Frühmoderne gedruckte Erzähltexte sind multimodal. ORDNEL bietet eine möglichst vollständige Druckübersicht mit detaillierten Informationen zur Multimodalität gedruckter deutscher und niederländischer Erzählliteratur bis 1800 (Griseldis; Reineke Fuchs; Fortunatus), die zu den Top Ten Erzähltexten im frühmodernen Europa gehören. Insgesamt sind 319 Drucke in 1069 Exemplaren erfasst. Jeder Eintrag bietet folgende Angaben: Autor:in/Übersetzer:in, Titel, Druckort, Drucker:in(verleger:in), Verleger:in, Entstehungsjahr, Quelle der Information, Kollation, Umfang des Drucks in Seiten, Format, Titelblattholzschnitt, Holzschnitte, Anzahl der Wiederholungen der Holzschnitte, Künstler:in. Im Hinblick auf die Überlieferung werden Angaben zur Zahl der Exemplare, zu den Exemplaren in den Bibliotheken und Archiven und zu den Digitalisaten der Drucke gemacht. Ebenso sind Angaben zur Sekundärliteratur, Bemerkungen zu inhaltlichen, formalen und paratextuellen Aspekten sowie zur Sprache erfasst (Stand: Februar 2024).

Der Datensatz enthält Minutenwerte der meteorologischen Messgrößen Luftdruck, Niederschlag, Luftfeuchtigkeit, Beleuchtungsstärke und Lufttemperatur (mittels verschiedener Sensoren gemessen und modelliert), die mit dem Messgerät MESSI erhoben wurden. Der MESSI (Mein eigenes Subskalen Messinstrument für atmosphärische Größen) ist eine kostengünstige Wetterstation für Citizen Science Projekte, die an der Freien Universität entworfen wurde.

Zudem beinhaltet der Datensatz auch Messungen von Wetterstationen der Firma Pessl Instruments, die die Messgrößen Lufttemperatur, Luftfeuchtigkeit und Niederschlag beinhalten. Bei diesen Stationen ist die minimale Messfrequenz 5 Minuten. Alle 98 Messstationen wurden dabei vornehmlich in Kleingärten von teilnehmenden Bürger:innen platziert. Die Messungen fokussierten sich jeweils auf die Sommermonate 2023, wobei vereinzelte Stationen auch über einen längeren Zeitraum gemessen haben.

The Mars 2020 Terrain Relative Navigation HiRISE Orthorectified Image Mosaic provided by USGS was used together with the pixel-aligned HRSC color data to produce a pan-sharpened color mosaic that retains the original spatial resolution of 50 cm per pixel. The pansharpening method used here is HSV color space conversion. The HRSC color processing is described in Michael et al. (2016). An overview of the HRSC processing methodology and product characteristics is described in Gwinner et al., 2016.

This CSV file records the search results for terms "etat AND armes" and "etat AND artillerie" (condition/inventory AND weapons, condition/inventory AND artillery) from documents relating to the Caribbean, Louisiana and Guyana colonies of the First Colonial Empire collection, held at the French Archives nationales d'outremer (Overseas archives). The results range from 1675 to 1815. The file records the search term, archive directory and code of the record, date of the record, kind of record, title, and availability online. It then records whether the record includes any remarks on the condition of weapons/artillery (as opposed to simply recording numbers), and if so whether problems are noted, whether those noted problems are related to decay or climate, and finally whether mention is specifically made of rust/oxidisation. This data is intended to support the RUSTEE project; specifically, research into how the claims made in travel narratives about the problems with rusting equipment in different climates (Ligon 1673, Ellis 1748) are or are not reflected in routine colonial administrative correspondance in France's equatorial American colonies. It should also be useful to researchers interested more generally in the role of the island environment, climate and weather in European colonial projects.

The dataset contains shape-files of the valleys and deltas in the Jezero crater on Mars: 1) initial and last incision valleys for the western inlet, northern inlet and outlet; 2) minimum, medium and maximum extents of the western and northern deltas. The mapping was done in ArcGIS 10.8.2 using CTX and HiRISE data (Planetary Data System Imaging Node https://pds-874 imaging.jpl.nasa.gov/) and HRSC data (data archives of ESA and NASA and https://maps.planet.fu-berlin.de [Walter et al., 2018]). For the minimum extent of the western delta a GIS version of the map of [Stack et al., 2020] was used. Details of mapping are described in [Ovchinnikova A. et al. A modeling approach for water and sediment transport in Jezero crater on Mars based on new geomorphological evidence. Icarus (accepted)].

