C R ........................ 67

11 S A ...................................................................................................................................... 68

O S A ................................................................ 68

O S A ........................................................................ 71

O STI J E L O S A ............................ 75

C.......................................................................................................................................... 80

12 USA .................................................................................................................................................... 82

O STI JELO USA ....................................................................... 82

E USA .............................................................................................. 85

C...................................................................................................................................... 88

A A .............................................................................................................................................. 90

A B ............................................................................................................................................ 100


5/100

5

1

BILAT EU (FP7)

EU 1. O

BILAT

STI J E L O (STI JELO) W

P 2012. T STI JELO , ,

E U

, . T , E

, ,

, , . S

E E

U STI . A JELO JELO, E

.

T BILAT STI

J E L O E :

A (ABEST III)

A (CAESIE)

K (KONNECT)

M (EUMEX INNOVA)

B (B.BICE+) C (ERA CAN+)

N Z (FRIENZ) R (BILAT RUS A)

C (DRAGON STAR)

J (JEUPISTE)

S A (ESASTAP PLUS)

USA (BILAT USA 2.0)

T BILAT USA 2.0 ABEST III. I

O 30, 2013, B, BILAT

. D (A A) ,

1I T C S&T A E U


6/100

6

,

BILAT. T ,

BILAT

P O. T EC J 2014. T

S 1 O 31, 2014.

T E ,

, , , SME, C, / T T .

T 12 EU , 35

EU . A 400 42 E U M S (MS)

A C (AC) , , 25%,

94 . I, 400

E BILAT

. I ,

.

T , .. ,

. T .

T E .

T ,

T

. T STI J E L O (STI JELO)

E , STI JELO E

T ,

(C , A B).

T . T

. T ,

(.. , , .)

STI JELO T (..

), , .

T T C A, A, B, C,

C, J, N Z, R, S A USA.


7/100

7

43

11

22

1

2

11

1

12

R

R

U

U

S/M

SME

T

T

O

67

59

53

34

33

29

24 9

A

B

I

E

R

T

R

O

2

A 400 , , , ,

SME, C, / T T 42 E U M S (MS)

A C (AC) BILAT . T

25%, 94

28 E MS AC.

80%

, 20%

.

R ,

80%

. W 13%

(12) O

, , .. SME,

SME , T

T

,

6% (6) .

I ( )

67 94

A, 59 B

.

53

I 34

E .

33

R 29

T


8/100

8

,

, , , . 24

R .

T STI ,

STI .

C

I , E ,

. N,

28 E MS AC ,

E

.

G E , F, G S

512 , , , .

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 12 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 34 4 4 5 5 5

6 6

1112

A

B

I

N

RM

S

S

T

C

C

H

I

M

S

F

L

P

S

P

S

UK

G

I

S

A

G

CR

F


9/100

9

( )

T 50%

I C T (ICT), E

C C, B, E, H , / M

, .

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

ICT

E C C

B

E

H

M

S

B

E

CE

B

F

I

P

A

R I

M

A

R

S

O


10/100

10

63

31 Y

N

42 4138

30 3027

25 2422

20 20

16

0

5

10

15

20

2530

35

40

45

34

1811

31

P (O

R ..

EU D)V

P (I O)

N

I I J L E

67% (63 94)

STI J E L O E. O

33% (31 94) !

I J E L (I JEL)

71% (45/63)

STI JELO

E

, 54%

(34/63)

, ..

EU D. I , 17%

(11/63)

.

A 29% (18/63) ,

STI JELO E,

STI JELO.

I I J E L C/C (

)

45% (42)

STI JELO C, 44% (41)

STI JELO

USA 40% (38)

B.

N, STI

JELO T

C

.


11/100

11

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

N ( , ,

, , .)

J ( , , .)

R ( E STI ,

, .)

J ( ,

, , , .)

V ( , , .)

P H 2020

P EU

P EU

B EEN (E E N)

O

I J E L ( )

A 63% (59) STI JELO

E N

,

.

48% (45) J

, .

A 47% (44) R STI JELO, ..

E STI .

A 45% (42) J ,

, , , , .

42.5% (40) STI JELO V ,

, , .

B 20% 40% STI JELO

P , H 2020, EU

, EU E

E N.


12/100

12

87

6 65

4 43 3 3 3

00

24

6

8

10

E C

20%

E. N,

80%

T C.

T

T C:

A: L R&D P

L U.S.

Q U.S .

F STI

P

B:

F B

A

C

G G

C ,

B

C:

L R&D P

G

F STI

I

E

:

L R&D P F STI

G , ..

A:

L R&D P

S

G

F STI

I E

T C . T ,


13/100

13

E R&D P ,

, ,

F STI E

,

G , .. .

I J E L

(I JEL) E

63 (67%)

F

T STI JELO . A

E ,

.

C

M E

STI JELO T C. T

.

A

T STI STI JELO ( ,

STI ). G

.

A

T STI JELO T

C . T

STI STI JELO

.

G

T STI JELO . T

E .

E

I J E L (I JEL) E

62 (66%)

I


14/100

14

STI J E L O T C E

.

T EU E STI

T C STI

.

S ,

B

, , , . A STI JELO T C

.

E STI

T STI

T C STI JELO. T

STI TC STI

.

E H2020

STI JELO T C E

, , STI

T C . F, STI JELO

H2020 /

/ .

A , STI

D STI

. I STI JELO STI

T C STI

.

F ,

F ,

STI JELO. J E ,

STI JELO

. M E

STI JELO.


15/100

15

1. A

94 , 80% 20% , 28 E MS AC. R ,

80% ,

STI , .. A (71%), B (63%) I (56%),

E (36%).

I SME, SME , T T

, 6% (6) .

T , .. 50%

I C T

(ICT), E C C, B, E, H , /

M , .

A, ,

28 E MS AC ,

E , F, G S 512

, , , UK, S, F, I H

24 , , , S

I 1 , .

2. H I J L E

67% STI J E L

O T C STI JELO C (45%),

USA (44%) B (40%), J, C R.

71% STI JELO E

, 54% ,

EU D. O 17% . E ,

29% STI JELO STI

JELO E.

F 63% STI JELO T C

. F 48% , ,

STI JELO.

47% , E STI

45% ,

, , , .


16/100

16

T , (67%) STI JELO T C,

C, USA B. P ,

EU D (54%), . O, EU

D EU T C

, STI ,

.

