Danish Ministry of Higher Education and Science
governmentCopenhagen, Capital Region, Denmark
Research output, citation impact, and the most-cited recent papers from Danish Ministry of Higher Education and Science (Denmark). Aggregated across the NobleBlocks index of 300M+ scholarly works.
Top-cited papers from Danish Ministry of Higher Education and Science
This study investigates patterns in the language and type of social sciences and humanities (SSH) publications in non-English speaking European countries to demonstrate that such patterns are related not only to discipline but also to each country’s cultural and historic heritage. We investigate publication patterns that occur across SSH publications of the whole of the SSH and of economics and business, law, and philosophy and theology publications in the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Flanders (Belgium), Norway, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia. We use data from 74,022 peer-reviewed publications from 2014 registered in at least one of the eight countries’ national databases and for 272,376 peer-reviewed publications from the period of 2011–2014 registered in at least one of the seven countries’ national databases (for all countries except Slovakia). Our findings show that publication patterns differ both between fields (e.g. patterns in law differ from those in economics and business in the same way in Flanders and Finland) and within fields (e.g. patterns in law in the Czech Republic differ from patterns in law in Finland). We observe that the publication patterns are stable and quite similar in West European and Nordic countries, whereas in Central and Eastern European countries the publication patterns demonstrate considerable changes. Nevertheless, in all countries, the share of articles and the share of publications in English is on the rise. We conclude with recommendations for science policy and highlight that internationalization policies in non-English speaking countries should consider various starting points and cultural heritages in different countries.
This paper gives an overview of development of the EU-bioeconomy, 2014-2020. The Vision of the new Circular Bio-based Economy, CBE is presented: Unlocking the full potential of all types of sustainably sourced biomass, crop residues, industrial side-streams, and wastes by transforming it into value-added products. The resulting product portfolio consists of a wide spectrum of value-added products, addressing societal and consumer needs. Food and feed, bio-based chemicals, materials, health-promoting products; and bio-based fuels. The pillars of CBE are described, including biotechnology, microbial production, enzyme technology, green chemistry, integrated physical/chemical processing, policies, conducive framework conditions and public private partnerships. Drivers of CBE are analyzed: Biomass supply, biorefineries, value chain clusters, rural development, farmers, foresters and mariners; urgent need for climate change mitigation and adaptation, and stopping biodiversity loss. Improved framework conditions can be drivers but also obstacles if not updated to the era of circularity. Key figures, across the entire BBI-JU project portfolio (2014-2020) are provided, including expansion into biomass feedstocks, terrestrial and aquatic, and an impressive broadening of bio-based product portfolio, including higher-value, health-promoting products for man, animal, plants and soil. Parallel to this, diversification of industrial segments and types of funding instruments developed, reflecting industrial needs and academic research involvement. Impact assessment is highlighted. A number of specific recommendations are given; e.g., including international win/win CBE-collaborations, as e.g., expanding African EU collaboration into CBE. In contrast to fossil resources biological resources are found worldwide. In its outset, circular bio-based economy, can be implemented all over, in a just manner, not the least stimulating rural development.
We investigate the state of multilingualism across the social sciences and humanities (SSH) using a comprehensive data set of research outputs from seven European countries (Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Flanders [Belgium], Norway, Poland, and Slovenia). Although English tends to be the dominant language of science, SSH researchers often produce culturally and societally relevant work in their local languages. We collected and analyzed a set of 164,218 peer-reviewed journal articles (produced by 51,063 researchers from 2013 to 2015) and found that multilingualism is prevalent despite geographical location and field. Among the researchers who published at least three journal articles during this time period, over one-third from the various countries had written their work in at least two languages. The highest share of researchers who published in only one language were from Flanders (80.9%), whereas the lowest shares were from Slovenia (57.2%) and Poland (59.3%). Our findings show that multilingual publishing is an ongoing practice in many SSH research fields regardless of geographical location, political situation, and/or historical heritage. Here we argue that research is international, but multilingual publishing keeps locally relevant research alive with the added potential for creating impact.
In this paper, we investigate the use of CAS in Danish upper secondary school from a norms perspective. The construct of sociomathematical norms is used to understand the potential influence that CAS may have on the rules (and values) in the mathematics classroom. We focus on a situation of teacher change, where the different teachers enact different norm sets related to students’ CAS use in their mathematical work. We zoom in on one student’s perception of this, and find that the teachers’ CAS policies have a direct influence on how students’ navigate in their mathematical work. In particular, the alignment between teachers’ endorsed and enacted norms as well as the extent to which the norms impose judgement on the students’ behalf in relation to CAS use play a major role in this respect.
An important question in industrialized countries is whether offshoring activities reduce the probability of performing own research and development (R&D) or whether the R&D intensity falls in firms that already have R&D activities. This question is addressed using a unique data set that combines survey and register data. No evidence is found for a lower probability of own R&D after offshoring takes place compared to before. Moreover, offshoring does not lead to lower R&D intensity in general. However, firms that offshore R&D activity have larger R&D intensity after offshoring has taken place, which suggests that R&D performed at home is complementary to foreign R&D.