Coastal countries have traditionally relied on the existing marine resources (e.g., fishing, food, transport, recreation, and tourism) as well as tried to support new economic endeavors (ocean energy, desalination for water supply, and seabed mining). Modern societies and lifestyle resulted in an increased demand for dietary diversity, better health and well-being, new biomedicines, natural cosmeceuticals, environmental conservation, and sustainable energy sources. These societal needs stimulated the interest of researchers on the diverse and underexplored marine environments as promising and sustainable sources of biomolecules and biomass, and they are addressed by the emerging field of marine (blue) biotechnology. Blue biotechnology provides opportunities for a wide range of initiatives of commercial interest for the pharmaceutical, biomedical, cosmetic, nutraceutical, food, feed, agricultural, and related industries. This article synthesizes the essence, opportunities, responsibilities, and challenges encountered in marine biotechnology and outlines the attainment and valorization of directly derived or bio-inspired products from marine organisms. First, the concept of bioeconomy is introduced. Then, the diversity of marine bioresources including an overview of the most prominent marine organisms and their potential for biotechnological uses are described. This is followed by introducing methodologies for exploration of these resources and the main use case scenarios in energy, food and feed, agronomy, bioremediation and climate change, cosmeceuticals, bio-inspired materials, healthcare, and well-being sectors. The key aspects in the fields of legislation and funding are provided, with the emphasis on the importance of communication and stakeholder engagement at all levels of biotechnology development. Finally, vital overarching concepts, such as the quadruple helix and Responsible Research and Innovation principle are highlighted as important to follow within the marine biotechnology field. The authors of this review are collaborating under the European Commission-funded Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action Ocean4Biotech – European transdisciplinary networking platform for marine biotechnology and focus the study on the European state of affairs.
Coastal countries have traditionally relied on the existing marine resources (e.g., fishing, food, transport, recreation, and tourism) as well as tried to support new economic endeavors (ocean energy, desalination for water supply, and seabed mining). Modern societies and lifestyle resulted in an increased demand for dietary diversity, better health and well-being, new biomedicines, natural cosmeceuticals, environmental conservation, and sustainable energy sources. These societal needs stimulated the interest of researchers on the diverse and underexplored marine environments as promising and sustainable sources of biomolecules and biomass, and they are addressed by the emerging field of marine (blue) biotechnology. Blue biotechnology provides opportunities for a wide range of initiatives of commercial interest for the pharmaceutical, biomedical, cosmetic, nutraceutical, food, feed, agricultural, and related industries. This article synthesizes the essence, opportunities, responsibilities, and challenges encountered in marine biotechnology and outlines the attainment and valorization of directly derived or bio-inspired products from marine organisms. First, the concept of bioeconomy is introduced. Then, the diversity of marine bioresources including an overview of the most prominent marine organisms and their potential for biotechnological uses are described. This is followed by introducing methodologies for exploration of these resources and the main use case scenarios in energy, food and feed, agronomy, bioremediation and climate change, cosmeceuticals, bio-inspired materials, healthcare, and well-being sectors. The key aspects in the fields of legislation and funding are provided, with the emphasis on the importance of communication and stakeholder engagement at all levels of biotechnology development. Finally, vital overarching concepts, such as the quadruple helix and Responsible Research and Innovation principle are highlighted as important to follow within the marine biotechnology field. The authors of this review are collaborating under the European Commission-funded Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action Ocean4Biotech – European transdisciplinary networking platform for marine biotechnology and focus the study on the European state of affairs.
Coastal countries have traditionally relied on the existing marine resources (e.g., fishing, food, transport, recreation, and tourism) as well as tried to support new economic endeavors (ocean energy, desalination for water supply, and seabed mining). Modern societies and lifestyle resulted in an increased demand for dietary diversity, better health and well-being, new biomedicines, natural cosmeceuticals, environmental conservation, and sustainable energy sources. These societal needs stimulated the interest of researchers on the diverse and underexplored marine environments as promising and sustainable sources of biomolecules and biomass, and they are addressed by the emerging field of marine (blue) biotechnology. Blue biotechnology provides opportunities for a wide range of initiatives of commercial interest for the pharmaceutical, biomedical, cosmetic, nutraceutical, food, feed, agricultural, and related industries. This article synthesizes the essence, opportunities, responsibilities, and challenges encountered in marine biotechnology and outlines the attainment and valorization of directly derived or bio-inspired products from marine organisms. First, the concept of bioeconomy is introduced. Then, the diversity of marine bioresources including an overview of the most prominent marine organisms and their potential for biotechnological uses are described. This is followed by introducing methodologies for exploration of these resources and the main use case scenarios in energy, food and feed, agronomy, bioremediation and climate change, cosmeceuticals, bio-inspired materials, healthcare, and well-being sectors. The key aspects in the fields of legislation and funding are provided, with the emphasis on the importance of communication and stakeholder engagement at all levels of biotechnology development. Finally, vital overarching concepts, such as the quadruple helix and Responsible Research and Innovation principle are highlighted as important to follow within the marine biotechnology field. The authors of this review are collaborating under the European Commission-funded Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action Ocean4Biotech – European transdisciplinary networking platform for marine biotechnology and focus the study on the European state of affairs.
Coastal countries have traditionally relied on the existing marine resources (e.g., fishing, food, transport, recreation, and tourism) as well as tried to support new economic endeavors (ocean energy, desalination for water supply, and seabed mining). Modern societies and lifestyle resulted in an increased demand for dietary diversity, better health and well-being, new biomedicines, natural cosmeceuticals, environmental conservation, and sustainable energy sources. These societal needs stimulated the interest of researchers on the diverse and underexplored marine environments as promising and sustainable sources of biomolecules and biomass, and they are addressed by the emerging field of marine (blue) biotechnology. Blue biotechnology provides opportunities for a wide range of initiatives of commercial interest for the pharmaceutical, biomedical, cosmetic, nutraceutical, food, feed, agricultural, and related industries. This article synthesizes the essence, opportunities, responsibilities, and challenges encountered in marine biotechnology and outlines the attainment and valorization of directly derived or bio-inspired products from marine organisms. First, the concept of bioeconomy is introduced. Then, the diversity of marine bioresources including an overview of the most prominent marine organisms and their potential for biotechnological uses are described. This is followed by introducing methodologies for exploration of these resources and the main use case scenarios in energy, food and feed, agronomy, bioremediation and climate change, cosmeceuticals, bio-inspired materials, healthcare, and well-being sectors. The key aspects in the fields of legislation and funding are provided, with the emphasis on the importance of communication and stakeholder engagement at all levels of biotechnology development. Finally, vital overarching concepts, such as the quadruple helix and Responsible Research and Innovation principle are highlighted as important to follow within the marine biotechnology field. The authors of this review are collaborating under the European Commission-funded Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action Ocean4Biotech – European transdisciplinary networking platform for marine biotechnology and focus the study on the European state of affairs.