3. C

I JEL C

T

STI JELO T C.

T , ,

. A ,

. W ,

STI JELO T C .

R , STI JELO T C

E.

T STI JELO . STI

JELO T C E , E ,

.

M, STI JELO T C ,

STI

H2020.


17/100

17

I E

E STI JELO T C. T

E STI ,

E .

F, E STI

. A STI J E L O

E , E

E , , , C, USA

B, .

1. E I JEL C, A B

S E , .. G F,

. A

STI J E L O C, USA B E STI

, EU D EURAXESS, ,

E . O

, STI / E , .. C,

H, L, S, S, S ,

E

(I U S 2015).

T STI JELO E STI

E T C

T C

2. E I C,

C, J, , .

T E E

T C E STI . J

E, JTI, JPI, ERA NET, SFIC

E

, .. ,

EU D.


18/100

18

3 (provided by ABEST III)

The data generated by the survey provides insight into the current representation status of

European research organizations in Argentina. It covers their bilateral cooperation with

Argentina, either in form of an own representation office or cooperation with other existing

structures such as embassies or non-governmental organizations. Furthermore, the

organizations were asked about the form of collaboration (e.g. which services/activities are

covered) and to elaborate on their experiences. Last but not least, the organizations were

asked whether they are interested in a Joint European Liaison Office in Argentina, and if so,

which services the office should cover to fulfill their needs.

Four of the 94 organizations that participated in the survey already established a

representation office in Argentina. They are all public organizations, two are universities in

Israel and France, one is a research funding agency in Spain and another is a SME

association in Poland. Both universities are engaged in all types of research and innovation

activities, while the Spanish research funding agency is only involved in research funding

and research management. The Polish SME association is not engaged in any type of

research but supports Polish research and innovation entities. The main motivations and

reasons for establishing a representation office in Argentina were to support the generation

of projects and to foster and broaden the research collaboration with Argentinian universities

and research institutions.

The answers regarding hurdles and difficulties encountered by the organizations during the

establishment or the operation of their own representation offices can provide valuable

information about possible challenges for an STI JELO in Argentina. However, all four

organizations answered that there were no administrative hurdles, no legal obstacles, no

financial difficulties, no mobility restrictions, no problems to find appropriate personnel and no

cultural obstacles. Information regarding the services rendered by these representation

offices could give an indication of what European organizations might need in order tosuccessfully establish and sustain a close cooperation with Argentina. Three out of the four

organizations stated that the representation office supports their networking activities. One

organization additionally receives support for the exchange of experts and staff, conferences

and workshops, and the representation of services or products. Under the option other, one

organization added funding activities and another added governmental support

When asked whether the organizations received any support (e.g. logistic, legal, etc.) for

establishing the office in Argentina, two out of four answered that they received support from

their embassy as well as from governmental organizations. Two claim they received no

support. As a response to the question How is the existing representation in Argentina

financed? one organization claims to be self-financed, and another is financed by the CDTI,

which is a Public Business Entity, answering to the Spanish Ministry of Economy and

Competitiveness. The remaining two have not given an answer to this question.


19/100

19

According to the survey responses, 23 organizations are cooperating with existing structures

or partners in Argentina. These are governmental organizations of Argentina (61%), their

own countrys embassy or representation in Argentina (30%), non-governmental

organizations in Argentina (22%), EU research, funding or business organizations (13%),

and another 13% have stated in the category other that they are cooperating with

universities. None are cooperating with the EU Delegation in Argentina. The services these

structures and partners provide the organizations with mostly pertain to the support of

networking activities (65%), support of exchange of experts and staff (48%), and another

30% receive support with organizing workshops. A smaller number of organizations receive

help in managing STI funding programs (17%), facilitating conferences (13%), offering

trainings (9%), and the representation of services or products (9%).

Even though these 23 organizations already cooperate with existing structures and partners

in Argentina, 10 of them are nonetheless still interested in an STI Joint European Liaison

Office in Argentina. This may indicate that the existing structures do not sufficiently fulfill all

their needs. The specific activities that these 10 organizations claim they could better

achieve jointly with other organizations shows that most organizations chose almost all

possible services that an STI JELO could potentially offer. The most popular activities are

networking (10/10), promoting participation in Horizon 2020 (9/10), promoting EU

participation in national programs (8/10), joint funding (8/10), visibility (joint exhibitions, show

rooms, etc.) (8/10), closely followed by providing partnering services for EU companies

(7/10), representation and joint activities (each 6/10) and being the EEN (Enterprise EuropeNetwork) node (5/10).

Out of the 94 survey participants, 20 (21%) have declared a special interest in a STI JELO

office in Argentina. Interestingly, the research organizations who have declared a specific

interest in an STI JELO Argentina also tend to be interested in the other Latin-American

BILAT-project countries that were part of the survey, namely Brazil (18 out of the 20organizations that are interested in an STI JELO Argentina) and Mexico (16 out of 20),

indicating a regional preference. China and USA come after the Latin-American countries

(unlike the general results, where China and the USA are the top STI JELO destinations).

Figure D shows that most of the organizations interested in an STI JELO Argentina are

located in the Czech Republic (25%), followed by Spain, Portugal, Israel, Greece and Croatia

(10% each).


20/100

20

F A: C I JEL A

These organizations are mostly universities and research organizations (40% each, see

Figure E) and reflect the same public-to-private ratio as the general profile, namely 80%

public and 20% private.

F B: I JEL A

Most of these organizations are engaged in applied research (80%) and basic research

(75%, see Figure F), whereas the thematic focus seems to be primarily material sciences

and nanotechnology (70%), biotechnology (70%) and environment and climate change(65%), closely followed by several thematic areas such as biology, bio-based industries,

energy, and ICT, each counting 55% of the organizations (for more details, please see

figure G).

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

.

C JEL A

02468

10

U R

SME

R

O

I JEL

A?


21/100

21

F C: I JEL A

F D: I JEL A

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

A

B

E

I0

R

T

R

S

I JEL A

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

B

M

E C CB

B

E

ICT

C

H

F

I

S

A

A

E

R IE

P

M

R

S

JEL A


22/100

22

The preferences of the organizations who are interested in an STI JELO Argentina are

similar to the ones who are generally interested in STI JELOs. A higher percentage of

respondents claim to prefer a virtual structure for the Liaison Office (35% instead of 29%),but the majority also prefers a physical office, either together with other delegates (45%) or

an individual office (20%).

