´ó·¢¿ìÈý²ÊƱ

Description of the video:

Hello, my name is Andrea Adam Moore. I am the Director of the Indiana University Europe Gateway in Berlin. And I'm very happy to welcome you for Today's or Tonight's wherever you are. Virtual panel on The Journey: navigating the PhD and beyond. It's wonderful to have a great panel here with us virtually, but also to see so many people being interested in this process of rather different panel. It's not the academic contexts, but it's a kind of a support event, which I really, really like, especially since it is trying to help junior scholars and students. So as you could also are already see with your registrations, what we want to talk about today. The PhD journey, which seems to be laden with challenges, but also opportunities in both Europe and the United States. And today's virtual panel of young scholars and also very experienced researchers is going to discuss strategies and perspectives for leveraging those early stage career challenges and impediments into opportunities. And before we start, I want to introduce our panel to you. We have here with us and it's the the instigator of our panel as my dear colleague, David Audretsch who is a distinguished professor and the chair of economic development at Indiana University, where he's also a serving as director of the Institute for development strategies. He's also a part-time professor at the Department of Innovation Management and Entrepreneurship at the University of Klagenfurt in Austria and an honorary professor of an industrial economics and entrepreneurship at the WHU Otto Beisheim School of Management in Germany. David's research has focused on the links between entrepreneurship, government policy, innovation, economic development, and global competitiveness. Also with us is Johann Wiklund was the Al Berg Chair and Professor of Entrepreneurship at the Whitman School of Management at Syracuse University. As I just learned, the city of snow in the state of New York in the United States. And he's the editor in chief for Entrepreneurship, Theory and Practice, is a prolific advisor of PhD students and he has received the Academy of Management Entrepreneurship division mentor OT in 2011. His research focuses on neurodiversity and mental well-being and entrepreneurship, or I should say it includes these topics. And then to our junior scholars have also with us, Ann-Christin Grözinger is a PhD student and research assistant at the chair for intrepreneurship and family. The University of seeing. Her research focuses on psychological factors and small and medium-sized enterprises in the German bit of shunt. She's also interested in topics in the field of sustainable entrepreneurship. Currently she's a grantee of the Fulbright Germany PhD scholarship program. And as visiting David Audretsch at Indiana University for a joint research project on yet cushioning, Ronja Kirschning is a doctoral student at the École supérieure de commerce de Paris, ESCP Business School. And prior to joining us at the business school, Ronja graduated from Maastricht University with a Bachelor of Science in International Business. She further received a Master of Science in International Management, design innovation from the University of Glasgow. She has come around quite a bit already and her research focuses on knowledge, spillover entrepreneurship in different contexts, as well as institutional voids and barriers to entrepreneurship in developing countries. And last, but certainly not least, my dear friend Jonah Otto, who is a doctoral student and research assistant at the Gerald management organization at the University of Oxford. Jonah earns his undergrad degree from the University of Southern Indiana and the United States. And then completed a master of Public Affairs degree at Indiana University, where he focused on public management, non-governmental organization management, international education, and economic development. Came to Alex book in 2018, focusing his reach or researched and international organizations, education and economic development. And with this, you know, a little bit about the background off our panel. They will get started discussing hopefully very interesting questions for all of you. But we also really want to invite you to ask your questions to our panel. Please use, if possible, the Q and a box on your in your Zoom window. And I will pop in and ask our panel when there are questions. But if you want to ask them the chat, that's fine. But we prefer the Q&A. Anyway. With this, I would like to hand it over to David and look forward to hearing from all of you. Great. Thank you very much, Andrea, for the very kind introductions of, of, of this, this very inspiring panel. Usually I'd say of experts. But I guess in a way, each of us is, I don't know for experts on our journeys. But one thing for sure, we're all on our journeys. And listening to talk about just a little reflection of the PhD journey reminds me. I was at a conference not that long ago. And one of the doctoral students was as like like that all, yeah, Jonah and Kiki and fission was pretty close to completing a PhD. And then she said to me, Thank goodness, this is over and I don't have to do this anymore. And I know you'll find with Lafferty is laughing at that because you think, oh no, no, you're just at the beginning of a journey that doesn't end basically and seems to have no beginning and no ending. So yeah, let me let me so we're, you know, we're all a diff various stages of our journeys. Some more at the beginning, some more in the middle. And I suspect that at least one of us is more towards VN. What surprised you the most in your journey that you didn't anticipate or think about when you got into this. And it really wouldn't matter if you're one of the more experienced people and have a lot of years or nobody hears in the first year or first month. But this question would still stand, let's say, or the younger people first, I'm curious to hear their perspective. So I guess for me, it was really the social side of this whole journey because I hadn't anticipated that. I hadn't anticipated that I'm going to meet a lot of very interesting people from whom I can learn a lot. Older opportunities that come along with meeting people like that. That will be my biggest surprise I'd say so far, but I'm only going to hear so well. But I think when I started my PhD program in economics, because back then entrepreneurship didn't exist. I'm not sure the word really existed except for the French word, but that's another story. But I know, I know this. I never would have connected PhD in social in the same sentence. I think the questions are interesting because you say, what's the biggest surprise and maybe the biggest surprises that almost everything as a surprise, you, you don't really know when you're first starting out. What's really come in. You don't know what type of opportunities are going to be open to you. You don't really know what it's like to be managing, teaching your own courses at a, in our longer-term view, developing your own curriculum in a way, how your research idea is going to change from how you first envision that happen. You got to the university to start your doctorate. I said at the beginning, all you really know is okay, well I have this thing I want to research. I have this position, this title that I want to gain at the end of it. And you really have no idea exactly how that's going to go in-between. Almost everything kind of feels like a surprise, you know, the direction but the steps themselves, they reveal themselves as you go. What opportunity has surprised you the most? I mean, they have to be huge on, it could be on your Anybody. Kiki. I would win the Fulbright Scholarship honestly for me. Because, you know, that's, that's key. That's still surprises me. I'm joking. Me, so I already had it and everything and then I fire it and get it and then you're like, Okay. Sorry. No, it's just going to say in terms of surprises, I mean, I remember is selective and I did my PhD back in 998, so that's whatever 24 years ago now. So I probably only remember the positive things, but I think one thing clear really, because I was a consultant before we had gone to come for instance, in that space. What I do recall from our very first conference, which was in Barcelona, was how approachable everybody was there now, collegial was because there were people that I had read their works, you know, they, they were like the, the top scholars in our field. Now that's remember that, you know, after the session as we all went out and had to bear together and so forth anyway, just and you know, you could approach anybody and ask them about anything and everybody was just very, very happy to share their experience and knowledge. And I think that, I mean, I think I hope It is still that way. And I think that I've noticed with my own PhD students, particularly in their first year, that they have a bit reluctant to approach people that are more senior. Uh, for example, I had one PhD student. She was studying a specific method in turn out that Danny Kahneman, the Nobel Prize Laureate, had used that method, but he didn't fully describe it in this papers. I just told her I'll send him an email and ask him and she goes, Well, I'm a first year PhD student. I can't write an email to a Nobel Prize Laureate. Sure, you can eat and the academic, if you're an academic, you help the younger generation. So he did. And she did, she sent an email to him and he got a response actually, not from him directly, but from one of his co-authors. He does forwarded the email to one of the co-authors, wrote a very nice and exhaustive response. So I think that's what surprised me the most probable. And I encourage everybody who's listening to approach the people at conferences and whenever because they are open at Johann, I think what you just said is also what surprised me the most because I at the beginning I kind of thought that there's kind of probably a divide between kind of the early stage research as myself and more established paper and our professors actually encouraged us to also reach out to others just if we're interested in something. If you want to talk about something with someone and a lot of us did. I mean, David, I reached out to you and here we are now. So that worked out, I think for almost all of us at the chair that we just kind of got to know. Other people, got to know my senior people. They were super appropriate, traverse, super nice and happy to help and start a conversation. So yeah, I definitely didn't expect that before. I think right. You got your first publication as a result of them? Yeah. I mean, not yet, but I'm in the process. Is in the process. Okay. It's in the process. Yeah. I think those are probably the things that have come up here from, I