The Central Mountain Range of Taiwan represents an exclusive location for palaeo-climate and palaeo-glaciation research in monsoonal East Asia as it provides high altitude terrestrial data in an oceanic environment. This study focuses on the dating of boulders and rock surfaces by means of paired (Be-10/ Al-26) in-situ produced cosmogenic nuclides in two mountain ranges - the Nenggao Shan and the Hsueh Shan - to estimate the time of previous glacier extents. The results will be presented in scientific journals available under the provided DOIs.

Here we present the original AMS nuclide concentration measurement data of Be-10 and Al-26 and their ratios from 16 samples. The sample preparation including quartz separation as well as Be and Al isolation were carried out at the Purdue Rare Isotope Measurement Laboratory (PRIME Lab), Purdue University, West Lafayette, US., nuclide concentrations of Be-10 and Al-26 were determined by accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS). Field work and sampling were funded by the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD), Grant 57137675. The sample analysis was funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG), Grant BO 659/28-1, project-no. 424056024.

The dataset is related to the Horizon 2020 Una.Resin project Work Package 1 mapping exercise (Task 1.2) on Research & Innovation (R&I) strategies and strategic initiatives. This task was carried out from February to August 2021 by the University of Helsinki and Freie Universität Berlin. Questionnaire was targeted at the research professionals and policymakers at each of the eight Una Europa universities participating in the project (University of Edinburgh; University of Helsinki; University of Bologna; Complutense University of Madrid; Freie University Berlin; 3 Katholieke Universiteit Leuven; Jagiellonian University; Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne) aiming to identify the complementary strengths, values, opportunities and barriers for the building the capacities for research collaboration in this alliance. Questionnaire helped us to understand specifically the university level strategic research themes or areas / thematic priorities, areas of excellence, multidisciplinary structures, strategic partnerships and the universities’ codes of conduct or other value-based regulations. The benchmarking served as a groundwork for development of the Una Europa R&I strategy that was launched in November 2023. Task was conducted together with the WP2 colleagues, who prepared the second part of the questionnaire benchmarking the existing strategies, policies and initiatives on research infrastructures. The WP2 has provided a separate dataset presenting the part 2 answers and curated by the University of Bologna. This dataset is available by request: a.franchini@unibo.it.