Coastal countries have traditionally relied on the existing marine resources (e.g., fishing, food, transport, recreation, and tourism) as well as tried to support new economic endeavors (ocean energy, desalination for water supply, and seabed mining). Modern societies and lifestyle resulted in an increased demand for dietary diversity, better health and well-being, new biomedicines, natural cosmeceuticals, environmental conservation, and sustainable energy sources. These societal needs stimulated the interest of researchers on the diverse and underexplored marine environments as promising and sustainable sources of biomolecules and biomass, and they are addressed by the emerging field of marine (blue) biotechnology. Blue biotechnology provides opportunities for a wide range of initiatives of commercial interest for the pharmaceutical, biomedical, cosmetic, nutraceutical, food, feed, agricultural, and related industries. This article synthesizes the essence, opportunities, responsibilities, and challenges encountered in marine biotechnology and outlines the attainment and valorization of directly derived or bio-inspired products from marine organisms. First, the concept of bioeconomy is introduced. Then, the diversity of marine bioresources including an overview of the most prominent marine organisms and their potential for biotechnological uses are described. This is followed by introducing methodologies for exploration of these resources and the main use case scenarios in energy, food and feed, agronomy, bioremediation and climate change, cosmeceuticals, bio-inspired materials, healthcare, and well-being sectors. The key aspects in the fields of legislation and funding are provided, with the emphasis on the importance of communication and stakeholder engagement at all levels of biotechnology development. Finally, vital overarching concepts, such as the quadruple helix and Responsible Research and Innovation principle are highlighted as important to follow within the marine biotechnology field. The authors of this review are collaborating under the European Commission-funded Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action Ocean4Biotech – European transdisciplinary networking platform for marine biotechnology and focus the study on the European state of affairs.
Coastal countries have traditionally relied on the existing marine resources (e.g., fishing, food, transport, recreation, and tourism) as well as tried to support new economic endeavors (ocean energy, desalination for water supply, and seabed mining). Modern societies and lifestyle resulted in an increased demand for dietary diversity, better health and well-being, new biomedicines, natural cosmeceuticals, environmental conservation, and sustainable energy sources. These societal needs stimulated the interest of researchers on the diverse and underexplored marine environments as promising and sustainable sources of biomolecules and biomass, and they are addressed by the emerging field of marine (blue) biotechnology. Blue biotechnology provides opportunities for a wide range of initiatives of commercial interest for the pharmaceutical, biomedical, cosmetic, nutraceutical, food, feed, agricultural, and related industries. This article synthesizes the essence, opportunities, responsibilities, and challenges encountered in marine biotechnology and outlines the attainment and valorization of directly derived or bio-inspired products from marine organisms. First, the concept of bioeconomy is introduced. Then, the diversity of marine bioresources including an overview of the most prominent marine organisms and their potential for biotechnological uses are described. This is followed by introducing methodologies for exploration of these resources and the main use case scenarios in energy, food and feed, agronomy, bioremediation and climate change, cosmeceuticals, bio-inspired materials, healthcare, and well-being sectors. The key aspects in the fields of legislation and funding are provided, with the emphasis on the importance of communication and stakeholder engagement at all levels of biotechnology development. Finally, vital overarching concepts, such as the quadruple helix and Responsible Research and Innovation principle are highlighted as important to follow within the marine biotechnology field. The authors of this review are collaborating under the European Commission-funded Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action Ocean4Biotech – European transdisciplinary networking platform for marine biotechnology and focus the study on the European state of affairs.
Coastal countries have traditionally relied on the existing marine resources (e.g., fishing, food, transport, recreation, and tourism) as well as tried to support new economic endeavors (ocean energy, desalination for water supply, and seabed mining). Modern societies and lifestyle resulted in an increased demand for dietary diversity, better health and well-being, new biomedicines, natural cosmeceuticals, environmental conservation, and sustainable energy sources. These societal needs stimulated the interest of researchers on the diverse and underexplored marine environments as promising and sustainable sources of biomolecules and biomass, and they are addressed by the emerging field of marine (blue) biotechnology. Blue biotechnology provides opportunities for a wide range of initiatives of commercial interest for the pharmaceutical, biomedical, cosmetic, nutraceutical, food, feed, agricultural, and related industries. This article synthesizes the essence, opportunities, responsibilities, and challenges encountered in marine biotechnology and outlines the attainment and valorization of directly derived or bio-inspired products from marine organisms. First, the concept of bioeconomy is introduced. Then, the diversity of marine bioresources including an overview of the most prominent marine organisms and their potential for biotechnological uses are described. This is followed by introducing methodologies for exploration of these resources and the main use case scenarios in energy, food and feed, agronomy, bioremediation and climate change, cosmeceuticals, bio-inspired materials, healthcare, and well-being sectors. The key aspects in the fields of legislation and funding are provided, with the emphasis on the importance of communication and stakeholder engagement at all levels of biotechnology development. Finally, vital overarching concepts, such as the quadruple helix and Responsible Research and Innovation principle are highlighted as important to follow within the marine biotechnology field. The authors of this review are collaborating under the European Commission-funded Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action Ocean4Biotech – European transdisciplinary networking platform for marine biotechnology and focus the study on the European state of affairs.
Coastal countries have traditionally relied on the existing marine resources (e.g., fishing, food, transport, recreation, and tourism) as well as tried to support new economic endeavors (ocean energy, desalination for water supply, and seabed mining). Modern societies and lifestyle resulted in an increased demand for dietary diversity, better health and well-being, new biomedicines, natural cosmeceuticals, environmental conservation, and sustainable energy sources. These societal needs stimulated the interest of researchers on the diverse and underexplored marine environments as promising and sustainable sources of biomolecules and biomass, and they are addressed by the emerging field of marine (blue) biotechnology. Blue biotechnology provides opportunities for a wide range of initiatives of commercial interest for the pharmaceutical, biomedical, cosmetic, nutraceutical, food, feed, agricultural, and related industries. This article synthesizes the essence, opportunities, responsibilities, and challenges encountered in marine biotechnology and outlines the attainment and valorization of directly derived or bio-inspired products from marine organisms. First, the concept of bioeconomy is introduced. Then, the diversity of marine bioresources including an overview of the most prominent marine organisms and their potential for biotechnological uses are described. This is followed by introducing methodologies for exploration of these resources and the main use case scenarios in energy, food and feed, agronomy, bioremediation and climate change, cosmeceuticals, bio-inspired materials, healthcare, and well-being sectors. The key aspects in the fields of legislation and funding are provided, with the emphasis on the importance of communication and stakeholder engagement at all levels of biotechnology development. Finally, vital overarching concepts, such as the quadruple helix and Responsible Research and Innovation principle are highlighted as important to follow within the marine biotechnology field. The authors of this review are collaborating under the European Commission-funded Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action Ocean4Biotech – European transdisciplinary networking platform for marine biotechnology and focus the study on the European state of affairs. ; This publication is based upon work from COST Action CA18238 (Ocean4Biotech), supported by COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology) program.AR, KK, and TR: the publication is part of a project that has received funding from the European Union Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under grant agreement no. 774499 – GoJelly project. AR and KK: this research was funded by the Slovenian Research Agency (research core funding P1-0245 and P1-0237). AR: this publication has been produced with financial assistance of the Interreg MED Programme, co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund (Project No. 7032, internal ref. 8MED20_4.1_SP_001) – B-Blue project. AB: acknowledges the support from the Research Council of Norway through the grant 267474 from the HAVBRUK2 program. MLC: acknowledges the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (UIDB/04326/2020), the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (MAR2020 OSTEOMAR/16-02-01-FMP-0057 and ALGASOLE/16.02.01-FMP-0058), the European Regional Development Fund (Atlantic Area BLUEHUMAN/EAPA/151/2016 and INTERREG V-A