F E: I JEL A

When asked Which services should the STI Joint European Liaison Office provide? And

what would be useful for your institution that you can better achieve jointly with other

organizations? almost all of the 20 respondents who are interested in an STI JELO

Argentina (95%) responded that networking (primary contacts, communication, information

exchange, structural access to relevant data, etc.) would be most useful, followed by joint

funding and promoting participation in Horizon 2020 as stated by 75% each. Slightly lower

but still of high importance are visibility and representation with 70%, respectively. Figure I

shows the list of answers and their frequencies.

F F: I JEL

20%

45%

35%

JEL A

P (I

O)

P (O

R)

V

19

14

14

13

15

15

12

10

8

2

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

N

V

R

J

J

P H 2020

P EU

P EU

B EEN (E E N)

S

I J E L ?

?


23/100

23

When it comes to risks and challenges perceived by the twenty organizations who are

specifically interested in an STI JELO Argentina, the answers reflect a similar picture as the

answers of all organizations interested in STI JELOs in general. Most refer to financial

aspects, such as lack of funding or financial sustainability (8/20). Another 5 organizations are

concerned about conflicts of interest and the coordination of different needs and interests.

Other risks and challenges that were mentioned are lack of visibility and promotion, lack ofacceptance and interest/engagement from the organizations and the third countries, lack of

transparency and independence of the STI JELO office, as well as hesitations to share

information openly. Three organizations stated that they see no risks.

The expectations and benefitsof the organizations specifically interested in an STI JELO

Argentina show a more diverse picture. As with the answers given in the general interest in

STI JELOs part, many of the answers reflect the list of possible answers for a previous

question, where the organizations were asked which services STI JELOs should offer to

cover their needs. Networking, joint funding, joint activities, visibility and representation are

among them. However, since this question gave the organizations a chance to elaborate on

their answers and add any expectations and benefits they can think of, it gives a more

detailed picture of their expectations and opinion about STI JELOs. Among the most frequent

answers of organizations interested in an STI JELO Argentina are aspects of networking

(17/20), including:

Finding partners and starting new partnerships;

Increasing the opportunity of collaboration with local partners;

Creating links to research, capacity building, innovation and external funding;

Better integration in international research, innovation and teaching networks;

Facilitating access of the several research stakeholders in a third country (national

and regional research funding bodies, academia, research institutes and companies,

infrastructures, competence centers, clusters);

Joining common research programs

Another topic frequently mentioned is the exchange and recruitmentof scientific staff and

students (8/20), such as establishing a mechanism for exchange of scientific personnel or

recruitment of students from abroad. The third most frequently mentioned benefit is the

exchange and transfer of knowledge(specifically mentioned by 5 out of 20), for example:

support and exchange of ideas; new technology transfer; and access to foreign sources of

knowledge. Joint activitiesand joint research projectsare also named frequently (6/20):

Jointly develop and exploit new knowledge and technologies based upon comparative factoradvantages; joint research projects and joint training (just to name a few). Other benefits

mentioned by the organizations are: Applying European innovations on other continents; new

markets for new technology; door-opening; decreasing transaction costs; better visibility

outside Europe; facilitating the participation at joint exhibitions and promotion events of EU

stakeholders in the third country, and to promote the research excellence and innovation

performance of the European organizations.


24/100

24

This survey, conducted by twelve BILAT projects, provides a first impression of the general

interest of European research organizations in the concept of Joint European STI Liaison

Offices (STI JELOs). It clearly shows that every third research organization whichparticipated in the survey is interested in an STI JELO in general, and every fifth organization

is specifically interested in an STI JELO in Argentina. Even though these results are not

representative for all research organizations in Europe, it does allow for a first impression,

not only on the overall interest, but also on specific preferences and expectations. The

preferred structure for an STI JELO in Argentina is a physical office together with other

representations (e.g. jointly with EU Delegation). The services that are most frequently

expected to be rendered include networking (primary contacts, communication, information

exchange, structural access to relevant data, etc.), joint funding (joint research projects, joint

calls, etc.) and promoting participation in Horizon 2020. The expected risks and challenges

most frequently stated pertain to conflicts of interest (e.g. diverse range of interests andneeds, underrepresentation of small organizations/member countries, office overwhelmed

with different requests) and funding issues (e.g. sustainable funding, high operational costs).

Among the expectations and benefits of STI JELOs stated by the organizations that are

interested in an STI JELO Argentina, networking is by far the most frequently mentioned

benefit. Other benefits include the exchange and recruitment of scientific staff and students,

as well as the exchange and transfer of knowledge. One other important issue that this

survey has revealed is the concern about funding. A sustainable funding scheme should be

developed, including the financial support from the EU for the initial years until the project

reaches self-sustainment.

Although Argentina ranks relatively low in the list of preferred STI JELO destinations, it has tobe taken into account that this survey included only the most important partner countries of

EU-cooperation in S&T.

Possible next steps could be:

A) Share the STI JELO report with ABEST-Partners and asking for suggestions and

comments

B) Organize a workshop with ABEST-Partners in Europe (inviting the EU-Delegation inArgentina)

1. Identification of key countries, institutions and possible strategic partners

2. SWOT-Analysis of an STI JELO in Argentina

3. Other topics

C) Share results with Policy Officer and verify if interest would also be reflected in

Horizon 2020 (e.g. a call).


25/100

25

4 ( CAESIE)

30% (19/63) STI JELO E

STI JELO A. T

STI JELO A STI

JELO .

19 A/63

I , , ,

G (0/1), F (0/9), S (0/2), UK (0/2) P (0/2) STI JELO

A , S, C, S, H, S,

C R (6/8). T ,

6/8

0/2

0/2

0/3

0/1

0/2

0/4

2/2

1/2

2/2

0/9

2/3

1/5

0/1

0/2

I:1/3 M: 1/1 C: 0/1

0/2

1/2

0/1

0/1

0/1

0/1

1/1

1/1


26/100

26

, STI JELO A

C R. I

C STI JELO.

O , A , , .. C B.

R (6) U (10) 84%

STI JELO A (19). R , O ,

T , U SME 5% . 2 R

(10%) STI JELO.

P , U, R , T

O , , STI JELO

.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

R

O

U R

F

O

O

P

P


27/100

27

T E STI JELO A

(14/19), , ( )

ICT ( 13/19). T (11/19)

. I

( 7/19) .