mean, from Johan's first, I think those, those themes of community and family and how relational the academic world really is. And that'll probably keep coming up throughout today. And maybe that's a surprise to, I think in a lot of ways. We think about doctorates and we think about dissertations. Phd work is an individual thing and it's truly not. You're not getting the most out of the experience. If you're kind of if you're more isolated, if you're not engaging with the rest of your department, recipe or faculty, even multi-disciplinary across the other faculties at your university, engaging in the community, participating in conferences, reaching out to people, connecting with the network of your supervisor. You're not doing those things. You're really limiting yourself and the experience as a whole. And I think maybe that's something I didn't fully grasp before I started either. If we have a question from a fist stuff in scheme which we'll get to in a second. But you'll know how do you do those things? You don't say it. Like, Oh yeah, connect with your community. Cake, cake, he says be social. But how does it actually, how to do that? I guess that starts with the most important relationship, probably that between you and your supervisor or whoever else is on your board starting that conversation about what are the networks I need to be involved with? What's the key literature I need to be, you know, in the two reading to know the bigger names, to know who writes with who, who does, what, what they attend, what journals they publish, and to really kind of get the lay of the land, I guess you would say. To then realize like okay, what are, what are the channels to connect with these people? Who were the people I might want to talk to. Who does my supervisor. I already know all of these types of things I think are good. Like first steps, steps. I've put up to that. I think we all, I think we all love talking about, I mean, what brings us all together in academe has some interests to some kind of research topic or theory or method or whatever. I think it's, I think if you approach people you don't know and talk about their research. I think that's usually a good way to do it. I mean, people all, everybody loves some ego stroking. If somebody says, I really love your research about XYZ, that's usually a good start delimiters are talking about. I think that's worked well for me. I really agree with everything you say, but I was also thinking that we you, you can think like a smaller level because I think it's also really important to get in touch with your colleagues and other people from your faculty, talk to other PhD students, talk to post docs because they, they might also have a network and especially in the beginning, it might be easier to connect with those people. If you're starting out and man, it sounds like talk to people, that's probably the best advice. Try to talk to people. I know that it does denounce the the Academy of Management Dr. consortium. I know that it's in the making. I will be in one other panels there. So I know that I recommend to everybody if you're if you're in your PhD to apply to those consortia test-like. And Christine is saying and where you can meet the other PhD students because you know, once the old guys like David and me are gone, it's actually your PhD students that would be the future leaders of the field. So I mean, I can just tell a little anecdote. I met, I first met in Urdu. If you're an entrepreneurship, you should know of him. He was the editor of Journal Business Venturing is a very prolific scholar. He's my best friend in academia and we met that the doctor, first, the Babson Doctoral Consortium in 1996. We were friends for five years and then we started working together. So that's just one example I think that applies to many of us. Go to the consortia, go like and Christine says, talked it out a PhD students. Yeah, it's really good. I appreciate the example. Kiki. Don't worry. It's tough because to get to your question, but, you know, kiwi, you said talk to colleagues. I think you mean you don't other PhD students, right? Yeah. I mean, yeah. I mean, go on. At least at our university, we have the opportunity to do Ph.D. Seminars where you can meet other professors, for example, and you really get to know them. That's, I hope I'm right now participating in one seminar in Germany with fluidity to synthetic event a for example, a lot of people probably also know her and she's really always an inspiration to me if I talk to her. And she's at the same university IN so it's probably easier to talk to her first, then to just walk up to Johanne on a conference and talk to him. I would be scared of that still probably. But I know it shouldn't, but that's just like try to get into, get yourself comfortable with talking to the kali and other professors at your faculty and then you can expand that. Well, one thing I can tell you if you approach Johann conference, you've gotta be lucky knock. That's for sure. Because he's very tall. And you're not How did you get to know Simon positive me? Yeah. That was also he was coming to our university teaching a course on statistics and I engaged in that. And then he was, he was there for a week and we organized like a dinner with all the people from the chorus, but it was like the week before Christmas, so not a lot of people join them. But I went there and we had a great night together. We talk the laude Amnon, we went out once more are two times more to grab dinner because he's really a nice guy and it's great to talk to him. I've heard people say about Johann to. So Christophe. Christophe, his key, poses the question to our panel. It's a great question and a really great question. I think it's in everybody's mind. Did you start your PhD journey from wanting to reach, search something that interests you? Or did you start it from a question that society needs to get answered? I think I did the same thing. A. I'll let the other start. I'll think about it first. I can give an advice and then I answer that. I have strong opinions. There's share my opinions and then I'll share my own experience. I think it's If I could could say anything. I think it's so important that you, you, you choose a topic that's important to you as an individual. And I actually see this as a Venn diagram of three, partly over, over lapping circles. So in the first one is something that interests you as an individual. Doesn't matter if it's cooking. If it's, you know, making the world a better place or if it's riding a bicycle, could be just anything. And then you find an overlap with your advice. So I think it's also really important. If your advice app is like cooking and that's great. If your advice app is like something within the field of entrepreneurship, that, that's also great. And then a third circle there is that it's something that's been discussed and entrepreneurship. And then you try to kinda get those three to overlap. I think you have to start with yourself. Because if you do something that's deeply meaningful to yourself, you will have the energy to keep working forward for a long time. And you will also be, you will also some unique knowledge and so to say competitive advantage. I myself, I actually did not do that. It was, I actually started not. I actually started with the research project. That was my advisor who had a project and they needed an assistant. So that's how I started. But then later I read papers by somebody than in Miller that really I thought Where does the most wonderful research I'd ever seen. And that's really what got me on to my topic was finding a paper that I felt was outstanding. So that's my own journey. Lucky. You're famous. What did you tighten your famous paper? It's a great title. We UTI above we have written about this and then I wrote a book chapter called Reyes search equals me search. And more recently I wrote together with Dean Sheppard and the MDM hub in an editorial for ATP, where we're talking about me search. So you can, you can find that there were actually outline. Not only why it's a good thing to start with, things that are important to you as an individual, but also how you do it and the things you need to think about when you do it. So it's a little bit more hand, it's pretty much hands-on. So I encourage you to go there and take a look at that. And I will be interesting. What was your story? Because I think bear like that. People that are more experienced and have a greater impact here and answering the questions and probably will. I don't know if we have a greater impact. I mean, one thing for sure, something they stay the same in our business. But some things evolve. So when I hear Rohingya talk about in YouTube, Tiki about how you, we're encouraged. How the senior faculty really facilitated interaction themselves with other people. You know, when I did my PhD. Now, it's not true for Johan. I remember Johan as a doctoral student, actually. I remember him, he used to be one of you. And if I if I'm around long enough that someday I'll know when you are, what he is today. And it's, you know, that's the journey he went from being like you to me. He might as well been what have you maybe just a little taller. But it's what happens over time. You know, he's now become the Johan that we know. But the one thing I think, yes. Did this did this, you all jumped on it. That smell. We're a social. It's about people. But when I was young, I, me because I was an economics, that management was almost nonexistent. Business schools were almost nonexistent. The basic disciplines ruled. It was not social, was not in the culture. And so what you described, which I think is totally correct, that was not my experience. Now I would say this. I went to a big PhD program. What saved we got me through was my interactions with fellow PhD students. Surely, they're the ones who, you know. Yeah, you know, some wise person once asked what's more important, the journey or the destination. And I know some of you would argue one of the other. But in fact, it turned out to be neither. It's the people you travel with. And those people I traveled with the mass constant or the wind then as an assistant professor. And that in my early years doing research and then need these are the people got me through. But I would say there's been this evolution, which is interesting. Why that is that it's become much more, I don't know, horizontal. And certainly I remember in Europe, whether it was in France or say Germany where I went to where it was very hierarchical when I would give a seminar in the 1980s. First the professors could ask a question and then the doctor daunting could ask the question. Doctoral students. And then other people. Those days are long gone. So going back to, but for me, I chose a topic. And the reason I went and was