This data set contains new results on how organisations can capture sustainability and manage innovation to contribute to changes in socio-technical systems characterised by greater sustainability. While drawing from sustainability transitions research can help to establish sustainability criteria that innovative organisations must meet with their sustainable innovation practices to contribute to complex and long-term sustainability, it is also essential to assess the governance and decision-making of innovative organisations within sectors in more detail. By doing so, we can identify potential adaptations that could make these organisations facilitators of sustainable transformational changes in the real world. Research in the field of innovation management (IM) provides significant insights into the driving forces behind sustainable innovation (SI). Management studies that focus on the management of sustainable innovation draw attention to the necessary measures to align development with sustainability and the role of innovation in facilitating business transitions to sustainable practices. However, challenges emerge when it comes to linking innovation initiatives with potential risks or consequences that can emerge, e.g., by pursuing environmental, yet socially unjust, goals and providing management practices for their prevention. This is partly due to conceptual limitations and the applied methods in prevailing studies. In this light, it can be beneficial to look at the Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) literature. As there is still little research exploring conceptual integrations of the two approaches for innovation management to answer transitions-related research questions, it will be first explored in this doctoral thesis, how RRI can expand existing knowledge on the management of sustainable innovation to prevent "partially" sustainable transitions. Second, it will be investigated how RRI could facilitate novel innovation management approaches to address transitions-related research questions. In Chapter 2, the impact of sustainability agendas in research and innovation on transitions is assessed to make conceptual extensions using the four RRI principles. A primary focus is on the concept of sustainable innovation, which provides essential features to analyse innovation processes in terms of their broader implications on socio-technical systems. However, SI falls short in addressing multidimensional sustainability, such as responsibility for potential future trade-offs or consequences of innovation. In such cases, innovation may run the risk of intervening in transitions with solutions that might be more environmentally friendly yet socially unjust. Therefore, the question is raised how innovation can be managed to contribute to creating sustainable socio-technical systems? To address this research question, answers are sought in the RRI literature, which encourages thinking about the purpose of research and innovation, the underlying goals of innovation, and the ethical, inclusive, and democratic opportunities through which these goals can be achieved. Specifically, the Chapter provides findings from a systematic literature review (SLR) of a representative sample of empirical studies from the SI and RRI literature (n=29). In the initial phase of the analysis, the SLR aims to enhance our understanding of aspects highlighted in the SI literature that enable sustainability-driven innovation processes to contribute to sustainable socio-technical system change and limitations highlighted in the same literature that may weaken the sustainable contributions. In the second part of the analysis, it is investigated how each RRI principle can support innovation processes for sustainability, either by enhancing existing strengths or minimising existing weaknesses. While findings from SI publications underscore certain strengths, such as aligning economic profit with sustainability goals, weaknesses also emerge. Specifically, profit, competitiveness and technology-centric assessments often take precedence over social sustainability. Nevertheless, the RRI publications illustrate that the RRI principles can contribute to enhancing existing strengths, e.g., by reinforcing corporate codes of conduct to enhance decision-making for social sustainability. Furthermore, RRI proves to be advantageous in addressing current challenges, e.g., by recognising sustainability-dilemmas at an early stage in order to integrate solution-finding into strategy-development. This not only contributes to the existing literature by synthesising two innovation-driven concepts in a novel form but also expands upon these requirements by providing a first critical discussion of responsible approaches in innovation processes for sustainability and useful methods to support sustainable change. In Chapter 3, Foresight is considered an essential approach to support sustainable change with responsible approaches to innovation by enabling deliberations on complex futures. However, even though Foresight provides valuable analytical and outlook tools to address this task, Foresight-related methods need to be tailor-made and fine-tuned to accomplish it adequately. It can be argued that Foresight inherits open potentials for capturing the multidimensional nature of sustainability in innovation, i.e., by omitting broader visions and focussing more on technical elements or by superficially considering complex interrelationships for subsequent decision-making. In Chapter 3, the aim is to answer the question of how Foresight methods can be adapted to explore how innovation-driven systemic changes can contribute to greater (multidimensional) sustainability and how RRI can assist in this task? Thereupon, a responsibility-oriented Foresight approach with a Delphi method is developed and piloted in Chapter 3. Using a multi-stage Delphi survey informed by insights from the RRI literature, 52 public and private sector experts are asked to examine 15 innovation-driven future changes in the German agri-food system for which there was a shared opinion that they represent (potential) sustainable changes. For the Delphi questionnaire, RRI provides an approach to assessing (multidimensional) sustainability from a broader perspective, allowing co-existing values to sharpen the complexity of future expectations. The analysis reveals that the Delphi method can be adapted to enable reflection on unintended consequences of "seemingly-sustainable", innovation-driven future changes for multiple aspects of sustainability. This can be a beneficial addition to previous studies by providing a methodological framework for the reassessment of promising innovation for sustainable transition in light of system complexities. While consensus can be reached on