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

[A ][A ]

[B]

[B ]

[B]

[C]

[E ]

[E]

[E]

[E C C]

[F ]

[H ]

[ICT]

[I ]

[M

[M]

[P]

[R ]

[R I]

[S ]

[S]

O


28/100

28

T 4 A I,

S P. T I

. T S P .

C

I U R O

S R F O

P O

N E F, UK G

A. A, , G A E S (DAAD)

U S .

M / A

M (3 ) :

A AP ,

T R&D P

S

A

A

T A

, .

A E

T

A . T

.


29/100

29

1) A E

W 32% EA T . T

A E

A . 3% 0,3

.

T EU M S C R, P, S

C, E M S F, UK G

STI JELO A. T EU

M S A

.

T C R

STI JELO A. I

C .

: T A

E M S A . J STI JELO A

.

2) I JEL A

W , ICT, ,

S S H. T

STI JELO A.

: A STI JELO A S

E S S H.

3) M E I

A E , ..

R&D , , ,

, . T

E M S . O

, A

E M S EU MS.

: A STI JELO A, E

E STI E A

E R A (ERA) A.


30/100

30

5 ( BBICE +)

H B R O (45%),

U (29%). R F A 15% . T

, : SME, T

C T T O B.

A B,

40% , (32%).

E , ,

20% ( 1). T ,

I (3

94 )

B.

F 1: &I , B, (%, =53)

T B

2 ( ), E/C C

B 60% ; H & M R 57%; ICT

M S/N 55%, E 51%.

I 6

94 ( 2, ).

39

37

1922

20

3215

A R

B R

I

E

DR

T

R


31/100

31

F 2: F (%, )

F 7 E B, 4 USA S

A; 3 C, M, R J; 2 C K.

H F G, S, S

I. F (2 , 1 , 1

1 ); . I

1, 53

B, 86%,

71% 57%.

I, 7 ( 2,

). C

B, R I M, M S & N, B

A & F.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

O

S

R M

M

A R

A & F

P

I T

R I

F & H D

E

E S

B I

C

B

S S & H

E

M S & N

ICT

H & M R

E & C C

B

, =94 B, =53

O B, =7


32/100

32

T B :

T B

N B

B , B

C

S I 2

D B

T B (..

,

); ( .. ,

MU) ( ).

N 90% ,

/ ,

( 3).

F 3: B (%, , =7)

2://../F_G/F_C_A/I_F_C_A.

0

20

40

60

80

100

N

E &

W

C

R

STI F

O

T

L IPR


33/100

33

S (.. , , .) B

' 5 . 3

,

U S P. T . N EU

D EU .

I 2 , 2

.

F 53 B, 49% (=26)

B, 92% . H R

, 6 U, 5 R , 1 M 1

. O H F C R(5 3, )

. A 3 P 2 F, G, S, S

UK B, G, S, H, I

S.

W 26

53 B ( 2, ); R&I

: 77%, 69%

58%.

R B, 36% ,

19% E 13% (

4). 6% EU , , 1%

EU D B.

62% 26 STI JELO B.

F 4: C B (%, , =26)

36

19

13

8

22

6

2G

Y E

RN

U

P P

O

EU ,


34/100

34

F 5: B (%, , =26)

S B

( 5)

(

3),

(36%),

(25% )

.

B STI JELO,

, 40% (38 ) 94 . 79%

38 , 21% . A (17) R

(13) , 4 , 2 I

, 1 M 1 .

C , (

C R F):

C R: 6

F: 5

G P: 3

A, C, F, H, I, L, S, S, UK: 2

B, I S: 1

S 38 53 B,

( 2, ). I,

R&I : STI JELO

(82%) (79%), 94

, 53 B

. R 39%

.

Q STI JELO B, 61% 38

. A 26%,

, 13% .

R STI JELO, 28 : 7% B

0

10

20

30

40

N

E &

W

C

R

STI F

O

T

L IPR


35/100

35

, 4% R J P A 18%

.

F 6: I JEL (%, , =38)

A 38 STI JELO B

STI JELO , ,

. A, N (

, , , )

97%, R ( E STI ,

) J ( & ) 76% (

6). M 50% J ( ,

, & ), P H 2020,

EU .

R STI JELO B . T

, 26%

. T

21% 11%

. H ,

,

5% . 13% . A ,

EU 5%,

5% STI JELO EUD, 5%

E , .

F,

STI JELO. T (

, =38) :

E & (50%)

97

76

76

7166

63

61

47

37 5

N

R

J

J

P H 2020

V

P EU

P EU

B EEN (E E N)

O


36/100

36

A ST&I B (26%)

F (21%)

I (21%)

F (18%)

E H2020 (8%)

A ,

STI JELO B. B

STI JELO,

( ):

T L (B S P3)

P

B : I B / E (..

U S P / EU D B B)

S ( )

C

L & ( B)

M (.. )

C

M

R

Q

O , STI JELO

.

T G H S I (DWIH) S P4, G

,

STI JELO. F ,

.

L S P, DWIH , ,

, . T

15 . T ,

, , , , , , I

3S P B , : ://.

./2014/88894://.../.?=72


37/100

37

, IT ,

12.000 .

C , 11%

STI JELO B, 65.000 DWIH,

, .

I ,

STI JELO, ,

. E 65.000 ,

.

F, STI JELO

L , ..

, , , , / B2B . T

60.000 .

S, E STI JELO

80.000 S P, B. O

STI JELO ,

, 125.000 .

F ,

, 94 400 . D

, ,

E STI .

T B E STI

(56%), , ,

, . A,

; B,

E & C C, H & M R, B

STI 5.

T B MS,

E . F

T C,

. C ,

,

. N

. L

B

.

5://..//218981.


38/100

38

T STI JELO B

(40%). E

, ,

, EU EU

. H

MS. I, STI JELO

,

.

S, E STI B T

C USA C. A , J

E L ,

B.


39/100

39

6

( ERAC +)

Existing representation offices in Canada

Only 2 organizations have a representation office in Canada. The main reasons for the establishment

of these two offices were to promote the Association of the friends of the Hebrew University and to

support EUREKA projects.

No problems, obstacles and barriers seem to be faced by the offices. Only the activity for one of the

organizations, offered as a service, is expressed and its a funding activity.