exactly what Jonas said. I was interested in solving a problem in the world. And I found a way to do that in a PhD program through research. For me, that's always been the driving force. I think if you were, if you are comparing kind of the two different approaches, I think it's I think both you on and David were really getting at for me. It's so it feels like it's so much easier to go through this and stay motivated because I personally care about my research topic. And I mean, person I couldn't imagine going about it from another perspective. I know this wasn't exactly the question that was asked, but sometimes your people like people to talk to me about that. We'll say like, I really want to get a PhD. And then my next question is always looking at why? Because I couldn't imagine doing this just for the title or just because I feel like a doctor, It's brings me to something else. It the reality is it's a multi-year, long, like medium to long-term thing that you're really going to hate if you're not passionate about it. So I couldn't imagine coming into it without that sort of inner drive that connects you to the topic in that way. All right, I guess we would all agree that it's you should also be interested in doing research and not just do it a PhD for the title. Because then mean I even tell my students at this point if they wanted to pick like their death thesis topic, that they should obey interested in it, because I mean, I wrote like a bachelor thes's and the master thesis. I was interested in both topics that I wrote, but I can only imagine how hard it is if you're not interested in the topic and it will not turn out good. We can probably also agree on that. So there's, of course you need the interests. But I also think you need to look out what the community is interested or a society is interested. Because just because you have an interest doesn't always necessarily mean that other people are also interested in it. So you should ask yourself the question, well, could you contribute to the research or to society with researching your topic? And if you can find an answer to that imbalance like a great topic. And I said something. I think I have several colleagues. I mean, that I've worked with in different places that are a strong religious faith. I think it's really interesting. The once I know and work with how they are always able to kind of have that permeate their research from when they work on their PhDs and throughout. And I think that, I think for me those are really good role models on how you can kind of combine what are you realize we call Kiki now, what Keq is talking about here, do something that's important to the world and so forth. But also lined whether all were their own personal convictions and what they think is important. I'm not I don't want to drop any names here because but, uh, yeah, But I've seen a particular and those people that I can see it through their visitation and throughout everything they do. And if several of them are among our most successful in our field. So it's not a trade off that you do something that you think is important. And nobody else will think, I think it's important. I think it's the other way around. Like Jonah said, you more motivated and you can do better work. And get Andre is say Hmm to oppose her question. Sorry, there's my video. I got it. So what did you say you you'd be wanting to assume we say arm to actually ask a question? I'm not. No. Oh, oh, you mean to show up on the screen? Going to ask it in our own words. Okay? Yeah, Of course, yeah, I was like, Actually, it's really nice. Thank you to our audience than you are. And we have already be questions lined up and I'll, I'll take the first one now from CSM gov wash. As a young researcher at the early phase of my research Curie, I follow my passion and pursue research articles that I love and see value in. However, some people advised me to only focus on one or two aspects to build my profile in. I like research that focus on women, entrepreneurship, social entrepreneurship, social value creation, sustainability. As the sound, disconnected and distracted. Let's see answering yes or no. I think there's a lot to unpack there. So I mean, I think that whenever there's like promotion and tenure evaluations, I do quite a few. I mean, I think you want to see that a person through their career are known for something. So you could say if I think about the topic of XYZ, One of the first name that comes up is, is you I think you wanted to be known for something at the same time. I mean, I think it's at but another, and then also, it's also the way in to research what's really valued is for each individual paper, I should say, for each individual project, it's important that you go deep in a relatively narrow area, both medicine ideologically and theoretically. And in terms of findings, rather than doing a little lemma, everything, It's not good to build a theoretical model, combine the 25 different theories, for example, and look in at 500 different variables and saying that everything is important. So, but at the same time, I think you can combine several interest. You can still achieve those two things. But, uh, but combine many different interests and also think it's, I mean, of course you can also do research in, let's say, two or maybe even three distinct areas as a PhD, is it about I wouldn't I wouldn't advise you to work in more than two distinct areas as a PhD student rail thus can be too overwhelming, but I think that's, that's, it's not that needs to be cracked and I think it's it's not that hard to be honest, too good to be able to do this. Say home, You remind me of, I don't know of. I want to say Americans when they go to Europe and they want to go to Portugal. And they want to see Rome. And they want to see Stockholm. And they want to say, well, you get the point right. And they're gonna go and they got a week a go. Well, you get down, you know what the solution is, spent 20 years. And then you can see so that when I look at your interests, I've got it on my screen. You guys can see it to women, entrepreneurship, social insurance, social value. I mean, what I see is these are all great topics. Lisbon, great burger, most great outburst grade, and so on. But it's, I think what Johann says. I mean, I think in some ways the answers he says is, well, it depends what you do with it. You could certainly do something that's relevant to all of those. But in some ways, you've got a bigger, I don't know, it's a bigger umbrella basket, will call it Europe. And it was full of interesting places. And the key is to, this is what you'll aren't really getting at. The key is to pick something specific that you can have a meaningful experience with. But then going back to what you said, which very boring, but also mean something to somebody else like the scholarly community, then you've got some success. So one answer is, do you want to be a tourist and spend three hours in 14 different cities? That's what Johann does. In the freshman courses he teaches, I suppose, right? With some survey of some topic, right? Give it right. But it's almost in this when he said about this laser focus that you're going to actually contribute something to a very specific question that nobody's thought of or maybe they thought it, but I haven't been able to do. So. Actually, my answer is it looks good. And he yes, what you will do, maybe relevant all of them. But in the end you're gonna have a much more specific, specific question. I don't know what the Yona and tiki and Ron, you think about them. I mean, urine of struggling with all this, right. So actually I had the same problem or sometimes to have the same problem. I think there are so many interesting topics out there also when you speak to people, what other people are researching, I'm off, I'm amazed by what your topic somewhat as researching where I'm like, oh, I kind of want to do that as well. But I mean, that got you to have the time to do all of that. And I think once you narrow it down to a certain like maybe you are as you want, set two distinct areas within these areas, there's so many different topics. You can clap on that. Within your interest, obviously. Yes. So yeah, I think that's what I'm doing at the moment, but that's the stage where I'm at, at the moment. And I think now that I realized within these areas, That's so many other areas, yeah. That helped me a lot. And I think yeah, I think you just have to keep going and maybe pick one or two and see you see what's out that way you can contribute the most. I also think that it kind of depends on what, what phase of your journey urine. Because if you're very early in your PhD, it just makes probably sense to focus on one thing because it's already enough. Jonah, I mentioned that there's a lot of surprises the waiting for you, and that's really true. And if you try to do way too much at that in the first year, then it can get very overwhelming, I'd say. But then if you come closer to maybe trying to get like a professorship position or an assistant professorship position. Other thing, scan import and I just have like a seminar last week where someone shared his experience on those boards when they do decide on ten years and things like that. And they were he said that they are always asking the question. Yeah, you're researching that, but what else can you teach? And I think that's something to keep in mind of course, but you cannot diversify too much in an early stage of a career. And also, I think then it comes to thinking outside of the box because maybe you cannot teach like five different courses, like topic wise, but maybe you can offer something else. Maybe one of your strengths is to present something. And you could do like a workshop on presenting or if you're a good writer, then you could shared this advice with students and things like that. I think then. That will be my take on that. It's very great. And I think the mix of your responses to the questions, grade and night, if I just because I see a lot of questions from our audience coming in, I think they should get the questions answered as much as we can. I would like to ask you one that is somewhat related from someone who didn't mention the name. But the question is, what happens if one finds out midway that their research question has already been answered or just got answered recently. Well, I'm going to I'm not good at I'm going to critique. That's the wrong question. The right question is not happy, not what happens if one finds, but what happens when one finds? It's got to happen. Now, colleagues, What's the answer? And that's the importance of reading. At the beginning, you just, you really need to read. I think that as you're going into the PhD and then in the first stages of the PhD, you really need to be reading a lot and speak