Spain-Portugal ALGARED+), and the European Commision (H2020-MSCA-ITN BIOMEDAQU/766347). MFC: wishes to acknowledge the funding from CEEC program supported by FCT/MCTES (CEECIND/02968/2017); ACTINODEEPSEA project (POCI-01-0145-FEDER-031045) co-financed by COMPETE 2020, Portugal 2020, ERDF and FCT; Strategic Funding UIDB/04423/2020 and UIDP/04423/2020 through national funds provided by FCT and ERDF. MC: financial support from the Programme of the Institute of Oceanology, PAS (grant no. II.3) and National Science Centre in Poland (project number NCN 2016/21/B/NZ9/02304). MCu: acknowledges the funding from the Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación of Spain (SAF2009-0839 and RTA 2015-00010-C03-02) and INTERREG-MAC2/1.1b/279 (AHIDAGRO). AD-M: acknowledge financial support from INTERREG-MAC/1.1b/042 (BIOTRANSFER2) and Agustín de Betancourt Programme (Cabildo de Tenerife and Universidad de La Laguna). AD: work has been supported by the ERDF Activity 1.1.1.2 "Post-doctoral Research Aid" of the Specific Aid Objective 1.1.1, Operational Programme "Growth and Employment" (No. 1.1.1.2/VIAA/1/16/048). RJF: funding for this research was provided under the Marine Research Programme 2014–2020, through the Marine Institute of Ireland under grant PBA/MB/16/01 "A National Marine Biodiscovery Laboratory of Ireland (NMBLI)" and through the Food Institutional Research Measure, administered by the Department of Agriculture, Food, and the Marine, Ireland under grant issue 17/F/260 (MaraBioActive). SG: this work was supported by the Applied Molecular Biosciences Unit-UCIBIO which is financed by national funds from FCT/MCTES (UID/Multi/04378/2019). SG thanks financial support provided by FCT/MCTES through grant IF/00700/2014 and OceanTresaures project PTDC/QUIQUI/119116/2010. NID: wishes to acknowledge the funding from the Croatian Science Foundation Project CELLSTRESS (IP-2018-01-5840). MMa and TD: we wish to acknowledge funding from the General Secretariat for Research and Technology (GSRT) and the Hellenic Foundation for Research and Innovation (HFRI) under grant no. 239 (SPINAQUA project). AM-G: acknowledges the financial contribution from the project BYTHOS funded by the European Union's Interreg V-A Italia-Malta Programme under project code C1-1.1-9. HM-M: financial support from National Science Centre in Poland 2016/21/B/NZ9/02304 and 2017/25/B/NZ9/00202. MMe: this work has been supported by the French Government, through the UCAJEDI Investments in the Future project managed by the National Research Agency (ANR) with the reference number ANR-15-IDEX-01. MMe: thanks the Canceropôle Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur, and the Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur Region for the financial support provided to the MetaboCell project. DO: supported by the Doctorate Study program in Ecology and Environmental Sciences, Marine Research Institute, Klaipėda University, Lithuania. CR: we gratefully acknowledge the Research Council of Norway, the Møre and Romsdal County Council and Møreforsking AS for their financial contributions through the PROMAC (244244; www.promac.no), the Norwegian Seaweed Biorefinery Platform (294946; http://seaweedplatform.no/), and the Blå-Grønn (55031) projects. ER: this work benefited from financial support from the PACA Canceropôle, the National Cancer Institute, the PACA Regional Council and the French Government, managed by the National Research Agency as part of the Université Côte d'AzurJEDI Investissement d'Avenir project (ANR-15-IDEX-01). JS: work was supported by the Slovenian Research Agency (P4-0127 and J4-1771). IS: financial support from Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic (project CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/17_048/0007323). XT: the tool "RRI Roadmap" was developed as part of the European Horizon 2020 project MARINA "Marine Knowledge Sharing Platform for Federating Responsible Research and Innovation Communities" under the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under Grant Agreement No. 710566 (2016–2019). OT: his contribution is carried out with the support of the Marine Institute and is funded under the Marine Research Programme by the Irish Government (Grant-Aid Agreement No. PBA/MB/16/01). ; Peer reviewed
Coastal countries have traditionally relied on the existing marine resources (e.g., fishing, food, transport, recreation, and tourism) as well as tried to support new economic endeavors (ocean energy, desalination for water supply, and seabed mining). Modern societies and lifestyle resulted in an increased demand for dietary diversity, better health and well-being, new biomedicines, natural cosmeceuticals, environmental conservation, and sustainable energy sources. These societal needs stimulated the interest of researchers on the diverse and underexplored marine environments as promising and sustainable sources of biomolecules and biomass, and they are addressed by the emerging field of marine (blue) biotechnology. Blue biotechnology provides opportunities for a wide range of initiatives of commercial interest for the pharmaceutical, biomedical, cosmetic, nutraceutical, food, feed, agricultural, and related industries. This article synthesizes the essence, opportunities, responsibilities, and challenges encountered in marine biotechnology and outlines the attainment and valorization of directly derived or bio-inspired products from marine organisms. First, the concept of bioeconomy is introduced. Then, the diversity of marine bioresources including an overview of the most prominent marine organisms and their potential for biotechnological uses are described. This is followed by introducing methodologies for exploration of these resources and the main use case scenarios in energy, food and feed, agronomy, bioremediation and climate change, cosmeceuticals, bio-inspired materials, healthcare, and well-being sectors. The key aspects in the fields of legislation and funding are provided, with the emphasis on the importance of communication and stakeholder engagement at all levels of biotechnology development. Finally, vital overarching concepts, such as the quadruple helix and Responsible Research and Innovation principle are highlighted as important to follow within the marine biotechnology field. The authors of this review are collaborating under the European Commission-funded Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action Ocean4Biotech – European transdisciplinary networking platform for marine biotechnology and focus the study on the European state of affairs.
In: Heard , J-M , Bellettato , C , van Lingen , C , Scarpa , M , Debray , F-G , Nassogne , M-C C , van Coster , R , de Meirleir , L , Eyskens , F , Morava , E , Baric , I , Kozich , V , Lund , A M , Germain , D , Belmatoug , N , Guffon , N , Labrune , P , Gouya , L , de Lonlay , P , Schiff , M , Dobbelaere , D , Chabrol , B , Das , A M , Spiekerkoetter , U , Rutsch , F , Ploeckinger , U , Mohnike , K , Hahn , A , Kölker , S , Ullrich , K , Balogh , I , Bembi , B , Donati , M A , Gasperini , S , Parenti , G , Salviati , A , Vici , C-D , di Rocco , M , Cefalo , G , Burlina , A , Ceccarini , G , Federico , A , van der Ploeg , A , Rubio-Gozalbo , M-E , van Spronsen , F , Visser , G , Bosch , A , Tangeraas , T , Sanderberg , S , Kieć-Wilk , B , Gaspar , A-M S M , Martins , E , Silva , E-M F R , de Abreu Freire Diogo Matos , L-M , Azevedo , O , Tansek , M-Z , Couce-Pico , M-L , Cazorla , A G , Azuara , L A-E , del Toro-Riera , M , Lajic , S , Darin , N , Deegan , P , Vijaym , S , Chronopoulou , E , Jones , S , Chakrapani , A & Hiwot , T 2019 , ' Research activity and capability in the European reference network MetabERN ' , Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases , vol. 14 , no. 1 , 119 . https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-019-1091-8
Background: MetabERN is one of the 24 European Reference Networks created according to the European Union directive 2011/24/EU on patient's rights in cross border healthcare. MetabERN associates 69 centres in 18 countries, which provide care for patients with Hereditary Metabolic Diseases, and have the mission to reinforce research and provide training for health professionals in this field. MetabERN performed a survey in December 2017 with the aim to produce an overview documenting research activities and potentials within the network. As the centres are multidisciplinary, separated questionnaires were sent to the clinical, university and laboratory teams. Answers were received from 52 out of the 69 centres of the network, covering 16 countries. A descriptive analysis of the information collected is presented. Results: The answers indicate a marked interest of the respondents for research, who expressed high motivation and commitment, and estimated that the conditions to do research in their institution were mostly satisfactory. They are active in research, which according to several indicators, is competitive and satisfies standards of excellence, as well as the education programs offered in the respondent's universities. Research in the centres is primarily performed in genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology, and focuses on issues related to diagnosis. Few respondents declared having activity in human and social sciences, including research on patient's quality of life, patient's awareness, or methods for social support. Infrastructures offering services for medical research were rarely known and used by respondents, including national and international biobanking platforms. In contrast, respondents often participate to patient registries, even beyond their specific field of interest. Conclusions: Taken as a whole, these results provide an encouraging picture of the research capacities and activities in the MetabERN network, which, with respect to the number and representativeness of the investigated centres, gives a comprehensive picture of research on Hereditary Metabolic Diseases in Europe, as well as the priorities for future actions. Marginal activity in human and social sciences points out the limited multidisciplinary constitution of the responding teams with possible consequences on their current capability to participate to patient's empowerment programs and efficiently collaborate with patient's advocacy groups.