the most desirable innovation-driven changes, it becomes evident that significant and interrelated risks for sustainability are associated with more and less desirable changes. Thereby, future options that are assessed to be desirable by the experts, such as the introduction of a nutrient-rich diet in school canteens and cafeterias, still face severe risks for certain dimensions of sustainability. Thereby, socio-cultural or socio-economic backgrounds define access, which can result in a social divide. Similar assessments are still rare in connection with Foresight, especially in connection with Delphi surveys. Additionally, by examining the reasons for experts’ dissent, it becomes evident that the desirability of future options for a sustainable agri-food system largely depends on the interplays with other innovations or consumption and production patterns. While Chapter 3 offers recommendations on how Foresight processes can be employed to inform innovation-driven systemic changes and contribute to greater multidimensional sustainability from a management perspective, similar to other studies, the primary focus lies on anticipating impacts, involving a broad spectrum of stakeholders, and fostering reflexivity in research agendas. However, a notable gap remains in understanding how to ensure that the generated future knowledge is effectively responded to during subsequent decision-making and planning processes. Thereby, anticipated knowledge may not be translated into responsive strategy-development, compromising the governance of societal challenges in desirable ways. Additionally, despite awareness of potential contrasted future options, there remains a risk that future options with divergent characteristics are addressed less comprehensively in Delphi surveys, thus, effecting their implications for subsequent decision-making. Consequently, the Delphi as a well-established methodological tool to inform subsequent decision-making and planning processes is utilised to integrate the articulation of response options for subsequent strategy-building. Specifically, in Chapter 4, the focus is on how a Delphi can inform research and innovation about responsive strategy-building to contribute to the creation of new procedures, structures, and institutional settings that promote beneficial outcomes and prevent harm? Drawing from the RRI literature to understand discrepancies between "desirability" and "probability" of future options as missed opportunities to increase social desirability ("doing good") or as threats to it ("avoiding harm"), experts (n=21) who have taken part in the previous two rounds were engaged in an additional third-round to assess three innovation-driven changes in the German agri-food sector that are characterised by desirability and probability discrepancies and their risks to sustainability. To increase alignment with the responsiveness principle, they were tasked with identifying and making potential future response options for research and innovation more explicit to help future decision-makers find or adopt strategies that promote beneficial outcomes and prevent harm to the society, environment and economy in an equitable manner. The discussion in Chapter 4 presents a novel perspective on assessing sustainability issues from an innovation management standpoint when compared to related literature by presenting the sustainability prospects of future options in connection with their management. The results show that the Delphi method can be adapted to contribute to responsiveness in future decision-making, ultimately improving the overall sustainability prospects of certain innovation-driven future changes. However, the results also demonstrate that despite a willingness to adapt, innovative organisations can be constrained by existing operational frameworks, which limits their ability to prevent social, environmental and economic harm. Hence, a methodological framework is presented that can help researchers deal with critical questions for transformative change seriously and how this can provide valuable insights for subsequent strategy-development and planning by elucidating response options without losing sight of the systemic context within which innovative organisations operate. The insights from Chapter 3 also inform Chapter 5 by combining it with a business modelling process. Business modelling allows for the visualisation and incorporation of existing knowledge to make strategic decisions that influence how businesses create, deliver, and capture value in the future. In Chapter 5, the goal is to gain a deeper understanding of how business model processes can be inspired to implement research behaviour that constitutes "doing good" and "avoiding harm" in the future, e.g., by elaborating on new options for partner selection or value proposition, as one opportunity to depart from business-as-usual strategies and the formation of more sustainable modes of production and consumption? Business modelling activities often lack clear insights into the practical application of business models in the future and multidimensional sustainability, with environmental and social aspects taking precedence, while other dimensions like human rights, health, or safety receive less consideration. These are just some examples why current business modelling applications run the risk of overlooking several crucial aspects required for a sustainable contribution to transition through strategic decision-making. In response to these challenges, a responsible business modelling approach is developed and piloted with a heterogeneous group of researchers and innovators from the German agri-food sector. The process includes a Value Proposition and a BMC workshop with researchers and innovators from the German agri-food sector (n=15) that utilises results from Chapter 3 in combination with additional RRI-interventions to inform three preselected business model ideas about novel food innovations. This approach represents an initial attempt to integrate future knowledge from various sources and viewpoints more closely into the value creation and delivery process of businesses in an iterative manner. The results demonstrate that the interventions can inspire new directions for doing business in the future by fostering anticipation, reflexivity and responsiveness, ultimately adding sustainability characteristics to the BMs, such as by reinforcing more sustainable linkages in network creations or mitigate risks associated with harmful ones. Additionally, it demonstrates that anticipative and reflective behaviour does not necessarily lead to responsive behaviour. Instead, not all broadly configured knowledge had an impact on the shapes of the final BMs, which extends the implications for responsible innovation approaches.