into your supervisor and your other colleagues a lot. So the other pretty firm grasp on the literature so that helps you kind of avoid yeah, moving in that direction. But then also, if someone else answers your exact specific research question, was your research question specific enough? I guess would be another way of looking at it. You know, the difference between between me and the rest of the panel is, I know move fossa. I think the book, he's the owner of the most famous Doner kebab. What he thought place in bus on. Maybe done right not far from the gateway. And I've actually met him. I mean, in the early days were very many customers. I talked to him and, you know, you know, he could've said I mean, in a way he told me. He says, Oh yeah, he thought that he was going to invent the Doner kebab and start selling into Berlin it as he did the reading that Jonas talking about, what he discovered is kind of, not surprisingly, he was not the first person to do it. Mark Twain wrote, the author wrote once, sex was invented, when I turn for G, while the donor who Bob was not infinite when multiple fossa got the idea. So what did move faster to do? And somebody wanted to help the great discovery or contribution from fossil made. Adding the vegetables. Yes, he had spent months. So he doesn't sit there and say, oh, it's been done before, because that is the phrase, the kiss of death that we all fear. Either in a dissertation, writing articles, is when the, the, the advisor, the referees, the editors said, well, it's been done before. And you know, you don't have to be just in Berlin to understand. Yes, the door to the kebab spend been done before, but not the waving fossils done it. And that's why we all know he's got the most famous Doner kebab in the world. Because he didn't say, oh, it's been done before, made a contribution. Which is to add because this is undiagnosed and you, of course, I'm trying to push the analogy. So when you were kid oh, it's been done before. We'll then find a way. I'm not saying add vegetables to your article. Vegetables are always good and healthy. But find a way to add to what's been done in a way that's meaningful. And I would say the reason we know about fossa, right, Andrea, is he didn't add ice cream. He didn't add, you know, what appeared as though he added vegetables, that was the right thing in appeals to the market. And in a way, that's why at my, you know, Japan might say no, no, you've, you've root word the question wrong. What do you do when you find out some exact all questions have been addressed? So what the challenges to either answer it's slightly different or to pose it in a way that hasn't been posed before. But everybody's going to say find what they're looking at. And that's almost a paradox of research that says you're lucky. You want to do something new and different. But the whole time we start out by looking at, say, well, if it were any good, somebody would have already done it. Exactly. Yeah. I would state in which you're worse off if you ask a question nobody else, it's as before. Because there are two reasons. Maybe you might know but S ask is just because a, it's not an interesting question or be it your question that doesn't have an answer. So I think that the fact that somebody has addressed this is a really good sign. And the good thing about research is that it's all, I mean, you can just look at it in any field, not only in social science but in science, there's always so much more to add. You know, you realize there's, the perfect study has not been carried out, the perfect papers not been, it would never be written. There's always going to be big, big gaps once you get sufficiently into the topic. And you'll be like Jonah said, you read all the literature on it. You're going to see there are big, big holes, big holes everywhere, which means that you can easily carve-out, do something unique. So I wouldn't worry the least. Johan, can you give us an example of a hole that you identified and the way that you filled it in you recycle. I could just talk about my first very first publication or saying that my first, I think I have one with my by that I mean, what? I'm actually the sole author. It's on entrepreneurial orientation. It's one of the most research topics in the world in the entrepreneurship. And it was that, I note is that virtually all, all research that was done was done cross-sectionally. So they look that entrepreneurial orientation and performance at the same time period. And all I did was pretty much to say, I think the title is something to sustainability of the relationship. So what I did was I got longitude data so I could see how large is the performance cross-sectionally, where it's hard to show which way causality runs. And then I saw how does that compare to performance one year into the future. And then more. I think it was only two years into the future. And I could show there seems to be sustainability and yeah, and it's got a cup. I think it's got probably a couple of thousand sites now since and it's well cited paper. And yeah, it's, it's not a great contribution, but it was good enough to get into good journal and good enough to get a lot of citations. So there you go. That's probably good for the younger members of the panel and most of the participants. So there you go. What, what I'm kind of hearing here, what what our advice would probably be is that you wouldn't need a change of perspective because that's also something that I learned very recently and probably you played a big role in that they were teaching me that. Sometimes it just makes sense to try to change your perspective on things. Try to think outside the box. Try to talk to people and try to approach a problem from a different angle and apps or a double research question that you want to ask. So pivot. Okay, moving on. After the question. Here's a question and I have to admit I don't read and speak Greek so I can read the name. But it's a great question that follows. The research question is, how are you sure or the methodology you choose is the best? Fit? Your bladder, your bladder viewers like you. Given that we're now, because if we're thinking about publishing and you'd never know who is going to be derived here. And that scenario and what opinion day would have on that. It's just you shouldn't make sure that it makes sense to use the methodology and then go with it if you decide that it makes sense that well, I don't know. Yeah, I think so. I ran into this. Actually once on the first my first publication, we ran into an issue where we had a blind reviewer kind of coming after her methodology a little bit. And what really helped us finding prior examples of the methodology being used in that journal or in other journals. And then adding that to our literature review of the methodology we were applying. So anytime you can kind of display, a lot of times it's about justifying your choices. So as long as you can always justify your choice by pointing back to the literature from journals that are either the journal that you're wanting to be in or where you're trying to publish or something like a similar caliber. A lot of times that seems to do the trick because chances are, as he said, You're not the first person to step up to the table. Someone else's. You'll maybe not answered your question with this methodology, but a similar question or in a similar area. And so there's always people you can look at. Provide examples. And maybe I'm sorry. Go ahead. No, no, no, no. Please. I just wanted to say I think it also always taps if you just talk to people that yields and if they think it makes sense or not. And also just talk to your supervisor, to other professors and they must stuff the time habit, take an opinion on that. And yeah, so I think that's also very helpful. And be asking that question or early like whenever marathon getting stage because that was not fun running into that at the pure. We were confident or methodology beforehand, but because we had talked it out with other scholars that have applied the methodology in similar type studies. But yeah, I mean, I would hate to get to and age and having not thought through that already, you might be doing that at the initial stage of your research. So I mean, that's that I think we said before about the social aspect. I think that I mean, I have multiple coauthors on all my papers these days. The one I mentioned was from 990 and I was by myself. But, you know, if if you're uncertain, talk to somebody who knows more than you do and ask them if they want to be a coauthor. And the second thing is send papers out for friendly reviews before you submit them to journals. And in this case, if it's a methodology, you hesitate. Try and find a piece. A guy, another person in the suite where we are, another PhD student, org. Standing about an OS more. That's the first two tanks. And the third thing is, I submitted a paper to a journal, gotta rejection. They said You must do Heckman correction. And me and Dean, we said, well now let's hack my correction. We didn't have a clue. So I went home. This is many years ago, I've bought a book, I learned it. I re-ran all the analysis, gets submitted, a paper got published. So if that's the third option is you actually go ahead and learn it. Somebody tells you it's not the right thing to do. You just figure out what is that? That's great. Sample. You know. I want to go back to what Jonas said when he said, Well, no. Gd. You remember what Sir? Isaac Newton's response was? When people said, how do you do all this great research. Remember what his response was? I don't. I know I know that Johann year-old, but you're probably not that all. His answer was Well, I stand on the shoulders of giants. That's one. Yeah. Yeah. Right. And so the point is, Jonah says What is especially you want to be, going back to what Johann said a little earlier. You, you want to really have focus on, you want to be very clear what your contribution is, which means what are we learning that we didn't know before? If it's not the methodology, then went to join it at, say, he said, Well, look, stand on the shoulders of giants rate, other people have done it. That's what Johan did in the example you gave. You stood on the shoulder of a real giant, a Nobel Prize winner Heckman, right? And so you want to be clear, probably your contributions, not the methodology. So therefore, you want to see who else has used a methodology. Where has it been used before? Now of course, a simpler way to go ask mook fossa, because you know what's move fast as contribution. Is it the Doner kebab? As far as I know, he makes up the rest of the Doner kebab like all the others, right? So he stands on the shoulders of giants. Well, maybe it's image at a Doner kebab. And then he's clear his contribution is something on top so that you don't want to be inventing, doing something different with the, you actually want to do what everybody else does with methodology. Now you may be using the wrong one, the wrong place, at which point that all the suggestions about, you know, talk to people, communicate, get friendly with views and so on. Makes sense. But yeah, I also think that you should, at some point, you'd have to make a decision on that. So you cannot be be be scared of making this decision because Oh, well, what I meant with saying You never know that I had an experience with our first research project that we did. And we decided on a method because my older colleagues, they were like, Yeah, we already last time we had a similar model and then we did this methodology and then the reviewers wanted us to change it. And we did that. So it makes more sense to already take that one. And now we got into the RFP process with our paper with their specific Method. And then they asked us, why did you not choose the other method? Because that makes more sense to us to use that. And then we, we set together, we thought about it, we discussed it. We also tried it. It worked two and then we send them the table in the wrap your process. And they were happy with that. So we could stick to our methodology that we initially chose. But when I'm trying to say here is just because you chose one methodology, does not say you don't have, You cannot change it. Like Johan also sat. So don't be too afraid to make bad choice here. Try to think it through very good. And then at some point just make a decision with will walk you feel comfortable with. So another question that comes from a very different angle, but being an international education and research, I think it's a very valid question. Farm friends, coffee men's, how do you start your PhD journey? Especially or coming from Africa? How best or you are able to reach a professor or a supervisor who was interested in the area or fields you intend to investigate. I mean, not truffle now understand a crisis because you need, as far as I mean, I have been involved in admitting PhD students in a few countries and all the contours I'm aware of, I'm, might not apply to Germany because I never but it's like you have to be admitted into the program first, right? So I mean, you can of course you pick you can pick a school where you know that there is a person who does the kind of research you're interested in and then you can apply to that school. And then you know, if you're lucky or good enough, whatever, then you will be admitted. And that's usually the biggest hurdle to pass. So. Maybe somebody else understands the question better because I don't fully understand that. Yeah, might my sense Johann, of the question is in a way I want to say add doesn't matter what the question is. It's our interpretation, right? Like, like watching art are going to museums. So your answer is interesting. My sense of the question is that it's about globalization. And back in where is where I do have the experience of, we'll say, are the advantage of experience, right? Because when I started out on my typewriter, I have to say all you young people and in participants asking questions, how many of you are using a typewriter? You've all got it easy, right? But back then, to really make contributions to research it in the fields that would be roughly equivalent to what we're all in. You almost couldn't do it. In Sweden. It was very yes to our PhD program, so on. They were second rate. And there was a clear you had to go to Oxford, Cambridge, Berkeley if you couldn't go to those. So the answer would be, you've gotta move to those places. But we know that was before globalization. You were part of that process, Johann, where you got your PhD on Shopee, right? Was a big part of that process. And we know like every other industry, inactivity, Our business is globalize. So people can participate in Access independent of where they're located on the globe in a way that gets into Johan's point. I mean, everybody's kind of coming in whether you're coming in from I don't know, From yon Shopee in or you're coming in from Milan? Yes, places are different. But there's a global industry and most of the people starting out are trying to access it. Now that doesn't say how to do it in good. I think that's a very important question because in a developing country contexts like Africa, there's any, any of the panels have any insights. What would be different about that than say, coming in from? I don't know. Lowly are Umea up in the north of Sweden. So international education is one of the topics I look at and the way that it's moved in the last and most recent times is that the competition for talent is so strong now in the university setting, if you have a competitive application, I don't get the sense that it matters where you're from. It this though, if you're comfortable in reaching out to a PhD program directors in areas where you have interest or if there's specific professors who work really piques your interests, reaching out and making those connections, making information requests from those places. I was recently talking to a retired professor who into his doctoral program while he was serving in the Marshall Islands at, during the seventies. Whenever there is just a mail boat, they came once every two weeks. Luckily, we don't have to do that. A more tape it's talking about. So it's literally just about reaching out, making connections and information requests, and finding the program that's the right fit for you. I'd say, I would just say you got be courageous. Be brave. Don't be scared to reach out to those places that have the access to information and get that application out there. Because I think like Johan said, that's the biggest hurdle. It struck me that I know that many universities, I don't know about Indiana University, I'm sure know about Syracuse. University has come to understand. Our PhD programs are that say, they're racially not very diverse. And I think that's been a push in my university to have more racial diversity and some non-thinking. If you're from Africa and your black, I think it might be, you might consider applying to the US because I think there's a genuine interests, at least from my university, to admit more students of color into our PhD program. So that says that a little observation, I think it's the same. I know it's the same in many other other American institutions. Don't about Indiana specifically, but that's just a little, little thing you might want to think about. I would also like to add to Joe now because I think what you said is, is really important. But I also like to, to think about the idea that it's really important who your supervisor is and that you kind of get along with that person where we're again at the social level. Because I think if you just, if you're not fitting together in, in your characters, it can be pretty hard. So I will want to advise you to try to get to node a pupil first where where you would like to apply, at least that's, in my opinion like the best the best idea to do. Because that's like. They will be your supervisor, usually they're also your boss. And you will work with them quite a lot. And if you're not on the same page than that, I don't know if that makes sense to pursue a PhD with this person. Certainly, I have colleagues that don't match well with their supervisor. And our experiences are completely polar opposites. So I can only echo that. That's incredibly important. David, did you have a question to the panel? I have a couple more in the Q and a. You have once you go, Where did you go with your questions? Okay. Vary from respond again, a question. Right. Conversation so far I would like to know, how could I get a fully funded PhD program related to my field, that is economics, what do I have to do? It's a question about funding of that journey. Choose the country wisely. Yeah, we can apps like that's like a really dependent on, on the, on the country and how, how does systems are. They are so different. So you would have to choose your country where you want to do your PhD and then try to get information from. Or it choose the instance. Some probably that, that will be like country plus institution and then getting contact with the institution and talk to them. They usually have like an international office or advisory office or something like that. And they know best what advice to give you because we, I think we cannot, cannot do that here in this particular frame because that's just very, very specific. There's some good There's some good sources of information that you can start out IID from like General down to more specific. So there's a few different international education bodies where you can find overall reports about how the university system in those countries operates. And then that gives you a kind of a broad overview like, okay, how are these funded? And then what does that mean for the programs? And then at a country level, once you kind of identify mortar or if you already have an idea of the types of places you want to go. Each. They typically at a national level, there will be some kind of Ministry of Education, Department of Education website that has information specifically for studying in that country. And what it looks like how to apply for those types of jobs, what the funding looks like, how those decisions are made. Um, and then obviously, depending on your discipline, there are outside foundation funding and grants available. So there's a lot of different answers to that question. And I would really just say start broad and then move in more specifically, you'd be surprised how many funded opportunities are out there, but by no means are all of them funded. And that Sorry, Brad, you I go No, that's fine. I was asked to go with, I think business schools in the US as far as I know, every basically position it's founded, I don't know of a single business school in America that have non funded PHD positions might be completely different in, in economics, but I don't know. So so since we have yet to eight, I'm sorry. Don't be afraid to reach out to the people. I mean, if you pick the institution, then just there's a lot of email addresses on their website. So you can just write another PhD student. They might be able to help you at least find like the person that can help you at the institution. So this is already partially answering one other question. There was a question about and resources, some good resources for PhD students. What I would suggest, if any of you will have some kind of more general resources for our audience, we will collect them and me both share those with a follow-up e-mail that we will send out to everyone who registered for today. That will also include the recording of this session. So everybody, keep your eyes open for that. But one other question that is somewhat related and it is about writing. Would you recommend taking writing courses? If yes. Do you have any in mind? The second part of the e-mail, but what do you think about academic writing is something course on. It's an art for sure. I'd say it's also in some ways it's field dependent. So I'd say there's a lot of different workshop opportunities available for this type of thing. Like doctorial workshops are ano depending on what type of course you're in or whatever program you apply to. You might even have courses that work on this type of thing. Or you end up at a university that has facilities on campus that also work and skill building towards academic writing. But the tone that you have to re, with, all those things are little bit different depending on the discipline. But yeah, those. Once things are out there, and I would say that if it's not already a mandatory part of your program, that if you would feel more comfortable with it, those things are out there. And I also think that you should try to be honest to yourself. Like evaluate, try to evaluate your writing skills by, for example, reading articles and really not, not thinking about what they are saying like the content, but look at how they structure articles, how to make our arguments like that, the techniques they use. And then be honest to yourself and ask yourself the question, can I do that already or not? Because it really depends if it makes sense to do like a course on writing depends on what stage of your writing process you are, right? Because for me, for example, I'm not a native speaker. I have to write in English most of the times. It's been a struggle in the beginning and I think I'm, I'm getting better. But then again, if I read something that David wrote for me, that's really discouraging because I'm not that good yet because he is a native speaker. And that just means that I have for myself to develop a strategy on how I can get better with that. And so it's really, it depends on what you need. I'm going, I'm gonna stick my neck out to disagree with q cube it. So firstly, no, I don't I don't feel like you're writing courses because I think that it's, it's not the right way to learn. And I also kinda disagree. We kick, I don't think it's an art, I think it's a craft. Writing a paper and a craft you learn as an apprentice mark that with a master. So my recommendation is never write your first paper. I mean, I don't think you should ever write papers alone. But make sure you write your first papers with more experienced authors. And you know, you just write then they're going to rewrite and look at exactly what they changed and everything else. You said 60k about looking at pay pursuit. You're like reading. It makes sense to you in and see what they do and try and copy, but always work with more senior colleagues, swabbed, learn to think. And I think that's the best way because writing, you know, I know about these workshops, right? And let's say in sociology and writing and entrepreneurship is completely different. And it's also going to be different even for I didn't economics. So I think they are limited value and I think it's better to kind of write. But then when you're within your discipline with a more experienced colleague. So we can both agree that writing matters. I'm no, Johann as editor of ETP, I'm going to put words in his mouth. That's the difference between acceptance and rejection half the time, right? It's the writing. So it matters how to get there is an interesting question. But since we're all disagree with TGL, disagree with her too. Not that I'm not a native speaker. Yeah. You got that part right. But when I was you when I was young, I look back and know I'd be my articles were written terribly night and do what Joanne said which work? Because people to work with partners in teams back in the day. But this gets to both your points. And you feel yourself key because I read your work, you know, you're getting better. You get better at. It is what Johann says. You start to develop the craft. You craft the craft. And if you live long enough, you get worse. And a lot of things in life that you're writing, anything you put that focus on, it will start to get better. But one thing for sure you allege right. It's it's field specific for sure. Another angle. And I know that's also an important question for a lot of people. Does H matter for starting a PhD journey? And she has the question is specifically in the United State, is it too late for those who are older than 40 years? And I should say, one of the people I admire most in my field list recount. I just wrote a 10 year later forum last year. He is a year older than me. He turns 60 last year. So he must have been a bit into his forties when he started 4550, like I said, a probability 50 when he started. I can't think of it more like promising and an embedded scholars. I don't think it's not too late. I can't imagine the trouble with most people. I'll see now our age. And you know, this is that they kind of get stuck because they knew where fields were, they knew where methodologies were. They knew where the literatures were, and they stopped evolving, I guess, keeping up right? So when I saw with Maryanne Feldman, who was a giant of a, of a scholar. And she got her PhD. She's my age. You've got a PhD about 43. 44. And I still felt these, I still feel these little twinges of envy. Because when she entered the research that everything you do, people been talking about. Also that the kind of networks and getting to know people relationship. She was current at a person what a time. And that made her able to, it's not a coincidence. She's famous. For a certain work she did on the geography of entrepreneurship and innovation. And, you know, when I got my PhD, nobody was talking about geography. She came right after. Geography kind of became a big thing. And so she took it to entrepreneurship in the literature. And she's never look back, you know, the older people. Well, actually I was her age, not in dog years, but in real ears, in impeached years older. But we were not we we did have the same awareness she did. So you could actually say it can be an advantage that you can leverage to your advantage. And it also depends on, on your reasons. I'd say, well, what are the reasons why you wanted to do a PhD? And how, how do you perceive this whole program? Because if you, for example, see it as an opportunity to grow as a person yourself, that say it doesn't really matter what HER just go for it. Because you will grow from this experience that will be hard times. There will be times where it's great and things like that, but you will grow and so that's not connected to an H. And if you're interested in something, then just go for it. You're really expect you to, to get tenure very fast and things like that. And that's your reason for doing a PhD. You should maybe reconsider that because it's not as easy. You have to be persists and width with everything and my work out, it might not work out, but that's, that's also academia because it's also for the younger people here. We don't know if we will ever get a tenured position and things like that. So we're also in that unclear here. So that's really not related to age. I think. This is a o going, gone. That is a very good bridge to what I will use as last question that the end of the journey today. But it's also the question about the end of the journey. And I want to apologize to I think three people's questions. We haven't taken up in our 75 minutes today, but I tried to pick those questions will apply to most here today in terms of our audience. So Leon is asking, I want to make this the last question, but it's an important one. And he's asking about intrepreneurship research, but it applies to all see, oh, no, not at all. Maybe at most. In intrepreneurship, research, nephew job offers, but many applicants, how can I increase my chances of finding a job after my doctorate? What matters most university employees? I know it's a big one. You can take more than two minutes that you need to. I mean, we were hiring and we've hired every year, the last eight or ten years to Syracuse and I've had PhD student on the job market just about every year. And I've applied for jobs all over. So it's very simple. You need to have you need to have interesting papers at a reasonable state, at a very simple journal. So it's essentially that there has to be something about your research that kind of resonates with the place are interested in. And you must also show that this can lead to high quality publications. I mean, ideally you should have one or two publications to the top journals. I know that's a very tall order for it for anybody at that state. But, you know, a couple of papers that have really good journalist, it's way better to have one or two papers at the revise and resubmit state at a really good journal have five or 10 at the low level journals. So that will be my battery rapid response. And now you need a job market paper that you have lead and not your advice so that you can present in a very compelling way. What if you get a campus visit? I subscribe to a ton of open position newsletter, emails just to kind of have an idea of how that market is moving at any given time. It's there usually multidisciplinary. But since they were asking specifically about entrepreneurship, if you're geographically open, there are opportunities, especially in university systems that are public. Entrepreneurships, an issue that some social and governmental relevance. And so those two institutions are either being created or being added to it and creating whole departments, you name it. So there it really does seem to be a lot of opportunity if you're open to where it is. And then in other fields, I think that also kind of holds true. I think a lot of people asked me where I want to go whenever I'm finished and I'm always kind of thinking like, well, wherever it is. So I think if you really gotta maintain an openness geographically, your opportunities probably aren't as limited as you might think, regardless of what the disappointments, no one else will last for it. I found it was a great answer for that question, but I don't want to cut anyone off. Well, then, thank you so much. David, Johann Jonah Raja, and I'm philistine. It's been a great pleasure. I am sure that this recording will be watched by many who couldn't join us today. I think this itself is a great resource for people. In your shoes. I see pneumonia and Jonah. So thank you for making time for us and for everyone else out there. Have a wonderful rest of your day and evening. Stay healthy and I hope to see you all soon again and one or the other way. All right. Thank you. Yeah. Thanks for having us. Yeah. Thanks, everyone.

