Recommendations on overarching indicators Sample Clauses

Recommendations on overarching indicators. Besides the individual indicator sets, there has been discussion over some time of the need to develop cross pillar indicators. The initial discussion on what these indicators might be was a little inconclusive. It is difficult, for instance, in looking at developments in the enterprise landscape to separate out, at a global level, the results of the actions of the EIP from those of Member State measures or from other developments taking place in the economy generally. But it should be appreciated that indicators should not primarily be seen as instruments for identifying causality, especially in relation to the effects of specific policy measures over the medium to long term. This is simply putting too much weight on an instrument that, after all, is intended to provide an indication rather than a definite conclusion. Rather, the importance of overarching indicators is in establishing the context in which other indicators are to be seen. In that respect, the first step is the provision of annual and total programme budgets for the various actions along with the other indicators to indicate the scale of the action and provide the basis for calculating the various ratios that are important in gauging efficiency. In addition, the main measures of enterprise and innovation, including those developed by the Global Competitiveness Report or the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor could be used. In view, however, of the current reformulation of the Lisbon agenda in a set of objectives for 2020, it is perhaps as well to wait for further developments in this area, before deciding on the appropriate specific indicators.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Recommendations on overarching indicators. In the recommendations on the development of the indicator system made by the EIPC after the special workshop on EIP indicators in October 2006, there was reference to the ‘need to develop some “cross pillar” indicators’ and this theme was also touched upon in the recent workshops after the Interim Report. Proposed set of indicators and 4 recommendations The initial discussion on what these indicators might be was a little inconclusive. It was felt in particular that that it is very difficult in looking at developments in the enterprise landscape to separate out, at a global level, the results of the actions of the Commission from those of Member States or from developments taking place in the economy generally. There are econometric techniques that can assist with issues of this kind, but it should also be appreciated that indicators should not primarily be seen as instruments for identifying causality, especially in relation to the effects of specific policy measures over the medium to long term. This is simply putting too much weight on an instrument that, after all, is intended to provide an indication rather than a definite conclusion. Rather, the importance of overarching indicators should be seen as in establishing the context in which the other indicators are to be seen. They can be important in indicating the continuing relevance of various policy objectives for instance and even in providing a perspective on the relative scale of actions, thus helping to communicate the real significance of the actions undertaken under the EIP. One way of providing this context has already been suggested. It is proposed that the annual and total programme budgets for the various actions be provided along with the other indicators. This will indicate the scale of the action and also provide the basis for calculating various ratios that are important in gauging efficiency, for instance. In addition, the other part of the same recommendation from the special EIPC workshop should be picked up. The EIPC commented that ‘there should be a clear link to the Lisbon strategy throughout’ before referring to the need for “cross pillar” indicators’, The main measures of enterprise and innovation, including some of those developed by the Global Competitiveness Report or the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor could be used. In view, however, of the current reformulation of the Lisbon agenda in a set of objectives for 2020, it is perhaps as well to wait for further developments in ...
Sample 1

Related to Recommendations on overarching indicators

  • Performance indicators and targets The purpose of the innovation performance indicators and targets is to assist the University and the Commonwealth in monitoring the University's progress against the Commonwealth's objectives and the University's strategies for innovation. The University will report principal performance information and aim to meet the innovation performance indicators and targets set out in the following tables.

  • Table 7b - Other milestones and targets Reference Number Select stage of the lifecycle Please select target type from the drop-down menu Description (500 characters maximum) Is this a collaborative target? Baseline year Baseline data Yearly milestones (numeric where possible, however you may use text) Commentary on your milestones/targets or textual description where numerical description is not appropriate (500 characters maximum)

  • Technical Objections to Grievances It is the intent of both Parties of this Agreement that no grievance shall be defeated merely because of a technical error, other than time limitations in processing the grievance through the grievance procedure. To this end, an arbitration board shall have the power to allow all necessary amendments to the grievance and the power to waive formal procedural irregularities in the processing of a grievance, in order to determine the real matter in dispute and to render a decision according to equitable principles and the justice of the case.

  • Benchmarks for Measuring Accessibility For the purposes of this Agreement, the accessibility of online content and functionality will be measured according to the W3C’s Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 Level AA and the Web Accessibility Initiative Accessible Rich Internet Applications Suite (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 for web content, which are incorporated by reference. Adherence to these accessible technology standards is one way to ensure compliance with the College’s underlying legal obligations to ensure that people with disabilities are able to acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same benefits and services within the same timeframe as their nondisabled peers, with substantially equivalent ease of use; that they are not excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or otherwise subjected to discrimination in any College programs, services, and activities delivered online, as required by Section 504 and the ADA and their implementing regulations; and that they receive effective communication of the College’s programs, services, and activities delivered online.

  • GEOGRAPHIC AREA AND SECTOR SPECIFIC ALLOWANCES, CONDITIONS AND EXCEPTIONS The following allowances and conditions shall apply where relevant: Where the company does work which falls under the following headings, the company agrees to pay and observe the relevant respective conditions and/or exceptions set out below in each case.

  • Technical Standards Applicable to a Wind Generating Plant i. Low Voltage Ride-Through (LVRT) Capability A wind generating plant shall be able to remain online during voltage disturbances up to the time periods and associated voltage levels set forth in the standard below. The LVRT standard provides for a transition period standard and a post-transition period standard.

  • Selection Criteria for Awarding Task Order The Government will award to the offeror whose proposal is deemed most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment using the evaluation criteria. The Government will evaluate proposals against established selection criteria specified in the task order RFP. Generally, the Government's award decision will be based on selection criteria which addresses past performance, technical acceptability, proposal risk and cost. Among other sources, evaluation of past performance may be based on past performance assessments provided by TO Program Managers on individual task orders performed throughout the life of the contract. The order of importance for the factors will be identified in the RFP for the specified task order.

  • Required Procurement Procedures for Obtaining Goods and Services The Grantee shall provide maximum open competition when procuring goods and services related to the grant-assisted project in accordance with Section 287.057, Florida Statutes.

  • Promotional Criteria Subject to the utilisation of the skills, as required by the Employer, an employee remains at this level until he/she has developed the skills to allow the employee to effectively perform the tasks required of this function and is assessed to be competent to perform effectively at a higher level or has successfully completed appropriate training to ASF level 1 and has the demonstrated skills to perform at a higher level. An employee must be prepared to undertake appropriate training. LEVEL 3

  • Design Criteria and Standards All PROJECTS/SERVICES shall be performed in accordance with instructions, criteria and standards set forth by the DIRECTOR.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.