The prevalence of antibiotic-resistant pathogens has become a major threat to public health, requiring swift initiatives for discovering new strategies to control bacterial infections. Hence, antibiotic stewardship and rapid diagnostics, but also the development, and prudent use, of novel effective antimicrobial agents are paramount. Ideally, these agents should be less likely to select for resistance in pathogens than currently available conventional antimicrobials. The usage of antimicrobial Peptides (AMPs), key components of the innate immune response, and combination therapies, have been proposed as strategies to diminish the emergence of resistance. Herein, we investigated whether newly developed random antimicrobial peptide mixtures (RPMs) can significantly reduce the risk of resistance evolution in vitro to that of single sequence AMPs, using the ESKAPE pathogen Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa) as a model Gram-negative bacterium. Infections of this pathogen are difficult to treat due the inherent resistance to many drug classes, enhanced by the capacity to form biofilms. P. aeruginosa was experimentally evolved in the presence of AMPs or RPMs, subsequentially assessing the extent of resistance evolution and cross-resistance/collateral sensitivity between treatments. Furthermore, the fitness costs of resistance on bacterial growth were studied, and whole-genome sequencing used to investigate which mutations could be candidates for causing resistant phenotypes. Lastly, changes in the pharmacodynamics of the evolved bacterial strains were examined. Our findings suggest that using RPMs bears a much lower risk of resistance evolution compared to AMPs and mostly prevents cross-resistance development to other treatments, while maintaining (or even improving) drug sensitivity. This strengthens the case for using random cocktails of AMPs in favour of single AMPs, against which resistance evolved in vitro, further providing an alternative to classic antibiotics worth pursuing.

