Europe and innovation
Europe and innovation
For the peoples of Europe, strategic objective 1 is to strengthen research, technological development and innovation.
It is as if the EU member states envisioned, living in a hut, working day and night in a robbery, where a third of children born are under the age of 1, and so on.
It is indisputable that it has historically been the case that a region has become only the second or third wagon of a locomotive, and that, in great historical perspectives, developed regions have sunk and leveled down for a while because they have been overwhelmed from scratch. There is an example of everything historically.
Until the middle of the 20th century, the military industry was considered to be the flagship of technical innovation. Then, with the rise of the role of space research and the explosive spread of information technology, these sectors have become the driving forces, and nowadays the health industry is catching up. But behind them are still many sectors, the agricultural sector, genetics, and so on. there is a rapid pace of development, often on a self-sustaining path. Renewal is progressing in a very wide range and field, unfortunately these processes have in common that they are resource intensive and demanding, and they have a large resource. So the poorer countries are having a hard time “catching up”. This is why Europe as such seems to be lagging behind in terms of R&D competition, as a significant part of high technology is no longer coming from this continent. You should not underestimate the following applications or solutions. It also takes ingenuity, and sometimes it really does. That the ceramic material developed for the heat shield of space rockets for household baking trays is also very good, it also requires idea and ingenuity.
On the other hand, it should be noted that in addition to technical innovations, there are also non-technical innovations, e.g. novelties of a social or artistic nature, the development, testing and dissemination of the experimental field and methods of which also require other circumstances. Personally, I see that Europe's role in the 'sweating' of such innovations has not diminished, the diversity, the diversity that characterizes European culture, is the best possible testing ground for social innovation. Here are some simple examples:
• from a historical perspective: the emergence of 4 young people in Liverpool brought about a huge change in several waves in the mid-1960s, triggering an earthquake-like cultural revolution: dress, behavior, everyday values were not the same in the world as they were 10 years ago.
• France: demarcation of multicultural tolerance. Prohibiting the wearing of headscarves is one of the stages in the “sweating” of tolerant yet coexisting norms that take into account the different solutions of different cultures.
Last but not least, there is an area of innovation where the trajectory, direction and speed of development can be measured and probable. It is estimated that 80% of the innovation areas are such. However, there are - always have been - randomly invented, even invented things, and even geographical allocation is not always predictable. Far and away from the centers of the world, Bólyai realized that parallels are not always parallel. Although he worked in a network, he corresponded with Gauss.
I think that if we were to clone an infant 5-6000 years ago, or get a newborn from the depths of the primeval forest, and raise it in today's Europe with average standard and average upbringing and education methods, 80% of such randomly trained children can be routinely taught solution. At the fifth degree, scattering may already occur. The human mind is evenly distributed on Earth for approx. 5000 years.
Virtually a great hair extender can be experimented anywhere, on Earth.
But at the same time, great intellectual capacity and the greatest possible resources must be provided in Europe to support innovation processes. This is essential to achieve the 80% sure novelty.
Additional, slightly geopolitical considerations
The so-called these are regional policy considerations. It is a series of long-standing debates about what regional development policy, rural development, settlement and urban development are and, in particular, what their interconnections, subordination and tools are. Now a paradigm shift has taken place.
The European Union's regional policy so far has had chiseled and sophisticated solutions, but it has had to deal with constraints:
• bound to territorial administrative units
• stated at idle time that regional differences were often (if not mostly) burdened by ethnic-ethnic problems, spiced up
• the latter involved internal political struggles
• despite all efforts, it was a bit rigid and schematic, certain uniqueness and specific problems were difficult to handle
• It sometimes seemed cumbersome in terms of funding
• Many (almost innumerable) programs worked beyond the administrative boundaries
• many (almost innumerable) programs worked in a way that breaks down and breaks down administrative boundaries
Now there has also been a shift in this area towards uniqueness, taylor made and smaller units. The main direction of the shift is that the scope of the problem of the development of rural areas and the scope of the development of urban areas are separated both conceptually and technically. Regions break into pieces, the pieces of the region also fight against each other (e.g., within a region, different urban areas carry everything the most, or someone else has a problem). Spatial development becomes a mosaic, connected by a network.
