The Construction of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology: The Realisation of an Ambiguous Policy Idea

References

• Barroso, J.M. 2005a. ‘Strong universities for Europe’, presentation at the EUA Conference “Strong Universities for Europe”. Glasgow, UK, 31 March–2 April.
   Google Scholar
• Barosso, J.M. 2005b. ‘Building an open europe in times of change’, presentation at the European ideas network. Lisbon, Portugal, 22–24 September.
   Google Scholar
• Barosso, J.M. 2006. ‘Europe: art or science?’, Dies celebration opening address. Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands, 13 January.
   Google Scholar
• Blijham, J. 2006. ‘Europa’ schakelt Van Vught en Castells in’, UT Nieuws, 18 May.
   Google Scholar
• Borrás, S. 2003. The innovation policy of the European Union: From government to governance. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Borrás, S., and C.M. Radaelli. 2011. The politics of governance architecture: creation, change and effects of the EU Lisbon Strategy. Journal of European Public Policy 18, no. 4: 163–484.
   Google Scholar
• Christopoulos, D.C. 2006. Relational attributes of political entrepreneurs: a network perspective. Journal of European Public Policy 13, no. 5: 757–78.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cini, M. 2005. Pragmatism prevails: Barroso’s European Commission, Chatham House briefing paper. London: Royal Institute of International Affairs.
   Google Scholar
• Corbett, A. 2003. Ideas, institutions and policy entrepreneurs: Towards a new history of higher education in the European Community. European Journal of Education 38, no. 3: 315–30.
   Google Scholar
• Corbett, A. 2005. Universities and the Europe of knowledge. Ideas, institutions and policy entrepreneurship in European Union higher education policy, 1955–2005. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Cordis. 2005. ‘Potočnik offers support to Figel’s network approach’, Cordis news. http://cordis.europa.eu/fetch?CALLER=NEWSLINK_EN_C&RCN=23570&ACTION=D(accessed 25 May 2011).
   Google Scholar
• Den Bak, S. 2008. The flagship sets sail. An analysis of the agenda setting process of the European Institute of Technology. Enschede: Bachelor thesis Public Administration, University of Twente.
   Google Scholar
• Dexter, L.A. 2006. Elite and specialized interviewing. Colchester: ECPR Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ecorys. 2011. External evaluation of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology. Brussels: EC.
   Google Scholar
• Elgström, O. 2000. Norm negotiations. The construction of new norms regarding gender and development in EU foreign aid policy. Journal of European Public Policy 7, no. 3: 457–76.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enserink, M. 2007. Barroso’s Brainchild. Science 317, no. 5845: 1676–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2000. Towards a European research area. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2002. The European Research Area: providing new momentum. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2003. The role of the universities in the Europe of knowledge. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2004. Facing the challenge. The Lisbon strategy for growth and employment. Report of the High Level Group chaired by Wim Kok. Luxembourg: Office for official publications of the European communities.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2005a. Towards a European Research Area. Science, technology and innovation key figures 2005, Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2005b. Working together for growth and jobs. A new start for the Lisbon strategy. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2006a. Implementing the renewed partnership for growth and jobs. Developing a knowledge flagship: the European Institute of Technology. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2006b. Results of the public consultation on a concept of a European Institute of Technology. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2006c. The European Institute of Technology: further steps towards it creation. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2006d. Commission staff working document, accompanying the Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Institute of Technology: impact assessment. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2006e. Proposal for a regulation of the European parliament and the council establishing the European Institute of Technology. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2007. The European research area: new perspectives. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2008. A more research-intensive and integrated European Research Area. Science, technology and competitiveness key figures report 2008/2009, Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• European Institute of Innovation and Technology. 2013a. Mission, http://eit.europa.eu/about-us/mission/ (accessed May 2013).
   Google Scholar
• European Institute of Innovation and Technology. 2013b. Knowledge and innovation communities, http://eit.europa.eu/kics/ (accessed May 2013).
   Google Scholar
• European Research Advisory Board. 2005. EURAB recommendation on the proposed European Institute of Technology (EIT). Brussels: EURAB.
   Google Scholar
• European University Association. 2006. EUA Policy Position on the European Commission’s “Communication to the European Council on the European Institute of Technology (EIT)”. Brussels: EUA.