In order to achieve the objectives of each work package, the Una.Resin project followed a common methodology across work packages:  Development of shared strategies, agendas and policies following definition of scope, mapping of policies and assets, stakeholder consultation and identification of barriers and enablers of R&I cooperation  Development of an action plan to implement shared priorities  Initial implementation via pilot actions  Evaluation of pilot actions This dataset relates to phases 3 and 4: “Initial implementation via pilot actions” and “Evaluation of pilot actions”. The pilots were planned considering the learnings of the benchmarking phase described in the dataset “Una.Resin_WP1_T1.2_benchmarking‐questionnaire_20240125” and the co‐creation workshops described in the dataset “Una.Resin_WP1_co_creation workshops_20240129 “. Even if common methodology across work packages was a guideline for us, we did not follow it fully chronologically, but the tasks were overlapping enabling that we could consider the key learnings from the pilots in the Una Europa R&I strategy and roadmap development. Concerning specifically the work done in WP1, the main major tasks of the benchmarking phase were: R&I Strategy Benchmarking including the benchmarking questionnaire and benchmarking of the publicly available strategies of the Una Europa universities; on‐line R&I Strategy Workshop involving academics from all partner universities; One Health SSC Workshop involving academics from the Una Europa One Health focus area; Online Consultation of the Una Europa Community done using Viima platform and done in collaboration with the Una Europa 2030 Strategy process and answers of the eight strategic questions for targeted to the Una Europa partners institutions done also as part of the Una Europa 2030 strategy. All these activities have been described in the Una.Resin WP1 Deliverable 1.1. “Benchmarking R&I Strategies and Priorities for a Joint Una Europa Strategy”. WP1 was working closely with the clusters of research professionals, especially the Research coordination cluster chaired by UH and the Cluster for Public, Private and Third Sector Collaboration (PPTSC) chaired by FUB to understand the relevant structures and processes to build sustainable support for Una Europa research‐collaboration. We also collected insights from the Una Europa focus area self‐steering committees. The pilot 1 was planned and carried out together with the One Health SSC. All the eight Una.Resin project Partner universities were involved either in planning and/or in the implementation of these pilots: University of Edinburgh; University of Helsinki; University of Bologna; Complutense University of Madrid; Freie University Berlin; Katholieke Universiteit Leuven; Jagiellonian University; Université Paris 1 Panthéon‐Sorbonne. Horizon 2020 Una.Resin project Work Package 1 Pilot 1 “Developing a format for supporting systematic collaboration on the Una Europa priority global challenges” (T1.11) Under this pilot we had two separate actions: 1) Una Europa R&I strategy workshop and 2) Piloting a process Horizon Europe Pillar II Call matchmaking. The first part is described in the dataset “Una.Resin_WP1_co_creation workshops_20240129”. In this dataset we provide the key documents of the part “Piloting a process Horizon Europe Pillar II Call matchmaking”. According to the Una.Resin WP1 benchmarking phase and as outcome of the co‐creation workshops and the discussions with the Un Europa focus area self‐steering committees, there is a major interest and unused potential in our alliance regarding European funding, particularly Horizon Europe Pillar II funding. There are existing support service structures at most partner universities, thus there is potential to build systematic and sustainable support for the calls also on Una Europa level and to share each other´s best practices. In this pilot process we identified the enabling and hindering structures, processes, and cultures at the partner universities and at the alliance level. We also shared best practises and tools to create an ideal process. The pilot action was designed and facilitated in close collaboration with the Una Europa Research Coordination Cluster, the Self‐steering committee of the One Health focus area as well as the Una Europa Vzw external funding manager. We also had an honour to have an EC keynote speaker at the first of our two workshop, Research Policy Officer Jean‐Charles Cavitte. He familiarized the participants with EC policy and EU funded research linked to One Health. The whole process from first planning meetings to the evaluation phase lasted from February 2022 until September 2023. The pilot included the following steps: 1) Collecting expressions of interest on‐line using Lyyti platform (https://www.lyyti.com/en/); 2) Identification and briefing of the potential coordinators; 3) On‐line workshop including i) common session highlighting the European goals and the call particularities as well as ii) facilitated group discussion aiming to draft the core idea of the proposal and appointing the core group for the proposal preparation. We used the template created in the R&I strategy workshop (Zoom as a meeting platform and Google Slides for the on‐line canvases); 4) Hybrid (on‐line and on‐site) workshop for the groups of researchers who engaged with proposal preparation (Teams). In this workshop the participants had a change i) to learn about the call particularities and proposal writing in the plenary sessions, ii) get support for the proposal drafting and iii) to participate Una Europa One Health networking event. The workshop was organised in connection to the Una Europa General Assembly; 5) Proposal preparation phase; 6) On‐line evaluation questionnaire after the process (Lyyti platform). In this dataset we provide the key documents to understand the process and to take the learning to future use. Horizon 2020 Una.Resin project Work Package 1 Pilot 2 “Developing a concept for an Una Europa collaboration platform” (Task 1.12) The task was aimed at collecting insights on what a joint platform for collaboration between Una Europa researchers and non‐academic partners should consist of. To develop this concept, a series of consultations and workshops were organized, and a preliminary mapping exercise took place. The key workshops contributing to this task have been presented in the dataset: “Una.Resin_WP1_co_creation workshops_20240129”. In addition, insights were collected from the Una.Resin WPs, Una.Resin Cluster chairs and the self‐steering committees of the Una Europa focus areas. The Research coordination cluster contributed to the concept development in several stages and in particular in RCC workshop in Paris in 2022 and in discussions in Edinburgh in September 2022.

In order to achieve the objectives of each work package, the Una.Resin project followed a common methodology across work packages: •Development of shared strategies, agendas and policies following definition of scope, mapping ofpolicies and assets, stakeholder consultation and identification of barriers and enablers of R&Icooperation •Development of an action plan to implement shared priorities •Initial implementation via pilot actions •Evaluation of pilot actions In the phase 1 WP1 aimed to understand the relevant policies of the different institutions, providing WPs with essential information to develop shared strategies. The main methods used in this phase were: (1) benchmarking of the strategies and policies including questionnaires, targeted at policy makers, research administration professionals and relevant academics; (2) co-creation workshops for the academic community, targeted mainly at the research professionals and the academic leaders and other researchers in the Una Europa focus areas. These are described in the datasets “Una.Resin_WP1_T1.2_benchmarking-questionnaire_20240125" and “Una.Resin_WP1_co_creation workshops_20240129”. In the second half of the project, the WP1 main tasks were carrying on two pilots described in the dataset “Una.Resin_WP1_T1.11._1.12._Pilots_20240131” and in the end, writing the R&I strategy, the Una Europa R&I Investment Pathway (Annex 1 of the strategy) and the Roadmap to Implementation (Straetgy Annex 2). The strategy writing process included several consultations with the Una Europa leading bodies RSG and BoD, the Una.Resin WPs, Una Europa Vzw, Una.Futura project management as well as consultations with the self-steering groups of the Una Europa focus areas. In addition, the WP1 was working closely with the clusters of research professionals, especially the Research coordination cluster chaired by UH and the Cluster for Public, Private and Third Sector Collaboration (PPTSC) chaired by FUB to understand the relevant structures and processes to build sustainable support for Una Europa research-collaboration. WP1 also consulted the Una Europa Diversity council for diversity in the R&I strategy based on their analysis of the D1.1 in 2022. The council chair also presented the messages to the RSG as part of the R&I strategy preparation process. The Una Europa R&I strategy was developed in close connection to the Una Europa 2030 strategy process and considering the simultaneously accumulated lessons learned from the 1Europe project. In addition, the aims of the Una.Futura project that kicked off in December 2022 were considered in the strategy development. We also discussed with the self-steering committees of the Una Europa focus areas to make sure that the strategies and action plans of them are considered and in line with the Una Europa R&I strategy preparation. Una Europa R&I strategy is not an umbrella strategy for all existing or future R&I strategies of Una Europa partner universities. We outlined that because the Una Europa priority setting had been done already in the Una Europa 2030 process, in the Una Europa R&I strategy we further developed priorities and activities to implement these aims and present in the strategy “strategic areas of actions” referring to the areas, where actions should be implemented to support the research collaboration in Una Europa in the most optimal and effective way. In order to identify these areas, we identified individual actions. Besides the activities identified in the co-creation workshops and WP1 deliverable D1.1. and in the discussions with the Una Europa focus area self-steering committees, we carried out a strategic questionnaire of 16 questions targeted to Una.Resin WP 2-4 leads and co-leads, Una Europa professional cluster chairs and the Una Europa Vzw. In the questionnaire, we asked the colleagues to identify 2-4 themes and individual activities which should be set as strategic priorities when developing services and allocating resources for supporting researcher and/or for institutional or professional development. The answers were based on the Una.Resin aims, outcomes and insights. The questions addressed the priority strategic themes and key stakeholders, processes, actions and resources required to reach the aim. We also asked about the communication and matchmaking needs and the cluster learnings and aims. The roadmap to implementation of the strategic areas of actions aims to establish sustainable links between individual actions driving the R&I collaboration in our Alliance and the ongoing Una.Futura project. Furthermore, the roadmap process aims to identify essential activities where the Alliance has ambition, but which go beyond the ongoing project frameworks. Roadmap phases: Phase I, Identification: Identifying concrete actions that could be taken to achieve our strategic aims as well as a process of structuring these actions in detail according to their level of ambition and required resourcing. This part was carried out by Una.Resin WP1 in a process described above. The next phases: Phase II, Prioritisation and the Phase III, Implementation will take place beyond the duration of Una.Resin. Prioritisation of actions (matrix exercise) at the alliance's highest decision-making level is on-going in early 2024. It sets the frame to Phase three that foresees the implementation of those activities selected as priorities in the previous phase. Actions will be taken either in the framework of Una.Futura through the SSC strategies and action plans or, depending on the nature of action, as a project-independent all-Alliance activity guided by the Una Europa R&I Strategy and the Una Europa 2030 Strategy.

