IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jscscx/v9y2020i11p207-d445698.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Artificial Intelligence Research and Its Contributions to the European Union’s Political Governance: Comparative Study between Member States

Author

Listed:
  • João Reis

    (Industrial Engineering and Management, Lusofona University and DREAMS Research Unit, Campo Grande, 1749-024 Lisbon, Portugal
    Institute of Social and Political Sciences (ISCSP), CAPP, University of Lisbon, Campus Universitário do Alto da Ajuda, 1300-663 Lisbon, Portugal)

  • Paula Santo

    (Institute of Social and Political Sciences (ISCSP), CAPP, University of Lisbon, Campus Universitário do Alto da Ajuda, 1300-663 Lisbon, Portugal)

  • Nuno Melão

    (CISeD—Research Center in Digital Services, Polytechnic Institute of Viseu, Campus Politécnico, 3504-510 Viseu, Portugal)

Abstract

In the last six decades, many advances have been made in the field of artificial intelligence (AI). Bearing in mind that AI technologies are influencing societies and political systems differently, it can be useful to understand what are the common issues between similar states in the European Union and how these political systems can collaborate with each other, seeking synergies, finding opportunities and saving costs. Therefore, we carried out an exploratory research among similar states of the European Union, in terms of scientific research in areas of AI technologies, namely: Portugal, Greece, Austria, Belgium and Sweden. A key finding of this research is that intelligent decision support systems (IDSS) are essential for the political decision-making process, since politics normally deals with complex and multifaceted decisions, which involve trade-offs between different stakeholders. As public health is becoming increasingly relevant in the field of the European Union, the IDSSs can provide relevant contributions, as it may allow sharing critical information and assist in the political decision-making process, especially in response to crisis situations.