Description of the video:

Good morning. Good afternoon and welcome everybody to our roundtable discussion today entitled Navigating the European funding landscape. My name is Tim and Helweg and I'm Academic Director of the way Europe gateway in Berlin. And it's my pleasure to welcome you to this roundtable discussion. I'm very excited about it and really very grateful for those that have joined us as presenters to learn more about what's available, what's not, how researchers can gain about that. I'm thinking about expanding the horizons in these directions. Before we get started, I wanted to my thanks to the Office of the Vice President for International Affairs and the ´ó·¢¿ìÈý²ÊƱ, but with gateway network for sponsoring this event. And thanks to the help of undergrad or more and on adult church for helping behind the scenes and administering this. Many thanks to them. I also want to thank those, help. They reach out to them and say thanks to the Office of the Provost for Research here at Indiana University for their help in promoting this event. So I'm happy to have three speakers with us today. And what I'd like to do, I'll introduce them and then they'll each make some remarks present there. They're just some brief presentations, and then we will have plenty of time to open up for Q and a two-year from all of you. So with us today is box I'm Nicholas. She is Program Manager for Europe at the office of the International Science and Engineering Program at the National Science Foundation will be speaking about international and European partnerships and availability to the NSF. I'm also happy to say that with us as Diego summer, I toggle, who is Deputy heard of unit the European Commission Directorate General for research and innovation. And he is with unit F1, which is international cooperation pertained to Europe, the Americas, and thematic coherence at DG, the EU Commission. And last but certainly not least, we have Joseph Shah who is Associate Professor and Associate Dean for Research at the School of Public and Environmental Affairs of Indiana University. And and Joe will be sharing his experience with Horizon 2020 research platform. So without further ado, I'd like to turn it over to Roxanne and hear from her and welcome Roxanne, thanks for joining us. Thank you so much, Tim. I'm glad to be here and I am going to share my screen. Is that showing up for everyone? Yes, I see a thumbs up. Thank you, Joe. So as Tim said, I'm with the National Science Foundation. I am in the Office of International Science and Engineering. I'm the lead for the countries and regions cluster. And also handle the EU portfolio as long as well as the UK and a couple of other portfolios. So I've taken the liberty to go a bit beyond Europe, to talk more about international more broadly. At NS. Get my, there we go. So just a little bit of background. The National Science Foundation, this federal agency, we fund research, that is our job. You can see our mission statement there on the slide. We don't conduct the research ourselves. We receive proposals and work through a merit review process to review those proposals and then give money for researchers to conduct the work. We do research in science engineering, and education across all fields of all fields, as you can see on the slide here. We don't really get into medical research per se. We do, It's fun. Some basic research, development of instruments that would get into the medical field. But for the most part, we believe the medical clinical research to National Institutes of Health. The NSF vision, in a nutshell, are in a single slide. The three pillars you can see across the screen there. We are focused on advancing the frontiers of research, ensuring accessibility and inclusion. And you will, you will see that theme come up a number of times that probably is obvious that the National Science Foundation supports research. We are also extremely interested in stem workforce, stem workforce development, so they go hand in hand. And then the third pillar most relevant to this presentation is securing US global leadership. When we talk about securing your school board leadership, I have to emphasize that we do not mean that the NSF or that the US is out there in front and we're leading the way and everyone else must follow. That's not at all. What we mean. What we mean is that we lead by example of how we conduct research, how we review research, that sort of process, that the process of science. So leading, leading by example, leading by the different processes that we put in place. See the bottom of the slide there. Underpinning the three pillars are a foundation of innovation and partnerships. So again, relevant to this presentation is that the partnerships in particular, I'm thinking in terms of partnerships broadly. Not just partnering across academic institutions, but partner across sectors and certainly partnering internationally. You may be aware, you may have heard that NSF is looking at a potential new research directorate that we refer to as tip. So technology innovation and partnerships. We will we'll have to see how that plays out in terms of our legislative process. So for NSF, but looking at, at a potential new directorate, really, really bringing innovation and partnerships message into focus. Then getting into more about the international engagement at NSF. So these are the three major focus areas of international and you will see they are very, very similar to the previous slide. So again, that idea of promoting a globally engaged workforce, advancing research through international partnership. And then again, that US leadership and looking at the global S and E agenda, just to say again, that does not mean that the US leaves and everyone follows. But again, leading by, by some of our processes and how we would work. Digging down a little bit beyond those three focus areas and looking at the core values. So what are we trying to accomplish? What do we pay attention to when we consider international collaboration mechanisms and opportunities? I'm going to repeat myself a few times here. We're just sort of drive the message home that we want to engage in international collaboration when it enhances research, when it progresses research, and when it enhances education. We absolutely want to make sure that partnerships are reciprocal, that it's a mutually beneficial relationship, that all parties bring something to the table. That doesn't necessarily mean dollars. It could mean knowledge, a technique, access to a site, a piece of equipment. But making sure that it's a mutually beneficial arrangement. Connected with that is the next bullet, networks that link expertise and leverage resources. The fourth bullet, again, just to hammer home the point that student engagement, early career opportunity that develop, development of the stem workforce is really important to us. And then the final bullet that ties back to the US participation in the global landscape is that commitment to openness and data-sharing When doing international collaboration. Of course, there are challenges. Tim referenced that there are challenges. And these are probably not a surprise to anyone. When you're dealing with different agencies in the US and different agencies around the world. There are different processes, criteria, policies, guidelines, constraints. Those are all things that we NSF, we try to work around whenever we are pursuing or have them place an international collaboration mechanism. Many things have to be sorted out before we, we present an international opportunity to the community. Of course, program cycles and timelines of those. Another thing to work around. And then just different national priorities and looking beyond the agency level, looking into at the national scale, what are the research priorities? Those can be different. Another thing to consider. Then getting to some of the nuts and bolts here of actually funding international activities at NSF. So I sent an international office. But most of the support for projects that include an international component actually come through the research directorates that you see listed across the bottom of the screen. So for folks who aren't aware, NSF is set up with research directorates. In those units are the ones that handle the incoming proposals, the processing and review proposals, and then getting money out the door to the successful proposals. So most support for projects with international components come out of those research directorates. They can be through GE, regular old programs. They can be supplements to existing awards, or they can be targeted opportunities. I'll talk a little bit more about those in the next few slides. The yellow rectangle up in the corner of the screen is something that I need to point out. That NSF is very open to international collaboration. Almost every program welcomes and international component, an international colleague being involved in the project. But NSF almost always only funds the US side. Something very important to keep in mind, there are rare cases that must be very well justified where we can use NSF dollars to support foreign personnel or foreign entity. But those are cases where the equivalent resource knowledge access just cannot be efficiently or effectively duplicated within the US. So then digging a little bit, I apologize for the many words. On this slide. It's not a very friendly slide. But I leave it behind for reading later on if you're interested. So the next few slides are cover a few of the different mechanisms that we have at NSF for supporting international collaboration. This is not meant to be comprehensive, these limits be just examples. So the first is what we call a lead agency opportunity. Through a lead agency opportunity. It is a mechanism whereby US and foreign researchers come together to draft a single proposal that is submitted to one agency. And it undergoes a single review at that agency. And that agency is called the lead. So that agency takes the lead and receiving, reviewing and then making a funding recommendation on that proposal. The point of the lead agency getting to the why is that? It's, it's meant to reduce some of the uncertainties are barriers to collaborating