In: Aman , J , Duijvelaar , E , Botros , L , Kianzad , A , Schippers , J R , Smeele , P J , Azhang , S , Bartelink , I H , Bayoumy , A A , Bet , P M , Boersma , W , Bonta , P I , Boomars , K A T , Bos , L D J , van Bragt , J J M H , Braunstahl , G-J , Celant , L R , Eger , K A B , Geelhoed , J J M , van Glabbeek , Y L E , Grotjohan , H P , Hagens , L A , Happe , C M , Hazes , B D , Heunks , L M A , van den Heuvel , M , Hoefsloot , W , Hoek , R J A , Hoekstra , R , Hofstee , H M A , Juffermans , N P , Kemper , E M , Kos , R , Kunst , P W A , Lammers , A , van der Lee , I , van der Lee , E L , Maitland-van der Zee , A-H , Mau Asam , P F M , Mieras , A , Muller , M , Neefjes , L , Nossent , E J , Oswald , L M A , Overbeek , M J , Pamplona , C , Paternotte , N , Pronk , N , de Raaf , M A , van Raaij , B F M , Reijrink , M , Schultz , M J , Serpa Neto , A , Slob , E M , Smeenk , F W J M , Smit , M R , Smits , A J , Stalenhoef , J E , Tuinman , P R , Vanhove , A L E M , Wessels , J N , van Wezenbeek , J C C , Vonk Noordegraaf , A , de Man , F S & Bogaard , H J 2021 , ' Imatinib in patients with severe COVID-19 : a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial ' , Lancet respiratory medicine , vol. 9 , no. 9 , pp. 957-968 . https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(21)00237-X , https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(21)00237-X
BACKGROUND: The major complication of COVID-19 is hypoxaemic respiratory failure from capillary leak and alveolar oedema. Experimental and early clinical data suggest that the tyrosine-kinase inhibitor imatinib reverses pulmonary capillary leak. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial was done at 13 academic and non-academic teaching hospitals in the Netherlands. Hospitalised patients (aged ≥18 years) with COVID-19, as confirmed by an RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2, requiring supplemental oxygen to maintain a peripheral oxygen saturation of greater than 94% were eligible. Patients were excluded if they had severe pre-existing pulmonary disease, had pre-existing heart failure, had undergone active treatment of a haematological or non-haematological malignancy in the previous 12 months, had cytopenia, or were receiving concomitant treatment with medication known to strongly interact with imatinib. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either oral imatinib, given as a loading dose of 800 mg on day 0 followed by 400 mg daily on days 1-9, or placebo. Randomisation was done with a computer-based clinical data management platform with variable block sizes (containing two, four, or six patients), stratified by study site. The primary outcome was time to discontinuation of mechanical ventilation and supplemental oxygen for more than 48 consecutive hours, while being alive during a 28-day period. Secondary outcomes included safety, mortality at 28 days, and the need for invasive mechanical ventilation. All efficacy and safety analyses were done in all randomised patients who had received at least one dose of study medication (modified intention-to-treat population). This study is registered with the EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT 2020-001236-10). FINDINGS: Between March 31, 2020, and Jan 4, 2021, 805 patients were screened, of whom 400 were eligible and randomly assigned to the imatinib group (n=204) or the placebo group (n=196). A total of 385 (96%) patients (median age 64 years [IQR 56-73]) received at least one dose of study medication and were included in the modified intention-to-treat population. Time to discontinuation of ventilation and supplemental oxygen for more than 48 h was not significantly different between the two groups (unadjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·95 [95% CI 0·76-1·20]). At day 28, 15 (8%) of 197 patients had died in the imatinib group compared with 27 (14%) of 188 patients in the placebo group (unadjusted HR 0·51 [0·27-0·95]). After adjusting for baseline imbalances between the two groups (sex, obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease) the HR for mortality was 0·52 (95% CI 0·26-1·05). The HR for mechanical ventilation in the imatinib group compared with the placebo group was 1·07 (0·63-1·80; p=0·81). The median duration of invasive mechanical ventilation was 7 days (IQR 3-13) in the imatinib group compared with 12 days (6-20) in the placebo group (p=0·0080). 91 (46%) of 197 patients in the imatinib group and 82 (44%) of 188 patients in the placebo group had at least one grade 3 or higher adverse event. The safety evaluation revealed no imatinib-associated adverse events. INTERPRETATION: The study failed to meet its primary outcome, as imatinib did not reduce the time to discontinuation of ventilation and supplemental oxygen for more than 48 consecutive hours in patients with COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen. The observed effects on survival (although attenuated after adjustment for baseline imbalances) and duration of mechanical ventilation suggest that imatinib might confer clinical benefit in hospitalised patients with COVID-19, but further studies are required to validate these findings. FUNDING: Amsterdam Medical Center Foundation, Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek/ZonMW, and the European Union Innovative Medicines Initiative 2.