Another respondent declares that his/her organization does not have a representative office but acooperation model in place with universities, which can also act as a platform for general networking

activities. Its service is a joint Research and Development activity.

One of the existing offices is self-funded, while for the other one the funding is split between a self-

and Canadian universities funding.

Existing cooperation with Canada

28 respondents organizations have an ongoing cooperation with Canada and Canadian partners, 7

with their countrys Embassy, 4 with a EU research, funding or business organization, 10 with a non-

governmental organization established in Canada, 12 with a governmental organization established in

Canada. The following offered services have been taken advantage of:

Representation

of services or

products

Managing

STI funding

programmes

Facilitating

conferences

Organising

workshops

Offering

training

Supporting

exchange

of experts

and staff

Legal

and

IPR

support

5 8 8 12 8 15 0

32% (30 out of 94) of the respondents are in favor and would find it useful to open an STI JELO in

Canada

30% (28 out of 94) respondents organizations have an ongoing cooperation with Canada and the main

service offered is the support to experts exchange followed by the organization of workshops. No

office offers a legal or IPR support.

There seems to be no barrier and particular risks for the cooperation in Canada.


40/100

40

7

( DRAGON STAR)

T ,

, STI JELO C . T

, , C 6, 5

1 . A

, C

:

- T C

- T

- T C

- T R&D P .

- T C P

T , ,

,

STI

.

G 4 ,

C, , 4

, 1 . F

CDTI B, G U B , R .

R ,

. O , ,

. A ( )

.

R

25%

M STI

F

17%

F

17%

O

33%

O

8%


41/100

41

O

13%

R

18%

R

44%

T

2%

U

23%

C

65

3 3 32 2 2

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

C

I 39 94 C. F 39, 10% 90% ,

:

I 29 39

C, 19 , 14

, 8 EU //

5 EU C.


42/100

42

8 8 9 11 11 12

13 14 14 14 15 16 16

17 18 18 18 20

22 23 23

A C

R

8%

M STI

11%

F

7%

O

16%

O

8%

S

24%

S

19%

L IPR

7%

A

C

F,

, (.. W U, C A F, .)

C.

T :


43/100

43

R

8% M STI

11%F

7%

O

16%

O

8%

S

24%

S

19%

L IPR

7%

A C

F C

:

T STI JELO C, :

S

,

S ,

E (, ),

E H 2020.

I , ,

/ .

N, . F ,

STI JELO

. A

. T, C

/ . S STI JELO

, ,

. P STI JELO

. T,

, EURAXESS EEN.


44/100

44

O

14%

R

14%

R

36%

T

3%

U

31%

U

2%

JEL

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 12 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3

45

H JEL

T

( )

. A

.

42 94 J

E L C. T :

2

1 1

0

1 1

A

P

L F

M

C

D C


45/100

45

8 9

12 12 13 13

15 15 16 16 16

17 18

19 20

22 22 22

24 25 25

A JEL

I 24

J L O C , 11

, 7

. A STI JELO,

B, .

T

J E L O . T

EURAXESS

. M,

E

. T STI JELO R&I EC

C.

I ICT, E, (N) M

B.


46/100

46

T

. I ,

,

. T :

1. N ( , , , , .)

2. V ( , , .)

3. R ( E STI , , .)

4. J ( , , ,

, .)

STI JELO

. T

E C, C

.


47/100

47

8 ( JEUPISTE)

F 94 , 17 ( 20%)

. J 3

( 1). T G

S.

F 1: C (%, =94)

F 2: I I JEL C (%, =94)

63

STI JELO T C.

J 30

.

S, 94 , 3 J 30 STI JELO

J. F 30 J. 24

0

2

4

6

8

10USA

B

C

R

S A

A

A

C

J

K

M

N Z

0

10

20

30

4050

USA

B

C

R

S A

A

A

C

J

K

M

N Z


48/100

48

,

NGO J. I, 10 24

STI JELO J, . N , 2

STI JELO J, J.

I J ,

30 J

J .

F E J, S

. I , N Z. T

G B, C, C, K, R US. T S

, G

.

C 30 STI JELO J

G

J. S

.

T J

:

G :

T J

N F J

F J ,

J

C D J

G :

:

T , 1986. A

2008. N

.

A J.


49/100

49

N J,

/ ,

3.

F 3: J (%, , =3)

0

2040

60

80

100

N

E &

W

C

R

STI F

O

T

L

IPR


50/100

50

S (.. , , .) J

' . T G

( ?) .

30 E L O J. T

/ :

C R: 7

F: 4

C, H, I, L, P, S: 2

A, F, G, I, S, S, U K: 1

F 4: L , .B : , =94; : J, =30.

T 30 J 4 (

). I 2 J . T

11/7

4/1

3/2

4/0

6/0

5/0

6/0

3/2

3/1

2/2

12/4

4/2

5/1

1/0

2/1

I:5/2 M: 2/0 C: 2/0

3/0

2/2

2/0

1/1

1/0

1/0

1/0

1/1

1/1

1/0


51/100

51

C R C

R. N B A, B, C, I,

G, M, N, P, R M, S, S, S, T.

T J .

R 12, 11 . R

3, 4 . O T C S

J.

A J,

. O 7 , 3 . T

, . A 1115

: I, B, B,

C, E S, E, ICT, M S, H E. N,I 17 .

T STI JELO ,

. T ,

( ), ,

, T.

I W STI J E L

O ? W

? T , ( ,

, , , .)

. N 30 . F

.

E, ( , , .) .

O , .. E STI , ,

. . O

( , , , , . I,

(

, , .). M . A

H 2020

. A ,

.


52/100

52

F 5: I JEL ( , =30)

I STI JELO

: D STI J E L

O? STI JELO

EU . I

. I

. A :

- C ;

- C ;

- C ;

- P ;

- T ;

- T

;

- R / (

E );

- L EU EU MS;

- C ;

- R . T B D

STI JELO;

- I ( )

;

- I EU STI JELO;

- C ; ,

- T STI JELO ;- T EU

E E

29

23

23

2120

18

15

129 1

N

R

J

J

P H 2020

V

P EU

P EU

B EEN (E E

N) O


53/100

53

. I

.

A

STI JELO J. F , . A

. I ,

, ,

. S , , ,

. F / ,

,

. S, . S

STI JELO, , . E ,

. A ,

/

.

F ,

( J,

;

J).

