Solutions for the commercialization challenges of Horizon Europe and earth observation consortia: co-creation, innovation, decision-making, tech-transfer, and sustainability actions
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract European Community (EC) Horizon-funded projects and Earth Observation-based Consortia aim to create sustainable value for Space, Land, and Oceans. They typically focus on addressing Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Many of these projects (e.g. Commercialization and Innovation Actions) have an ambitious challenge to ensure that partners share core competencies to simultaneously achieve technological and commercial success and sustainability after the end of the EC funds. To achieve this ambitious challenge, Horizon projects must have a proper governance model and a systematized process that can manage the existing paradoxical tensions involving numerous European partners and their respective agendas and stakeholders. This article presents the VCW-Value Creation Wheel (Lages in J Bus Res 69: 4849–4855, 2016), as a framework that has its roots back in 1995 and has been used since 2015 in the context of numerous Space Business, Earth Observation, and European Community (EC) projects, to address complex problems and paradoxical tensions. In this article, we discuss six of these paradoxical tensions that large Horizon Consortia face in commercialization, namely when managing innovation ecosystems, co-creating, taking digitalization, decision-making, tech-transfer, and sustainability actions. We discuss and evaluate how alliance partners could find the optimal balance between (1) cooperation, competition, and coopetition perspectives; (2) financial, environmental, and social value creation; (3) tech-push and market-pull orientations; (4) global and local market solutions; (5) functionality driven and human-centered design (UX/UI); (6) centralized and decentralized online store approaches. We discuss these challenges within the case of the EC H2020 NextLand project answering the call for greening the economy in line with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). We analyze NextLand Online Store, and its Business and Innovation Ecosystem while considering the input of its different stakeholders, such as NextLand’s commercial team, service providers, users, advisors, EC referees, and internal and external stakeholders. Preliminary insights from a twin project in the field of Blue Economy (EC H2020 NextOcean), are also used to support our arguments. Partners, referees, and EC officers should address the tensions mentioned in this article during the referee and approval processes in the pre-grant and post-grant agreement stages. Moreover, we propose using the Value Creation Wheel (VCW) method and the VCW meta-framework as a systematized process that allows us to co-create and manage the innovation ecosystem while engaging all the stakeholders and presenting solutions to address these tensions. The article concludes with theoretical implications and limitations, managerial and public policy implications, and lessons for Horizon Europe, earth observation, remote sensing, and space business projects.
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.
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 | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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 | 0,000 |
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 découle