Aerosol particles are a complex component of the atmospheric system which influence climate directly by interacting with solar radiation, and indirectly by contributing to cloud formation. The variety of their sources, as well as the multiple transformations they may undergo during their transport (including wet and dry deposition), result in significant spatial and temporal variability of their properties. Documenting this variability is essential to provide a proper representation of aerosols and cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) in climate models. Using measurements conducted in 2016 or 2017 at 62 ground-based stations around the world, this study provides the most up-to-date picture of the spatial distribution of particle number concentration (Ntot) and number size distribution (PNSD, from 39 sites). A sensitivity study was first performed to assess the impact of data availability on Ntot's annual and seasonal statistics, as well as on the analysis of its diel cycle. Thresholds of 50g% and 60g% were set at the seasonal and annual scale, respectively, for the study of the corresponding statistics, and a slightly higher coverage (75g%) was required to document the diel cycle. Although some observations are common to a majority of sites, the variety of environments characterizing these stations made it possible to highlight contrasting findings, which, among other factors, seem to be significantly related to the level of anthropogenic influence. The concentrations measured at polar sites are the lowest (g1/4g102gcm-3) and show a clear seasonality, which is also visible in the shape of the PNSD, while diel cycles are in general less evident, due notably to the absence of a regular day-night cycle in some seasons. In contrast, the concentrations characteristic of urban environments are the highest (g1/4g103-104gcm-3) and do not show pronounced seasonal variations, whereas diel cycles tend to be very regular over the year at these stations. The remaining sites, including mountain and non-urban continental and coastal stations, do not exhibit as obvious common behaviour as polar and urban sites and display, on average, intermediate Ntot (g1/4g102-103gcm-3). Particle concentrations measured at mountain sites, however, are generally lower compared to nearby lowland sites, and tend to exhibit somewhat more pronounced seasonal variations as a likely result of the strong impact of the atmospheric boundary layer (ABL) influence in connection with the topography of the sites. ABL dynamics also likely contribute to the diel cycle of Ntot observed at these stations. Based on available PNSD measurements, CCN-sized particles (considered here as either >50gnm or >100gnm) can represent from a few percent to almost all of Ntot, corresponding to seasonal medians on the order of g1/4g10 to 1000gcm-3, with seasonal patterns and a hierarchy of the site types broadly similar to those observed for Ntot. Overall, this work illustrates the importance of in situ measurements, in particular for the study of aerosol physical properties, and thus strongly supports the development of a broad global network of near surface observatories to increase and homogenize the spatial coverage of the measurements, and guarantee as well data availability and quality. The results of this study also provide a valuable, freely available and easy to use support for model comparison and validation, with the ultimate goal of contributing to improvement of the representation of aerosol-cloud interactions in models, and, therefore, of the evaluation of the impact of aerosol particles on climate. ; NOAA base funding supports the observatories BRW, BND, MLO, SMO, SPO and THD, where efforts of the dedicated observatory staff and of programmer Derek Hageman are appreciated. BRW observations are also supported in part by the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) user facility, a US Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science user facility managed by the Biological and Environmental Research programme. Measurements at Welgegund are supported by North-West University, the University of Helsinki and the Finnish Meteorological Institute. This publication also forms part of the output of the Biogeochemistry Research Infrastructure Platform (BIOGRIP) of the Department of Science and Innovation of South Africa. Pallas and SMEAR II are grateful for the support of the Academy of Finland Centre of Excellence programme (project no. 272041), the Academy of Finland project Greenhouse gas, aerosol and albedo variations in the changing Arctic (project no. 269095), and the Novel Assessment of Black Carbon in the Eurasian Arctic: From Historical Concentrations and Sources to Future Climate Impacts (NABCEA, project no. 296302). Aerosol measurements at Anmyeon-do were supported by the Korea Meteorological Administration Research and Development Program "Development of Monitoring and Analysis Techniques for Atmospheric Composition in Korea" under grant KMA2018-00522. Measurements at Gosan were supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (2017R1D1A1B06032548) and the Korea Meteorological Administration Research and Development Program under grant KMI2018-01111. The Lulin station is operated under the grants funded by the Taiwan Environmental Protection Administration. WLG is supported by the China Meteorological Administration, where efforts of the dedicated observatory staff are appreciated. Sites PDM, PUY, GIF, CHC and RUN are partially operated with the support of CNRS-INSU under the long-term observation programme and the French Ministry for Research under the ACTRIS-FR national research infrastructure. PDM and GIF received specific support from the French Ministry of the Environment. ATMO Occitanie is mentioned for sampling operations at PDM. Measurements at SIRTA are hosted by CNRS and by the alternative energies and atomic energy commission (CEA) with additional contributions from the French Ministry of the Environment through its funding to the reference laboratory for air quality monitoring (LCSQA). PUY is grateful for support from ATMO Auvergne Rhône Alpes for sampling operations and the support from the personnel of the Observatoire de Physique du Globe de Clermont-Ferrand (OPGC). The specific support of the Institut de Recherche et Développement (IRD) in France and the Universidad Mayor de San Andrés in Bolivia support operations at CHC operations. The Steamboat Ski Resort provided logistical support and in-kind donations for SPL. The Desert Research Institute is a permittee of the Medicine Bow–Routt National Forests and an equal opportunity service provider and employer. SPL appreciates the extensive assistance of the NOAA/ESRL Federated Aerosol Network, of Ian McCubbin, site manager of SPL, and of Ty Atkins, Joe Messina, Dan Gilchrist and Maria Garcia, who provided technical assistance with the maintenance and data quality control for the aerosol instruments. SGP measurements/mentorship were supported by DOE-7F-30118 and staff on site. The Cape Grim Baseline Air Pollution Monitoring Station is grateful to the Australian Bureau of Meteorology for their long-term and continued support and all the staff from the Bureau of Meteorology and CSIRO, who have contributed to the generation of records reported here. The aerosol measurements at the Jungfraujoch were conducted with financial support from MeteoSwiss (GAW-CH aerosol monitoring programme) and from the European Union as well as the Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI) for the European Research Infrastructure for the observation of Aerosol, Clouds and Trace Gases (ACTRIS). The International Foundation High Altitude Research Station Jungfraujoch and Gornergrat (HFSJG) is mentioned for providing the research platform at the Jungfraujoch. The aerosol measurements at Kosetice received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement no. 654109 and from the project for support of the national research infrastructure ACTRIS – participation of the Czech Republic (ACTRIS-CZ – LM2015037) supported by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of CR within National Sustainability Program I (NPU I), grant agreement