   Google Scholar
• George, A.L., and A. Bennett. 2005. Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gornitzka, Å. 2007. The Lisbon process: a supranational policy perspective. In University dynamics and European integration, eds. P. Maassen and J.P. Olsen, 155–178. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Gornitzka, Å. 2009. Research policy and the European Union - Multi-layered policy change? In The research mission of the university. Policy reforms and institutional response, eds. P. Clancy and D.D. Dill, 53–75. Rotterdam: Sense.
   Google Scholar
• Hodson, D. 2013. The little engine that wouldn’t: supranational entrepreneurship and the Barroso Commission. Journal of European Integration 35, no. 3: 301–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, P.D. 2008. The European Institute of technology and the Europe of knowledge: a research agenda. Globalisation, Societies and Education 6, no. 3: 291–307.
   Google Scholar
• Kaunert, C. 2010. The area of freedom, security and justice in the Lisbon Treaty: commission policy entrepreneurship? European Security 19, no. 2: 169–89.
   Google Scholar
• Kaunert, C., and S. Léonard. 2012. Introduction: supranational governance and European Union security after the Lisbon Treaty—exogenous shocks, policy entrepreneurs and 11 September 2001. Cooperation and Conflict 47, no. 4: 417–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kingdon, J.W. 1984. Agendas, alternatives and public policies. Boston: Little and Brown.
   Google Scholar
• Kingdon, J.W. 1995. Agendas, alternatives and public policies. New York: HarperCollins.
   Google Scholar
• League of European Research Universities. 2005. Competitiveness, research and the concept of a European Institute of Technology. Leuven: LERU.
   Google Scholar
• Mintrom, M., and P. Norman. 1997. Policy entrepreneurship and policy change. Policy Studies Journal 37, no. 4: 649–67.
   Google Scholar
• Mintrom, M., and P. Norman. 2009. Policy entrepreneurship and policy change. Policy Studies Journal 37, no. 4: 649–67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moravcsik, A. 1999. A new statecraft? supranational entrepreneurs and international cooperation. International Organization 53, no. 2: 267–306.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muldur, U. 2006. Building on experience: Learning lessons from past framework programmes. In A new deal for an effective European research policy. The design and impacts of the 7th Framework programme, eds. U. Muldur, F. Corvers, H. Delanghe, J. Dratwa, D. Heimberger, B. Sloanand S. Vanslembrouck, 93–142. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Muldur, U., F. Corvers, H. Delanghe, J. Dratwa, D. Heimberger, B. Sloan, and S. Vanslembrouck, eds. 2006. A new deal for an effective European research policy. The design and impacts of the 7th Framework programme. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Natali, D. 2009. The Lisbon strategy a decade on: a critical review of a multi-disciplinary literature. Transfer 15, no. 1: 111–37.
   Google Scholar
• Newman, A.L. 2008. Building transnational civil liberties: transgovernmental entrepreneurs and the European data privacy directive. International Organization 62: 103–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson, J. 1996. Research and development policy. In The European Union and national industrial policy, ed. H. Kassim and A. Menon, 226–46. London/New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Pollack, M.A. 1997. Delegation, agency, and agenda setting in the European Community. International Organization 51, no. 1: 99–134.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robertson, S.L. 2008. Embracing the global: crisis and the creation of a new semiotic order to secure Europe’s knowledge-based economies. In Education and the knowledge-based economy in Europe, eds. N. Fairclough, R. Wodak and B. Jessop, 89–108. Rotterdam: Sense.
   Google Scholar
• Rodrigues, M.J. 2009. Europe, globalization and the Lisbon agenda: an introduction. In Europe, globalization and the Lisbon agenda, ed. M.J. Rodrigues, 1–19. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Tansey, O. 2007. Process tracing and elite interviewing: A case for non-probability sampling. Political Science and Politics 40, no. 4: 765–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wettestad, J. 2005. The making of the 2003 EU emissions trading directive: An ultra-quick process due to entrepreneurial proficiency? Global Environmental Politics 5, no. 1: 1–23.
   Google Scholar
• Zahariadis, N. 2007. The multiple streams framework: Structure, limitations, prospects. In Theories of the policy process, ed. P. Sabatier, 65–92. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zahariadis, N. 2008. Ambiguity and choice in European public policy. Journal of European Public Policy 15, no. 4: 514–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar