Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction The development of a sound relationship between the EU and the European Space Agency (ESA) has been the subject of much academic and political debate in recent years. This chapter reviews the debate and considers its origins and potential development trajectories. Although the process of European economic integration has enjoyed spectacular success since the 1950s (Camps 1964; Moravcsik 1998; Hörber 2006a), cooperation in the fields of space navigation, satellites, research and exploration has lagged well behind and was late to develop, although space fitted perfectly with Jean Monnet’s definition of an ideal area for the advancement of European integration – that is, it was too big for individual nation states (Gaubert and Lebeau 2009: 41, 44), but was also a new field of politics, comparable with nuclear research under Euratom, which he strongly favoured (Hahn 1958: 1002; Gerbet 1999: 173). After many false starts, ten European states2 eventually agreed to the creation of the ESA in 1975, with the aim of cooperating in the field of space. The membership has since expanded to 19 European states, plus Canada (see Chapters 1 and 11).3 There are, of course, significant differences between the EU and the ESA because the latter embraces non-EU states, such as Switzerland, and even extra-European states, such as Canada. There are also fundamental differences in the rules and procedures that make up the institutional soul of each organisation. The ESA is an archetypal old-style intergovernmental organisation of the conventional kind, with features such as a national veto in many areas, exclusively national funding and the controversial, but inevitable, concept of juste retour, whereby most national funding contributions effectively flow back to space companies in the same country (Gaubert and Lebeau 2009: 43). There is no element of supranational procedure, such as direct democratic legitimisation through an elected parliament, the EU’s ‘own resources’ or qualified majority voting in the governing Council, although there is a simple or two-thirds majority voting in the ESA Council in some instances (see, for example, the ESA Convention, Article XI.5, available from the ESA website). The ESA was founded as an independent institution entirely separate from the European Communities, so the fact that there is now close cooperation with the EU is clearly significant and worthyof investigation. The German Minister for Research and Education, Edelgard Bulmahn, described developments in institutional collaboration and coordination (until 2005) as ‘. . . dovetailing the ESA into EU policy. . .’ (FRG Ministry for Research and Education 2001) This seems to foreshadow, for the twenty-first century, the development of a common European space policy.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».