no. LO1415. The measurements were also supported by ERDF "ACTRIS-CZ RI" (no. CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_013/0001315). Measurements at the Madrid site were funded by the following projects: CRISOL (CGL2017–85344-R MINECO/AEI/FEDER, UE), TIGAS-CM (Madrid Regional Government Y2018/EMT5177), AIRTEC-CM (Madrid Regional Government P2018/EMT4329), REDMAAS2020 (RED2018-102594-T CIENCIA) and Red de Excelencia ACTRIS-ESPAÑA (CGL2017-90884-REDT). Measurements at Montsec and Montseny were supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness and FEDER funds under project HOUSE (CGL2016-78594-R) and by the Generalitat de Catalunya (AGAUR 2017 SGR41 and the DGQA). Aerosol measurements at El Arenosillo Observatory are supported by the National Institute for Aerospace Technology and by different R&D projects of the Ministerio Español de Economía, Industria y Competitividad (MINECO). Aerosol measurements at UGR are supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness through projects no. CGL2016-81092-R, CGL2017-90884-REDT, RTI2018-097864-B-I00 and PGC2018-098770-B-I00 and by the Andalusia Regional Government through project no. P18-RT-3820. FKL, HAC and DEM are grateful for funding by project PANhellenic infrastructure for Atmospheric Composition and climate change (MIS 5021516), which is implemented under action Reinforcement of the Research and Innovation Infrastructure, funded by operational programme Competitiveness, Entrepreneurship and Innovation (NSRF 2014-2020) and co-financed by Greece and the European Union (European Regional Development Fund). CPC measurements at Sonnblick are supported by the Climate and Air Quality Commission of the Austrian Academy of Sciences and the office of the provincial government Salzburg, Unit 5/02. At CMN, aerosol measurements were partially supported by the Italian Ministry of Research and Education. Measurements at Birkenes II are financed by the Norwegian Environment Agency. VAV is grateful for various Swedish FORMAS, Swedish Research Council (VR) grants and the Magnus Bergvall and Märta och Erik Holmberg foundations and the Swedish EPA for making the research possible at the VAV site. NMY wishes to thank the many technicians and scientists of the Neumayer overwintering crews, whose outstanding commitment enabled continuous, high-quality aerosol records over many years. Gunter Löschau is acknowledged for his contribution to the data acquisition at ANB, DTC and DRN. Financial support This research was supported by the European Commission's Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (ACTRIS2 (grant agreement no. 654109)), the University of Helsinki, the Finnish Meteorological Institute, the Department of Science and Innovation of South Africa, the Academy of Finland Centre of Excellence programme (project no. 272041), the Academy of Finland project Greenhouse gas, aerosol and albedo variations in the changing Arctic (project no. 269095), the Novel Assessment of Black Carbon in the Eurasian Arctic: From Historical Concentrations and Sources to Future Climate Impacts (NABCEA, project no. 296302), the Korea Meteorological Administration Research and Development Program "Development of Monitoring and Analysis Techniques for Atmospheric Composition in Korea" (grant no. KMA2018-00522), the National Research Foundation of Korea (grant no. 2017R1D1A1B06032548), the Korea Meteorological Administration Research and Development Program (grant no. KMI2018-01111), the Taiwan Environmental Protection Administration, the China Meteorological Administration, the National Scientific Foundation of China (41675129, 41875147), the National Key R&D Program of the Ministry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China (grant no. 2016YFC0203305 and 2018YFC0213204), the Chinese Academy of Meteorological Sciences (2020KJ001), the Innovation Team for Haze-fog Observation and Forecasts of MOST and CMA, CNRS-INSU, the French Ministry for Research under the ACTRIS-FR national research infrastructure, the French Ministry of the Environment, MeteoSwiss (GAW-CH aerosol monitoring programme), the Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI), the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of CR within National Sustainability Program I (NPU I, grant no. LO1415), ERDF "ACTRISCZ RI" (grant no. CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_013/0001315), CRISOL (CGL2017-85344-R MINECO/AEI/FEDER, UE), TIGAS-CM (Madrid Regional Government Y2018/EMT-5177), AIRTEC-CM (Madrid Regional Government P2018/EMT4329), REDMAAS2020 (RED2018-102594-T CIENCIA), Red de Excelencia ACTRIS-ESPAÑA (CGL2017-90884-REDT), the Spanish Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness, FEDER funds (project HOUSE, grant no. CGL2016-78594-R), the Generalitat de Catalunya (AGAUR 2017 SGR41 and the DGQA), the National Institute for Aerospace Technology, the Ministerio Español de Economía, Industria y Competitividad (MINECO), the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (projects no. CGL2016-81092-R, CGL2017-90884-REDT, RTI2018-097864-B-I00 and PGC2018-098770-B-I00), the Andalusia Regional Government (project no. P18-RT-3820), the PANhellenic infrastructure for Atmospheric Composition and climate change (MIS 5021516), Research and Innovation Infrastructure, Competitiveness, Entrepreneurship and Innovation (grant no. NSRF 2014-2020), the Italian Ministry of Research and Education, the Norwegian Environment Agency, Swedish FORMAS, the Swedish Research Council (VR), the Magnus Bergvall foundation, the Märta och Erik Holmberg foundation, and the Swedish EPA. ; Peer reviewed
IPIN 2019 Competition, sixth in a series of IPIN competitions, was held at the CNR Research Area of Pisa (IT), integrated into the program of the IPIN 2019 Conference. It included two on-site real-time Tracks and three off-site Tracks. The four Tracks presented in this paper were set in the same environment, made of two buildings close together for a total usable area of 1000 m2 outdoors and and 6000 m2 indoors over three floors, with a total path length exceeding 500 m. IPIN competitions, based on the EvAAL framework, have aimed at comparing the accuracy performance of personal positioning systems in fair and realistic conditions: past editions of the competition were carried in big conference settings, university campuses and a shopping mall. Positioning accuracy is computed while the person carrying the system under test walks at normal walking speed, uses lifts and goes up and down stairs or briefly stops at given points. Results presented here are a showcase of state-of-the-art systems tested side by side in real-world settings as part of the on-site real-time competition Tracks. Results for off-site Tracks allow a detailed and reproducible comparison of the most recent positioning and tracking algorithms in the same environment as the on-site Tracks. ; Fundación para la Ciencia y Tecnología; 10.13039/100007225-Ministry of Science and Technology; Institute for Information and communications Technology Promotion IITP grant funded by the Korea government MSIT; Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea NRF funded by the Ministry of Science; MSIT Ministry of Science and ICT Korea under the ITRC; Slovak Research and Development Agency; Strategic Priority Research Program; Korea government NFA; ICT R and D Program of MSIPIITP; 10.13039/501100004837-Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación; JSPS KAKENHI; ICT R and D Program of MSIPIITP. ; Peer reviewed
Einstellung zu politischen Aufgaben (Position und Wertigkeit) von Kandidaten zur Wahl des Europaparlaments. Wertorientierung. Wahlkampf, Kontakt zu den Parteien. Einstellung zur Europäischen Integration. Parteidisziplin. Politische Biographie und Karriereverlauf. Politische Erfahrung. Beziehung zu den Parteien. Nominierungsverfahren.