T STI JELO J. T

J. T J

STI JELO, . T

, . J : I, B,

B, C, E S, E, ICT, M S, H E.

T J MS,

J G S. T STI JELO J

J. O E M S/AS. I

STI JELO J , MS/AS.

I , J , . T

,

. O . O

, J

( G S ).

T J L O E

U.


54/100

54

9 (provided by FRIENZ)

None of the organizations which have replied has a representation office in New Zealand (20.21% in

total have a representation office in the other 11 targeted countries).

8 responding organizations have existing cooperation with New Zealand, i.e. 8.51% of the

questionnaires respondents.

1. Profile of the European organizations having cooperation with a NZ partner:

Origin and type of the organizations:

All respondents are from public organizations. Half of the organizations having cooperation with a NZ

partner are universities; the other half being research organizations. Czech Republic is the most

represented country among the respondents (3), followed by France (2). The United Kingdom,

Switzerland and Finland are respectively represented by 1 organization among the respondents. (See

Fig. 1).

Figure 1: Distribution per country of research organizations and universities having cooperation with NZ partners

0

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

University

Research Organization

Those results do not reflect the most significant NZ partners recorded, which are Germany, France,

and the UK;1Those countries have some specific cooperation programmes with NZ (e.g. Dumont

dUrville NZ-France S&T Support Programme, NZ-Germany Science & Technology Programme,

etc.). In addition, NZ organizations cooperated the most with the UK, Germany, the Netherlands,

France and Italy within the FP7 framework. Yet, the respondents geographical origin distribution

does not reflect the current situation mentioned above.


55/100

55

Kind of activities conducted in the organizations:

All the 8 European organizations are conducting applied research, 7 of them basic research and 6 of

them innovation activities. Research management (3), translational research (2) and research funding

(0) are the activities which are the less conducted in the responding European organizations.

Figure 2: Activities conducted in the European organizations having cooperation with NZ partners

Main research areas of the organizations:

Environment (7) is the research area most represented in the 8 organizations, followed by bio-based

industry, biotechnology, food and health diet, and social sciences (5). On the contrary industrial

technologies, raw materials, space and marine research are the less represented research areas amongst

the responding organizations (1).

Figure 4: Research areas of the responding European organizations

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Applied research

Basic research

Innovation activities

Research management

Translational researchResearch funding

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Environment

Bio-basedindustry

Biotechnology

Foodandhealhdiet

SocialSciences

Biology

Eathsciences

Health&medical

ICT

Researchinfrastructure

Agriculture

Aquaticresources

Energy

Materialsciences&

Chemistry

Engineering

Mathematics

Physics

Industrialtechnologies

Rawmaterials

Space

MarineResearch


56/100

56

2. Profile of the organizations based in NZ with which the above mentioned organizations

cooperate with:

The 8 responding organizations, based in Europe, have cooperation with New Zealand organizations

but also with European organizations.

Cooperation of European organizations based in EU with New Zealand organizations in NZ:

Half of the organizations are collaborating both with NZ governmental and non-governmental

organizations, 3 are only collaborating with non-governmental organizations and 1 with only

governmental organizations.

These organizations based in New Zealand provide different kind of services to the European

organizations which have responded. The most important, provided to all European organization are

the support of experts and staffs exchange (to all of them), followed by the support of networks (7)

and the organizations of workshops.

Figure 3: Services provided by the partners based in NZ

Cooperation of European organizations based in the EU with European organizations based in NZ

3 out of the 8 European organizations are cooperating with European organizations (from France, the

United Kingdom and Finland) based in New Zealand. 2 of them are cooperating with their countrys

embassy or representation in NZ (France and United Kingdom). The organization from United

Kingdom is also cooperating with the EU Delegation in New Zealand. Also, 1 organization from

Finland is cooperating with 1 EU research, funding or business organization.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8 Supporting exchange ofexperts and staff

Supporting network

Organizing workshops

Representation of services orproducts

Offering training

Facilitating conference


57/100

57

6

6

2

1

1

Researchorganisation

University

Research fundingagency

Cluster

Others

Overall, 16 organizations are in favor of settling an STI JELO in NZ (25.40 % out of the organizations

interested in STI JELOs / 17.02% of the total respondents) and 30 organizations are not interested.

1. Profile of the organizations interested in settling an STI JELO in New Zealand

Origin and type of the organizations:

Responding organizations in favor of settling an STI JELO in NZ are from 11 different countries. The

most represented countries are Czech Republic (4), Portugal (2) and Croatia (2). All the other

countries are represented by one organization (see the table below for the details regarding the

geographical distribution).

CountryNumber ofanswers

Czech Republic 4

Portugal 2

Croatia 2

Israel 1

United Kingdom 1

Slovenia 1

Serbia 1

Finland 1Slovakia 1

Switzerland 1

Hungary 1

Figure 5: Distribution per country of organizations interested in an STI JELO in NZ

They are almost all public research organizations except one (cluster). They are mostly research

organizations (6) and universities (6).

Figure 6: Kind of organizations interested in an STI JELO in NZ


58/100

58

The figure below presents the organizations interested in having an STI JELO in New Zealand,

combining both criteria (geographical origin and type of organization).

Figure 7: Organizations interested in an STI JELO in NZ

Most of these organizations are conducting applied research (14), basic research (13) and innovation

activities (9). Research management (7), translational research (5) and research funding (7) are the

activities which are the less conducted in the European organizations interested in an STI JELO in NZ.

Figure 8: Activities conducted in the European organizations interested in an STI JELO in NZ

Main research areas of the organizations:

Biotechnology, chemistry, environment and climate, material sciences and nanotechnology (9) are the

most represented research area, followed by energy and ICT (8). On the contrary agriculture and

forestry, raw materials and space and marine research are the less represented research areas amongst

the organizations interested in settling an STI JELO in New Zealand.

02468

10

1214


59/100

59

Figure 9: Research areas of the European organizations interested in an STI JELO in NZ

Focus on the European organizations having cooperation with NZ organizations:

Out of the 8 European organizations which have cooperation with NZ organizations, 6 have replied to

this question. 4 of them are in favor of having an STI JELO (25% of the organizations interested in

having an STI JELO in NZ). More precisely, 3 are in favor of an office together with other

representations and 1 in the format of a separate office. Among the remaining organizations, 2 are

against the implementation of an STI JELO in NZ and 2 have not answered this question.

2. Preferred structure and services of STI JELO:

A great majority (81.25%) of the organizations in favor of settling an STI JELO in NZ would prefer to

have a physical structure (slightly above the average rate of positive answer for settling an STI JELO

for all countries, 71.43%).

If the organizations were interested in having a physical structure, they were asked to further precise

the nature of the structure: a separate office or a joint office with other organizations. The majority of

the respondents are in favor of an office together with other representations (61.53%) as shows the

figure below (Fig. 5). This percentage is a bit lower than the average of positive answer for settling an

STI JELO for all countries (75.55%).

Figure 10: Preference on the nature of the physical STI JELO structure (number)

No geographical preference was expressed as far as New Zealand is concerned.

0123456789

Biotechnology

Chemistry

Environmentand

Materialsciences

EnergyICT

Biology

Earthsciences

Foodandhealthydiet

Healthandmedical

SocialSciencesand

Bio-basedindustries

Engineering

Physics

ResearchInfrastructure

Aquaticresources

Industrialtechnologies

Mathematics

Agricultureandforestry

RawMaterials

Space

5

8

Separate Office

Office together with otherrepresentations


60/100

60

Services expected from an STI JELO:

Figure 11: Services expected from an STI JELO

The main services expected from an STI JELO in NZ are networking (16), joint funding (14) and

promoting participation in H2020 (13).

Few respondents seem to be interested in having an STI JELO in New Zealand (only 17.01%).

However, some countries are under-represented in this survey as Germany (6.38%), Italy (2.13%) and

the United Kingdom (4.26%) while some other countries are over-represented. It raises the question of

the representability of this sampleand how much we can rely on these results.

0

10

20


61/100

61

64 4

7

3 6

3 3 5

8

3 0

N R

10

( BILATRUSA)

:

S O R:

O I (2), G (2), F (1) S (1).

T O O R :

1. T

(F)

2. T H U (I)

3.

T R (G)

4. T R D S

C R P (S).

I I O

R A, A, B, C, M, S

A USA. O G O R

B, USA J, G O

O C. T S O R

A, A, B, C, C, S K M, S

A, USA J.

T O

O C: R, A, A, B,

C, C, S K, M, S A, USA, J N Z. I

R .

F 1: N O


62/100

62

H O ( F, I G) R

R. T

(F, I, G) ,

(I), (I G),

(I G) ,

(F I), (I G),

.

F 2: S

R R

A

A

L

F

M

C

DIFFICLIE EEIECED I HE EABLIHME

AD MAAGEME F FFICE I IA


63/100

63

T O R

: (F, G), STI F

(G), (F, G),

(F, G), (G), (F, I,

G), (F, G), L IPR

(I), (I).

F 3: S R R

M I

F

F

(, )

L I F

EICE FFEED B EEEAI I IA


64/100

64

T O C

E R R (F, I, G), G

R (S) EU D (F). O I

O .

I EU

O R.

F 4: S R R

C' E

G

E D

MECHAIM F F EEEAI

I IA


65/100

65

T O R

H C E (F),

G (G), CDTI (S), O

(G). T I O .

F 5: F R R

H C

E

G

'

H

CDI

F

FIACIG F EEEAI I IA


66/100

66

T R 33%

O , 31 O. T

C E R

(13%), EU D R (2%), EU ,

(5%), N R (12%), R G O

(21%) (.. U I, 10%). O

94 O 44

R.

F 6: C R

C

C' E

REU D

EU ,

.R NGO

R GOU,R I,

O


67/100

67

W

STI J E L O T C, 63

O ( 67% ) , 31 O ( 33% ) .

F 7: P STI JELO T

C

W T C 27

R (29%), 20 A (21%), 20

A (21%), 38 B (40%), 30 C (32%), 42

C (45%), 25 S K (27%), 22 M

(23%), 16 N Z (17%), 24 S A (26%), 41

USA (44%) 30 J (32%).

T R , :

O

C.

P

67%

N

33%

I

JEL C

P N


68/100

68

11 ( ESASTAP )

F 5.5%, S A. A

, STI JELO S A.

H

M /

I

(J)

P

S

B P S

,

, ,

S

(M)

F R&D

;

,

F

,

S

S

F(M) P E,

, H,

M STI F , ,

,

,

,

G

(M)

H, ,

,

R ,

,

: ,

( )


69/100

69

O , I

B. T S

A S A

( B U) . I

, J

S A U ,

U, S

A U.

N (.. , , .) I

S A. T . O , B

P, . F

M F A. B STI JELO

S A , .

P STI JELO :

N , , ,

;

J , ,

, ;

J , , H 2020;

B EEN (E E N) .

T I U ( E STI , , .). T B U

EU

EU .

A / STI JELO

EU E L . E

&

S A, E ,

H E .

T S A S;

G ; F

IRD/CNRS.

B E, M E

C, S .

I RD&I

S .

T S A S

R&D S A ,

.


70/100

70

T

. W ,

.

S S S S A; . T

STI JELO S A

.

C/ID J F E S A

F ARI: L C N R S (CNRS)

F I R D (IRD). W F,

, IRD

, , . CNRS

, , , , , , , ,

. S 2015, T F

M

CIRAD, CNRS/IRD

.

N . H,

. T

STI F ,

, .

S F

IRD

CNRS . T F STI J E L O S A

. T E

IRD & CNRS S A, STI F

, , , ,

.

W STI JELO, EU

(: A A), E

E . I

. T

STI JELO ,

, , H2020 .

G E

M, G. I

, , , . T . T


71/100

71

.

F , S A S A; S

A

S A A . C A E S A.

N S A

. T ,

. T

,

.

T

. T STI JELO S A.

29% ( 5 ),

S A.

T , .