Suggested Citation

  • João Reis & Paula Santo & Nuno Melão, 2020. "Artificial Intelligence Research and Its Contributions to the European Union’s Political Governance: Comparative Study between Member States," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-17, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:9:y:2020:i:11:p:207-:d:445698
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/9/11/207/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/9/11/207/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vincent Van Roy, 2020. "AI Watch - National strategies on Artificial Intelligence: A European perspective in 2019," JRC Research Reports JRC119974, Joint Research Centre.
    2. Christos Vlachokostas & Charisios Achillas & Ioannis Agnantiaris & Alexandra V. Michailidou & Christos Pallas & Eleni Feleki & Nicolas Moussiopoulos, 2020. "Decision Support System to Implement Units of Alternative Biowaste Treatment for Producing Bioenergy and Boosting Local Bioeconomy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-14, May.
    3. Galit Cohen & Peter Nijkamp, 2002. "Information and Communication Technology Policy in European Cities: A Comparative Approach," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 29(5), pages 729-755, October.
    4. Sotirov, Metodi & Sallnäs, Ola & Eriksson, Ljusk Ola, 2019. "Forest owner behavioral models, policy changes, and forest management. An agent-based framework for studying the provision of forest ecosystem goods and services at the landscape level," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 79-89.
    5. Michael L. Polemis & Achilleas Spais, 2020. "Disentangling the drivers of renewable energy investments: The role of behavioral factors," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2170-2180, September.
    6. Andersson, Johnn & Hellsmark, Hans & Sandén, Björn A., 2018. "Shaping factors in the emergence of technological innovations: The case of tidal kite technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 191-208.
    7. Shilpa Srivastava & Millie Pant & Ritu Agarwal, 2020. "Role of AI techniques and deep learning in analyzing the critical health conditions," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 11(2), pages 350-365, April.
    8. Raihan Ul Islam & Xhesika Ruci & Mohammad Shahadat Hossain & Karl Andersson & Ah-Lian Kor, 2019. "Capacity Management of Hyperscale Data Centers Using Predictive Modelling," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-22, September.
    9. Eggers, Jeannette & Holmgren, Sara & Nordström, Eva-Maria & Lämås, Tomas & Lind, Torgny & Öhman, Karin, 2019. "Balancing different forest values: Evaluation of forest management scenarios in a multi-criteria decision analysis framework," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 55-69.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hallberg-Sramek, Isabella & Nordström, Eva-Maria & Priebe, Janina & Reimerson, Elsa & Mårald, Erland & Nordin, Annika, 2023. "Combining scientific and local knowledge improves evaluating future scenarios of forest ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    2. Galit Cohen-Blankshtain & Peter Nijkamp & Kees van Montfort, 2004. "Modelling ICT Perceptions and Views of Urban Front-liners," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 41(13), pages 2647-2667, December.
    3. Vlachokostas, Ch. & Michailidou, A.V. & Achillas, Ch., 2021. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis towards promoting Waste-to-Energy Management Strategies: A critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    4. Nilsson, Jerker & Helgesson, Matilda & Rommel, Jens & Svensson, Ellinor, 2020. "Forest-owner support for their cooperative's provision of public goods," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    5. Hag Mo Kang & Dae Sung Lee & Soo Im Choi & Sohui Jeon & Chong Kyu Lee & Hyun Kim, 2020. "Problems and Challenges: A Private Forest Purchase Method for National Forest Expansion in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-13, October.
    6. Grilli, Gianluca & Fratini, Roberto & Marone, Enrico & Sacchelli, Sandro, 2020. "A spatial-based tool for the analysis of payments for forest ecosystem services related to hydrogeological protection," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    7. Hansmeier Hendrik & Kroll Henning, 2024. "The geography of eco-innovations and sustainability transitions: A systematic comparison," ZFW – Advances in Economic Geography, De Gruyter, vol. 68(2), pages 125-143.
    8. Knoke, Thomas & Kindu, Mengistie & Jarisch, Isabelle & Gosling, Elizabeth & Friedrich, Stefan & Bödeker, Kai & Paul, Carola, 2020. "How considering multiple criteria, uncertainty scenarios and biological interactions may influence the optimal silvicultural strategy for a mixed forest," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    9. Josset, Clement & Shanafelt, David W. & Abildtrup, Jens & Stenger, Anne, 2023. "Probabilistic typology of private forest owners: A tool to target the development of new market for ecosystem services," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    10. Kanieski da Silva, Bruno & Tanger, Shaun & Marufuzzaman, Mohammad & Cubbage, Frederick, 2022. "Perfect assumptions in an imperfect world: Managing timberland in an oligopoly market," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    11. Rohe, Sebastian & Chlebna, Camilla, 2021. "A spatial perspective on the legitimacy of a technological innovation system: Regional differences in onshore wind energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    12. Neel Patel & Bishnu Acharya & Prabir Basu, 2021. "Hydrothermal Carbonization (HTC) of Seaweed (Macroalgae) for Producing Hydrochar," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-16, March.
    13. Cai, Ying & Lin, Jun & Zhang, Ruxin, 2023. "When and how to implement design thinking in the innovation process: A longitudinal case study," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    14. Lodin, Isak & Brukas, Vilis, 2021. "Ideal vs real forest management: Challenges in promoting production-oriented silvicultural ideals among small-scale forest owners in southern Sweden," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    15. Báliková, Klára & Šálka, Jaroslav, 2022. "Are silvicultural subsidies an effective payment for ecosystem services in Slovakia?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    16. Sebastian Rohe & Jannika Mattes, 2021. "What about the regional level? Regional configurations of Technological Innovation Systems," PEGIS geo-disc-2021_01, Institute for Economic Geography and GIScience, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    17. Helen Onyeaka & Phemelo Tamasiga & Uju Mary Nwauzoma & Taghi Miri & Uche Chioma Juliet & Ogueri Nwaiwu & Adenike A. Akinsemolu, 2023. "Using Artificial Intelligence to Tackle Food Waste and Enhance the Circular Economy: Maximising Resource Efficiency and Minimising Environmental Impact: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-20, July.
    18. Fridén, Alexia & D'Amato, Dalia & Ekström, Hanna & Iliev, Bogomil & Nebasifu, Ayonghe & May, Wilhelm & Thomsen, Marianne & Droste, Nils, 2024. "Mapping two centuries of forest governance in Nordic countries: An open access database," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    19. Fabio G. Santeramo & Monica Delsignore & Enrica Imbert & Mariarosaria Lombardi, 2023. "The Future of the EU Bioenergy Sector: Economic, Environmental, Social, and Legislative Challenges," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 17(1), pages 1-1–52, April.
    20. Becker, Tristan & Wolff, Michael & Linzenich, Anika & Engelmann, Linda & Arning, Katrin & Ziefle, Martina & Walther, Grit, 2024. "An integrated bi-objective optimization model accounting for the social acceptance of renewable fuel production networks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 315(1), pages 354-367.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:9:y:2020:i:11:p:207-:d:445698. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.