Themen: Wichtigste Probleme im Land; Problemebene und geeignetste Ebene zur Lösung dieser Probleme (Substitution: regional, national oder europäisch); Parteizugehörigkeit; Jahr des Parteieintritts; Ereignisse und deren Zeitpunkt vor der Wahl zum Europäischen Parlament: Nominierung durch die eigene Partei, Organisation der Wahlkampagne und Beginn der Vollzeit-Wahlkampagne; genutzte Wahlkampfmittel: persönliche, von der Partei bzw. vom Kandidaten selbst gestaltete Internetseite, Flyer, Wahlplakate, lokale Anzeigen, Werbespots in den Medien, Podcasts, Weblog, soziale Netzwerke, Online Chat mit Wählern); zeitlicher Gesamtzeitaufwand für die Wahlkampagne im letzten Monat vor den Wahlen; persönlicher sowie durch das Wahlkampfteam geleisteter Zeitaufwand pro Woche für ausgewählte Wahlkampfaktivitäten im letzten Monat vor den Wahlen (Wählerkontakte per E-Mail bzw. Brief; Aktualisierung des Internetauftritts, Telefonate mit Wählern, Hausbesuche, Informationsgespräche mit Menschen auf der Straße, Teilnahme an Spendenaktionen, öffentliche Debatten, Firmenbesuche, Besuch von Vereinen und Clubs, Radio- und TV-Interviews, Presseinterviews, Treffen mit Parteimitgliedern und der Parteiführung); Wichtigkeit ausgewählter Medien für die Wahlkampagne auf Landesebene (regionale Fernsehprogramme bzw. Zeitungen, Radio, Internet, Webseiten mit Hinweisen zur Wahl, zusätzlicher Medienanschluss); wichtigste politische Streitfragen in der eigenen Kampagne; Schwerpunkt des Wahlkampfes (persönliche Qualifikation des Kandidaten, lokale bzw. regionale Gesichtspunkte, Partei-Wahlprogramm, Ausrichtung des Kandidaten auf spezifische Themen); Wahlkampfbudget; prozentualer Anteil von Parteimitteln, Spenden und privaten Mitteln; Personenanzahl des Wahlkampfteams; Wahlkampf auf die eigene Person oder die Partei konzentriert (10-stufiges-Skalometer); Selbsteinstufung und Einstufung der eigenen Partei sowie der Parteiwähler auf einem Links-Rechts-Skalometer; Einstellung zum Europäischen Parlament und zur Europäischen Union (Skala: Berücksichtigung der Belange der europäischen Bürger durch das Europäische Parlament, Vertrauen in die Institutionen der Europäischen Union, Wichtigkeit der Besetzung eines Sitzes im Europäischen Parlament durch einen bestimmten Kandidaten, Wichtigkeit einer Sitzmehrheit für eine Partei im Europäischen Parlament sowie im nationalen Parlament); Einstellung zu ausgewählten politischen Streitfragen (Skala: Assimilierung von Einwanderern, Marktwirtschaft als bester Weg zur Lösung nationaler Wirtschaftsprobleme, gesetzliches Verbot von gleichgeschlechtlichen Ehen, Wichtigkeit öffentlicher Versorgungseinrichtungen und Industriezweige im Staatseigentum, freie Entscheidung von Frauen für Abtreibung, keine Einmischung der Politik in die Wirtschaft, strengere Bestrafung für Straftäter, Umverteilung von Einkommen und Vermögen auf sozial Schwache, Schule sollte zum Autoritätsgehorsam erziehen, Änderungen von EU-Verträgen durch Referendum, Reduzierung der Berufstätigkeit von Frauen zugunsten der Familie, Reduzierung von Einwanderung ins Befragungsland); Einstellung zu den Machtbefugnissen des Europäischen Parlaments (Skala: Recht zu Gesetzesinitiativen, gleiche Machtbefugnisse wie der Rat in allen Bereichen der EU-Gesetzgebung und bei Budgetänderungen, Nominierung des Kommissions-Präsidenten durch das Europäische Parlament statt durch den Rat, Ermächtigung zur Entlassung von EU-Kommissaren, sämtliche Plenarsitzungen in Brüssel); Präferenz für Entscheidungen auf nationaler versus europäischer Ebene hinsichtlich ausgewählter politischer Bereiche (11-Punkte-Skala: Landwirtschaft und Fischerei, Arbeitslosenpolitik, Wirtschaftspolitik, Verbrechensbekämpfung, regionale Entwicklung, Sicherheit und Verteidigung, Umweltschutz, Finanzpolitik, Gesundheit, Sozialpolitik, Erziehung, Mediengesetze, wissenschaftliche und technologische Forschung, Außenpolitik, Steuerpolitik, Entwicklungshilfepolitik und Einwanderungspolitik); persönliche Identifikation (national und europäisch, europäisch und national bzw. nur als Europäer); Mitgliedschaft des eigenen Landes in der EU als gute Sache; Erweiterung und Stärkung der EU als konfligierende Ziele; Präferenz für die Erweiterung oder die Stärkung der EU; Beurteilung der EU-Erweiterung und der Stärkung der EU; persönliche Position und Position der Kandidaten-Partei sowie der Parteiwähler zum Europäischen Einigungsprozess (11-stufiges Skalometer); Vertrauen auf EU-Entscheidungen im nationalen Interesse; Einstellung zu Europa und zur europäischen Identität (Skala: geringere Unterschiede als Gemeinsamkeiten zwischen den europäischen Ländern, Stolz, Europäer zu sein, europäische Einheit gefährdet die nationale kulturelle Identität, Stärkung der Demokratie durch die EU, zu viele Regulierungen für die Mitgliedsländer, Schädigung der nationalen Wirtschaft durch die EU, gleiche Rechte fremder EU-Bürger im eigenen Land, Forderung nach stärkeren Maßnahmen zur Einschränkung von Einwanderung aus Nicht-EU-Staaten, zu hohe Abgaben des eigenen Landes an die EU im Vergleich mit anderen Mitgliedsländern); persönliche Demokratiezufriedenheit im eigenen Land und in Europa; Wichtigkeit der Repräsentation ausgewählter Gruppen im Europäischen Parlament (gesamte Bevölkerung in Europa, nationale Bevölkerung, die eigenen Parteiwähler, Bevölkerung in der Region, nationale Partei, die eigene Europäische Parlamentsgruppe, Frauen, Alte, Arbeiter, Junge, sozial Benachteiligte, Minderheiten); präferiertes Entscheidungsverhalten von Abgeordneten des Europäischen Parlaments: Parteimeinung versus Wählermeinung bzw. persönliche Meinung versus Wählermeinung, persönliche Meinung versus Parteimeinung, nationale Interessen versus Position der Europäischen Parteigruppe; erfahrene Unterstützung für die eigene Kandidatur als MEP durch Parteivertreter oder die Familie; Nominierungsebene für die eigene Kandidatur (national, regional oder lokal) und offizielle Nominierung; weitere Alternativkandidaten im Wahlkreis für die Nominierung; Voraussetzungen für die offizielle Nominierung (Stimmenanteil); Wichtigkeit ausgewählter Gruppen bei Kandidatenauswahl für das Europäische Parlament in der eigenen Partei (Europa-Parlamentarier der eigenen Partei, nationale, regionale bzw. lokale Parteiführung, einzelne Parteimitglieder, Nicht-Parteimitglieder, Minderheitenorganisationen, Interessengruppen); präferiertes Entscheidungsgremium für die Nominierung von Kandidaten für das Europäische Parlament (nationale, lokale bzw. regionale Parteiführung, gewählte Delegierte, Parteimitglieder oder Wähler); Wahlbiographie: eigene politische Karriere (Mitgliedschaft in einer lokalen, regionalen bzw. nationalen Volksvertretung, Abgeordneter des Europäischen Parlaments bzw. über die kommunale, regionale oder nationale Regierung); Mitgliedschaft bzw. Funktion bei Organisationen oder Gruppen (regionale bzw. nationale Parteiorganisation, Lobbyist in Brüssel, Berufsverband, Gewerkschaft, Unternehmensorganisation, Frauenorganisation, Umweltgruppe, religiöse Organisation); angestrebte politisch-beruflich Ziele und Karrierevorstellungen; in Belgien zusätzlich: Mitglied des regionalen Parlaments bzw. des regionalen geschäftsführenden Vorstands).
Demographie: Geschlecht; Alter (Geburtsjahr); Alter kategorisiert; Herkunftsland, derzeitige Staatsangehörigkeit bzw. zum Zeitpunkt der Geburt; Herkunftsland der Mutter und des Vaters; Identifikation mit der eigenen Nationalität, einer anderen Gruppe (Nennung) oder beidem; Familienstand; höchster Schulabschluss (ISCED); derzeitige Beschäftigungssituation bzw. unmittelbar vor der Wahl bei einem Vollzeitmandat); Branche; letzte berufliche Stellung; Selbsteinschätzung der sozialen Schichtzugehörigkeit; Urbanisierungsgrad; Wohndauer am Wohnort; Konfession; Kirchgangshäufigkeit; Selbsteinschätzung der Religiosität (11-stufiges Skalometer); Einschätzung des Lebensstandards der Herkunftsfamilie (7-stufiges Skalometer).
Zusätzlich verkodet wurde: Befragten ID; Erhebungsmethode (Internet oder postalisch); ISO-Code; Land; Parteikennung; Parteiname; Parteifamilie; Wahlbezirk; erfolgreiche Wahl des Kandidaten als MEP; Parteigruppe im Europäischen Parlament; Wahrscheinlichkeit einer Wahl des Kandidaten; Gewichtungsfaktoren; Index: politische Erfahrung.
Einstellung zu politischen Aufgaben (Position und Wertigkeit) von Kandidaten zur Wahl des Europaparlaments. Wertorientierung. Wahlkampf, Kontakt zu den Parteien. Einstellung zur Europäischen Integration. Parteidisziplin. Politische Biographie und Karriereverlauf. Politische Erfahrung. Beziehung zu den Parteien. Nominierungsverfahren.