72/100

72

H

C

3

:

2

1

B

,

,

,

,

R

&

A , B, B ,

B, C, E , ,

E , E C C, F

, H , ICT, M

, , , R

I, S S

H 2

:

1 1

B

,

,

,

I

,

R

B, B , B, C,

E , , E, E

C C, ICT, I , M , , , R

, S & S

F 5

:

4 R

,

1

A

,

,

,

I

,

R

A , A , B, B

, B, C, E ,

, E, E C C, F

, H , ICT, I

, M ,, , R I, S

& S

2

:

1 R

,

1 R

B

,

,

,

A , A , B,

B, C, , E, E

C C, F , H

, ICT, I , M

, , R

I

G 3

:

1 I

I

(P), 2

R

(P

)

B

,

,

,

,

A , B, B ,

B, C, E , ,

E, E C C, F

, H , ICT, I

, M ,

, , R I, S

S

2 R A , A , B, B


73/100

73

, B, C, E ,

E, E C C, F

, H , ICT, I

, M , R

, S

2

:

1 R

,

1 U

B

,

,

E

,

,

,

B, C, E , , E

C C, H , M

, , R

I

F 1

A

, ,

E

,

T

,

,

A , B, B ,

B, , E C C,I , R I, S

1

A

,

,E

,

,

I

A , A , B,

B, C, E , ,

E, E C C, F , H , ICT, I

, M , R

, M , S

1

R

N/A

G 2

:

A

, ,

T

,

I

,

R

B, B , B, C,

, E, E C C, F , H , ICT,

I , M

, M , R &

I 1

I

I 1

1

I

1

I 1


74/100

74

B 1

:

I

1

I 1

P S A

W S A, 41%

S A 37%

E S A. O , 26%

NG O S A, 15% EU ,

15% EU D S A S A

.

E A 37%

E D A 15%

E , 15% 26%

G 41%

15%

S

R ,

56% 41%.

O 33%, 26%, STI 22%,

/ S A.

11%

M I 22%

F 26%

26%

33%

56%

41%L I 7%

4%


75/100

75

26% : 24

STI J E L O S A.

T ,

.

H

C

4

:

3

1

B

,

,

,

A , B, B ,

B, C, E , ,

E , E C C, F

, H , ICT, I

, M ,, , R I, S

S

H 2

:

1

1

B

,

,

,

I

,R

B, B , B, C,

E , , E, E

C C, ICT, I , M

, , , R

, S & S

F 3

:

2 R

,

1

B

,

,

,

,

I

,

R

A , A , B,

B, C, E , E,

E C C, F ,

H , M

, , R , R

I, S

2

:

1 R

,

1 R

B

,

,

,

A , A , B,

B, C, , E, E

C C, F , H

, ICT, I , M

, , R

I

G 3

:

1 I

B

,

A , A , B, B

, B, C, E ,

, E, E C C, F


76/100

76

I,

2 R

,

,

,

,

, H , ICT, I

, M

S

1

B

,

,

E , , E C C

F 1

A

,

,

E,

T

,

I

,

R

A , B, B ,

B, , E C C,

I , R I, S

1

A

,

,

E

,T

,

I

,

R

A , A , B, B

, B, C, E ,

, E, E C C, F

, H , ICT, I

, M , R, M , R I,

S

I 2

:

1 &

1

A

,

,

E

,

T,

I

,

R

A , A , B, B

, B, C, E ,

, E C C, F

, H , ICT, I

, M , R

, M , R I,S

1

A

,

,

I

,

R

&

ICT

L 1 I


77/100

77

I

A

I 1

I

,

R

&

A , A , B, B

, B, C, E ,

, F , H ,

ICT, I , M

C 1

R

N

B 1


78/100

78

P STI JELO

(

.. E

D)

42%

(I ) 29%

29%

F & STI JELO

( , ,

,

, .)

100%

( , , .) 79%

( E STI

, , .)

79%

J ( ,

, , ,

.)

67%

J ( , ,

.)

83%

H 2020 75%

E

62,5%

E 46%

B EE (E E N) 37,5%

A

STI J E L O. B

S A, STI JELO

. T

S A ( ,

, , , , )

.

S ,

,

( ) . S

E ,

.

T STI JELO EU

EEN . T

S A

EU .


79/100

79

S E

H 2020. T STI JELO

,

, H 2020. I

H2020 , E

, H2020 / .

T , STI JELO

.

F, ,

H

E .

L, S A,

P J. S /

.

F &

F

STI JELO S A. C

,

,

.

D E

S A. T

. T STI JELO EU ,

E

E . F , STI JELO

. F , E STI JELO'

.

;

.

F , ( )

. W

,

STI JELO .


80/100

80

E

STI JELO . T E

S A.

C . I ,

STI JELO.

O &

STI JELO. R ( , , )

. L,

, S A

.

T E

STI JELO S A. 24%

S A, E

S A .

A E 79%, 21%. C , 42%

, 33% , 12,5% , 12,5%

( ).

R & STI JELO S A,

. I ,

S A . S E

,

E H2020 EU. O

, . T

STI JELO

EUS A

, . I

S A . C

E , 71%

P 42% EU S

A, 29% ).

T : ,

,


81/100

81

E

S A.

C E S A,

,

P

STI JELO S A


82/100

82

12 ( BILAT USA 2.0)

I JEL A ( )

65% (41/63) STI JELO E (

7) STI JELO USA. T

STI JELO USA STI

JELO .

41 A/63

I , , P

(0/2), G (0/1), F (2/9) S (0/2) STI JELO USA,

, S, C, S, H, S, L

C R (7/8). T ,

, STI JELO USA C R.

7/8

2/2

2/2

2/3

0/1

0/2

2/4

2/2

1/2

2/2

2/9

2/3

2/5

1/1

2/2

I:2/3 M: 1/1 C: 1/1

0/2

2/2

1/1

1/1

1/1

1/1

1/1

1/1


83/100

83

I , U.S. ,

, .. N Y W D.C. E ; S F W .

I JEL A

R U 68% (14 34% )

STI JELO USA (41). R , O

, T , U SME 32%

.

P R , U, R , T

O , , STI JELO

USA .

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

P

P


84/100

84

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

ICT

M N

B

E

H

E

E C C

S

B

C

I

E

B

F

M

P

A

R IA

R

S

I JEL A

M 50% STI JELO USA ICT (63%),

M N , B, E, H ,

E / E C C (51%).


85/100

85

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

S

R

F

S

O

M STI F

O

O

L IPR

T 8 USA ( 9) F (2;

, O ), G (2;

, ), I (2;

, ), G (1 SME),

S (1 ).

Public organisation Private Other organisation

France Research organisation Other organisation

Germany Government funded organisation Research organization

Israel University Research organization

Greece SME

Spain Research funding agency

W STI

JELO USA ( 11), , , F,

G, S , ,

E STI JELO USA. N, ,

I, ,

E STI L O USA .

I

Documents

Operational Feasibility Study for STI Joint European Liaison Offices (STI JELOs) for European Research Organizations in Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Japan, New Zealand,