The dataset is related to the Horizon 2020 Una.Resin project Work Package 1 Tasks 1.2 and 1.3. It describes the co-creation workshop methods, agendas and outcomes that fed into the preparation of the Una Europa Research & Innovation (R&I) strategy, Task 1.10. R&I roadmap (annex 2 of the WP1 D1.2). and to the Task 1.9. resulting the Una Europa R&I Funding Pathway (annex 1 of the WP1 D1.2). The outcomes also fed into the pilot tasks 1.11. (Horizon Europe Pillar II matchmaking) and 1.12. (Concept for a Una Europa collaboration platform) These workshops were carried out between September 2021 and April 2022 by the University of Helsinki and Freie Universität Berlin. They were targeted to professionals and academics at each of the eight Una Europa universities participating in the project (University of Edinburgh; University of Helsinki; University of Bologna; Complutense University of Madrid; Freie University Berlin; Katholieke Universiteit Leuven; Jagiellonian University; Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne) aiming to identify the complementary strengths, opportunities, enablers, and barriers of the research collaboration in this alliance.

Der Datensatz enthält Messwerte im fünf Minuten Takt des 'FU- Microclimate network' (FUMiNET) aus dem Berliner Stadtgebiet. Dieses Messnetz wurde kontinuierlich seit dem Jahr 2017 aufgebaut und dient der skalenübergreifenden Erfoschung des Stadtklimas von Berlin, welches durch das BMBF 'Stadtklima im Wandel Projektes' (https://www.uc2-program.org/) gefördert wurde. Die Stationen sind so aufgebaut, dass die Stadtstruktur von Berlin gut abgebildet wird. Gemessen wird die 2m Temperatur und Feuchte. Im Datenpaket sind die Daten des Jahres 2023 enthalten. Zu jeder der Stationen gibt es eine Datei mit gepackten Daten im CSV Format. In einer Gesamtbeschreibung als eine pdf Datei sind die Standorte expliziert beschrieben.

Im BMBF-Förderprojekt „tech4compKI“ intendieren acht Verbundpartner, die Vorteile von individuellem Mentoring mit digitalen Möglichkeiten wie Künstlicher Intelligenz allen Studierenden zur Verfügung zu stellen. Im Projekt entwickelt die TU Dresden eine Mentoring Workbench, ein User Interface mit interaktiven Tools zur Steuerung des Lernprozesses, dazu zählen u. a. eine Timeline, eine Suchfunktion und ein Chatbot. In diesem Kontext wurde eine UX-Design Studie entworfen, um prospektiv zur Verbesserung und Entwicklung der Technologie beizutragen.

Es wurden ein User Flow erstellt und zu dessen Analyse eine quantitative Usability-Umfrage sowie eine qualitative Fokusgruppe durchgeführt. Die Analyse des User Flows ist hilfreich, Problempunkte in der Interaktion mit den Systemkomponenten zu erkennen. Mit dem User Flow und Fragebogen wurden die Benutzererfahrungen individuell erfasst, um datenbasierte Einblicke in die Bedienbarkeit, Nützlichkeit, den erwarteten Zeitaufwand und die allgemeine Zufriedenheit mit der Technologie zu erhalten. Diese Erfahrungen wurden im Rahmen einer gemeinsamen Fokusgruppe eruiert, dabei wurden mit Blick auf zukünftige Entwicklungen weitere Nutzerwünsche und Nutzererwartungen erhoben.

Der UX-Design Workshop wurde erstmalig an der TU Chemnitz durchgeführt. Die im Rahmen dieser Studie erhobenen Daten werden an dieser Stelle veröffentlicht.

Citizen Science, zu deutsch Bürgerwissenschaft, bezeichnet eine Form der wissenschaftlichen Forschung, bei der Bürgerinnen und Bürger aktiv an wissenschaftlichen Projekten teilnehmen. Die gesammelten Daten aus dem Citizen Science Teilprojekt einer Messkampagne von 2021 werden hier genauer beschrieben und zur Verfügung gestellt. Das meteorologische Bürgermessnetz gehörte zu einer groß angelegten Messkampagne, die unter dem Akronym FESSTVaL (Field Experiment on submesoscale spatio-temporal variability in Lindenberg) stattfand. Die Messkampagne wurde im Rahmen des vom Deutschen Wetterdienst (DWD) finanzierten Hans-Ertel-Zentrums für Wetterforschung (HErZ) initiiert. Sie fand in den Sommermonaten des Jahres 2021 am Meteorologischen Observatorium Lindenberg – Richard-Aßmann-Observatorium (MOL-RAO) des DWD südöstlich von Berlin statt. Um die Quellen sub-mesoskaliger Variabilität zu betrachten, konzentrierte sich die Messkampagne auf drei Hauptaspekte: Strukturen der atmosphärischen Grenzschicht, Cold Pools und Windböen. Ergänzend zu dem am Observatorium operationell betriebenen Messnetz und weiteren Messungen mittels professioneller Instrumente und dem von der Universität Hamburg entwickelten, gebauten und gewarteten temporären Stationsmessnetz (APOLLO) wurde im Rahmen der Kampagne der Mehrwert eines bürgerwissenschaftlichen Messnetzwerks untersucht. Die Geräte aus dem Bürgermessnetz wurden mit Technologien entwickelt, die das sogenannte ”Internet-of-things“ mit sich bringt. Desweiteren wurden kostengünstige Sensoren verbaut, um möglichst viele Geräte herstellen zu können. Die Geräte wurden als Bausätze ausgeteilt, die von Bürger*innen in wenigen Schritten zusammengebaut, aufgestellt und gewartet wurden.