Themen: Wichtigste Probleme im Land; Problemebene und geeignetste Ebene zur Lösung dieser Probleme (Substitution: regional, national oder europäisch); Parteizugehörigkeit; Jahr des Parteieintritts; Ereignisse und deren Zeitpunkt vor der Wahl zum Europäischen Parlament: Nominierung durch die eigene Partei, Organisation der Wahlkampagne und Beginn der Vollzeit-Wahlkampagne; genutzte Wahlkampfmittel: persönliche, von der Partei bzw. vom Kandidaten selbst gestaltete Internetseite, Flyer, Wahlplakate, lokale Anzeigen, Werbespots in den Medien, Podcasts, Weblog, soziale Netzwerke, Online Chat mit Wählern); zeitlicher Gesamtzeitaufwand für die Wahlkampagne im letzten Monat vor den Wahlen; persönlicher sowie durch das Wahlkampfteam geleisteter Zeitaufwand pro Woche für ausgewählte Wahlkampfaktivitäten im letzten Monat vor den Wahlen (Wählerkontakte per E-Mail bzw. Brief; Aktualisierung des Internetauftritts, Telefonate mit Wählern, Hausbesuche, Informationsgespräche mit Menschen auf der Straße, Teilnahme an Spendenaktionen, öffentliche Debatten, Firmenbesuche, Besuch von Vereinen und Clubs, Radio- und TV-Interviews, Presseinterviews, Treffen mit Parteimitgliedern und der Parteiführung); Wichtigkeit ausgewählter Medien für die Wahlkampagne auf Landesebene (regionale Fernsehprogramme bzw. Zeitungen, Radio, Internet, Webseiten mit Hinweisen zur Wahl); wichtigste politische Streitfragen in der eigenen Kampagne; Schwerpunkt des Wahlkampfes (persönliche Qualifikation des Kandidaten, lokale bzw. regionale Gesichtspunkte, Partei-Wahlprogramm, Ausrichtung des Kandidaten auf spezifische Themen); Wahlkampfbudget; prozentualer Anteil von Parteimitteln, Spenden und privaten Mitteln; Personenanzahl des Wahlkampfteams; Wahlkampf auf die eigene Person oder die Partei konzentriert (10-stufiges-Skalometer); Selbsteinstufung und Einstufung der eigenen Partei sowie der Parteiwähler auf einem Links-Rechts-Skalometer; Einstellung zum Europäischen Parlament und zur Europäischen Union (Skala: Berücksichtigung der Belange der europäischen Bürger durch das Europäische Parlament, Vertrauen in die Institutionen der Europäischen Union, Wichtigkeit der Besetzung eines Sitzes im Europäischen Parlament durch einen bestimmten Kandidaten, Wichtigkeit einer Sitzmehrheit für eine Partei im Europäischen Parlament sowie im nationalen Parlament); Einstellung zu ausgewählten politischen Streitfragen (Skala: Assimilierung von Einwanderern, Marktwirtschaft als bester Weg zur Lösung nationaler Wirtschaftsprobleme, gesetzliches Verbot von gleichgeschlechtlichen Ehen, Wichtigkeit öffentlicher Versorgungseinrichtungen und Industriezweige im Staatseigentum, freie Entscheidung von Frauen für Abtreibung, keine Einmischung der Politik in die Wirtschaft, strengere Bestrafung für Straftäter, Umverteilung von Einkommen und Vermögen auf sozial Schwache, Schule sollte zum Autoritätsgehorsam erziehen, Änderungen von EU-Verträgen durch Referendum, Reduzierung der Berufstätigkeit von Frauen zugunsten der Familie, Reduzierung von Einwanderung ins Befragungsland); Einstellung zu den Machtbefugnissen des Europäischen Parlaments (Skala: Recht zu Gesetzesinitiativen, gleiche Machtbefugnisse wie der Rat in allen Bereichen der EU-Gesetzgebung und bei Budgetänderungen, Nominierung des Kommissions-Präsidenten durch das Europäische Parlament statt durch den Rat, Ermächtigung zur Entlassung von EU-Kommissaren, sämtliche Plenarsitzungen in Brüssel); Präferenz für Entscheidungen auf nationaler versus europäischer Ebene hinsichtlich ausgewählter politischer Bereiche (11-Punkte-Skala: Landwirtschaft und Fischerei, Arbeitslosenpolitik, Wirtschaftspolitik, Verbrechensbekämpfung, regionale Entwicklung, Sicherheit und Verteidigung, Umweltschutz, Finanzpolitik, Gesundheit, Sozialpolitik, Erziehung, Mediengesetze, wissenschaftliche und technologische Forschung, Außenpolitik, Steuerpolitik, Entwicklungshilfepolitik und Einwanderungspolitik); persönliche Identifikation (national und europäisch, europäisch und national bzw. nur als Europäer); Mitgliedschaft des eigenen Landes in der EU als gute Sache; Erweiterung und Stärkung der EU als konfligierende Ziele; Präferenz für die Erweiterung oder die Stärkung der EU; Beurteilung der EU-Erweiterung und der Stärkung der EU; persönliche Position und Position der Kandidaten-Partei sowie der Parteiwähler zum Europäischen Einigungsprozess (11-stufiges Skalometer); Vertrauen auf EU-Entscheidungen im nationalen Interesse; Einstellung zu Europa und zur europäischen Identität (Skala: geringere Unterschiede als Gemeinsamkeiten zwischen den europäischen Ländern, Stolz, Europäer zu sein, europäische Einheit gefährdet die nationale kulturelle Identität, Stärkung der Demokratie durch die EU, zu viele Regulierungen für die Mitgliedsländer, Schädigung der nationalen Wirtschaft durch die EU, gleiche Rechte fremder EU-Bürger im eigenen Land, Forderung nach stärkeren Maßnahmen zur Einschränkung von Einwanderung aus Nicht-EU-Staaten, zu hohe Abgaben des eigenen Landes an die EU im Vergleich mit anderen Mitgliedsländern); persönliche Demokratiezufriedenheit im eigenen Land und in Europa; Wichtigkeit der Repräsentation ausgewählter Gruppen im Europäischen Parlament (gesamte Bevölkerung in Europa, nationale Bevölkerung, die eigenen Parteiwähler, Bevölkerung in der Region, nationale Partei, die eigene Europäische Parlamentsgruppe, Frauen, Alte, Arbeiter, Junge, sozial Benachteiligte, Minderheiten); präferiertes Entscheidungsverhalten von Abgeordneten des Europäischen Parlaments: Parteimeinung versus Wählermeinung bzw. persönliche Meinung versus Wählermeinung, persönliche Meinung versus Parteimeinung, nationale Interessen versus Position der Europäischen Parteigruppe; erfahrene Unterstützung für die eigene Kandidatur als MEP durch Parteivertreter oder die Familie; Nominierungsebene für die eigene Kandidatur (national, regional oder lokal) und offizielle Nominierung; weitere Alternativkandidaten im Wahlkreis für die Nominierung; Voraussetzungen für die offizielle Nominierung (Stimmenanteil); Wichtigkeit ausgewählter Gruppen bei Kandidatenauswahl für das Europäische Parlament in der eigenen Partei (Europa-Parlamentarier der eigenen Partei, nationale, regionale bzw. lokale Parteiführung, einzelne Parteimitglieder, Nicht-Parteimitglieder, Minderheitenorganisationen, Interessengruppen); präferiertes Entscheidungsgremium für die Nominierung von Kandidaten für das Europäische Parlament (nationale, lokale bzw. regionale Parteiführung, gewählte Delegierte, Parteimitglieder oder Wähler); Wahlbiographie: eigene politische Karriere (Mitgliedschaft in einer lokalen, regionalen bzw. nationalen Volksvertretung, Abgeordneter des Europäischen Parlaments bzw. über die kommunale, regionale oder nationale Regierung); Mitgliedschaft bzw. Funktion bei Organisationen oder Gruppen (regionale bzw. nationale Parteiorganisation, Gewerkschaft, Frauenorganisation, Umweltgruppe, religiöse Organisation); angestrebte politisch-beruflich Ziele und Karrierevorstellungen.
Demographie: Geschlecht; Alter (kategorisiert); Herkunftsland; derzeitige Staatsangehörigkeit bzw. zum Zeitpunkt der Geburt; Herkunftsland der Mutter und des Vaters; Identifikation mit der eigenen Nationalität, einer anderen Gruppe oder beidem; Familienstand; derzeitige Beschäftigungssituation bzw. unmittelbar vor der Wahl bei einem Vollzeitmandat); Selbsteinschätzung der sozialen Schichtzugehörigkeit; Urbanisierungsgrad; Wohndauer am Wohnort (kategorisiert); Kirchgangshäufigkeit; Selbsteinschätzung der Religiosität (11-stufiges Skalometer); Einschätzung des Lebensstandards der Herkunftsfamilie (7-stufiges Skalometer).
Zusätzlich verkodet wurde: Befragten ID; Erhebungsmethode (Internet oder postalisch); Parteifamilie; Gewichtungsfaktoren; Index: politische Erfahrung.