internationally. For example, US researcher wants to collaborate with someone in country X. Us researcher submits a proposal to NSF. They had to take their chances on what the outcome of that review processes, breathing your in-country access estimate the similar proposal and take their chances through that funding mechanism. So under the lead agency, it means one proposal, one agency 1 review process. So getting rid of some of that uncertainty of having to go through to review processes. The lead agency, as I mentioned, makes the funding recommendation. The non lead agency honors that recommendation. Each, each country's researchers are then supported by their own funding agency. So we have this sort of an arrangement setup with the countries that you see listed here. And then you can find more information online about, about each of those. I will take this moment to say that I'm an expert on some of these. I am not an expert on many who do. So. I will answer the questions as best I can and then probably have to do some following up on specific questions. So then moving along, we also have Dear Colleague letters. Dear Colleague letter is a very typical communication mechanism that NSF uses to announce opportunities or share information with the US research community. So through Dear Colleague letters, again, not a comprehensive list, but we do have announced opportunities working on supplements and in quantum information science, for example, that when it's not current, it may or may not be currents come next year. We may have another opportunity on that particular quantum supplements. On the second bullet specific to Europe. Nsf does have an ongoing collaboration working with the European Research Council that enables us researchers to, who already have an NSF award. We supplement that award to allow them to spend time working in the lab of a PI supported by the European Research Council. And then just a couple of other examples here. I won't go into details, but you can see computer sciences that also was directly connected with, with the EU or sciences. So. Topics run the spectrum of fields that NSF supports. A couple of other mechanisms. Dear Colleague letters are more open. Open announcements you to community solicitations are very targeted. They name a specific topic and they name a very specific guidance to the PIs on, on what to submit, how to submit when does cement? So we do use those very targeted solicitations to to foster international collaboration. So you can see again a few examples here, spanning, spanning different topics. And then finally, under the category of other, There's the transatlantic platform for social sciences and humanities. There's the Belmont Forum. Internal to NSF. We have opportunity called research experiences for undergraduates. There can be international research experiences for undergraduates. Specific to my office. We do. Mostly what we do is science diplomacy. We foster international collaboration. We work on all these different agreements, but we also do have funding opportunities. You can see the three programs here. The first one, iron's, is focused on student experience. The second one called pyre, that's focused more broadly on research with education as a nice side note. But pyre is focused on research that can only be done with an international collaboration. So it's not, an international collaboration is a nice thing to do. It's that international collaboration is a key component. But being able to answer the research questions posed. Third, we have what we call telnet Excel that does not necessarily fund the research itself, but it funds the connections between networks of researchers in the US and networks of researchers overseas. So I like to call it the connective tissue is what Axel that supports. And then bringing it home here. Second to last slide. There's a lot of countries in the world. Obviously, there's a lot of things happening. We have different collaborations with different, different countries. If you just go on to the NSF website and look at NSF OISE. It brings you to our homepage. Under additional resources. You can click on that and you can see the list of program directors who are responsible for the most active countries. And those are the folks that are, that are key for talking through what the opportunities are. And that's it. Great, nice electronics, I'm sorry, helpline or no, I appreciate your pointing out some of those places where resources and I'm sure we'll have some follow-ups on mobile, so that's great. Next, I'd like to turn it over to Diego's emerge on all from the European Commission and killed him. So I'm going to share my screen to this icon. Right. Sit Okay. Coming on. There we go. Yes. Perfect. Okay. So I'm so today I'm going to give you some basic information about your program for research and innovation. Horizon. You wrote to the new program that has just started this year. It's like it's a federal program that is published temperature years. This one will last for seven years, this year until 2027. And the basic information is, we started with the budget. Budget is quite, quite, quite big. 95.5 billion Euro that are available for researchers and innovators in Europe, but also beyond Europe. This is the biggest European funding program ever. And it represents a big increase also compared to Horizon 2020, which had a budget of €77 billion, but that one included in UK. So now the situation is different. So over the next seven years there would be thousands October topics and cause founded an already in the two-year. In the first two years there will be almost one topics and almost all of them, let's say 97, 97 percent of these topics will be open to US participation. So that's the good news. I wanted to pass it to you at the outset. Then the program is there. Well, the budget is distributed in different parts that I will explain that we can tell later. Debulk the major parties to the section on global challenges in European industrial competitiveness. And this is where we are we trying to address, if you like, societal, societal challenges. And one-quarter is for excellent science, that's basic triangle by basically search. And there is a new section on, you know what, in Europe, but maybe this is going to be Cara. Well, I hope so because the business structure of the horizon Europe, which is not that simple as accursed image. I will try to focus here on the central part, which is usually like a specific program implementing arising Europe and European emission isn't took technology. So there are three pillars. Again, like an acid and a sample. You have three pillars, ego, yeah, 1 second could you maybe restart your, your presentation? We see black bars. One of them is actually above the one of the pillars. So maybe you can just restart. Bars. Yeah, yeah, it is. There's a VC black bars over part of your presentation that you can just stop and reshare. Maybe it goes away because we didn't have that problem earlier. I will share. Stop. Share. Went up. So I share again. Thank you. I'm very sorry. I'm going to introduce one. I want Perfect. Thank you. Up. It's coming up again. It's coming up again. Now. We yeah. Again. Yeah. It's there again. I wonder if it's assume that. I'm not saying that. But maybe that's all right. Okay. So okay. So now saccade so I was talking about three pillars. The bulk of the budget is on Pillar 2, global challenges and a European industrial competitiveness. And this is articulated in different, what we call clusters. Addressing and peak, if you like. Themes lead to the most important challenges, societal challenges that you're facing. And not only Europe, health, culture created in society through the secret inside the digital industry, in space, climate, by economy, and so on and so forth. And included in this part. There's also the Joint Research Center here, if you like. The idea is to give a direction to to the funding that we provide to collaborative research projects. So the, the, the themes and the content to recall and the topics have been designed through a long consultation process with the research community, citizens, with the companies, and also with the member states in Europe. So here, if you like, is the top-down part of the program. Where are the exact objectives are each called the topics I'd be fine, foolproof. Including this part is also Joint Research Centre, which is department of the commission that is overseeing a series of research centers, uh, laboratories in different, in different countries in Italy, Belgium, and Spain. And the Joint Research Center supports policy making, but also they conduct actual research. Then Pillar 1, it's about excellent science. This is the more bottom-up part of the program where we have, where the Europeans, such concepts included. The grounds by European Research Council are very like selective and we'll call it, used to call it like a normal Nobel Prize factory. Because many Nobel Prizes have sooner or later received the grant by European Research Council. Meaning that these grants are not only generals, but also toward that only the best proposals and to the best researchers in the words. And again, the interesting information for you is that's a American researchers can apply. I can receive funding by the European Research Council. And the same, The same goes for the muddy is Carlos quick reactions that are more for like a PhD candidates but also for postdoc. And they also support and mobility researchers between exchanges, the researchers between European institutions and American ones, and then research infrastructures. And then the part which has been, if you like. A big chapter in Horizon Europe is Pillar 3, in particular with European emission cancel. And the idea there has been inspired actually by the US model, by the darpa model or the RPA model, whereby there is funding made available for high-quality but also high risk, a deep tech projects intended to actually to be, to be developed and implemented in Europe. It's actually like this part, if you like, is less prone to international cooperation. Now, before going into lots of opportunities for us researchers have like simply two, to put it, international cooperation component or the rise of Europe. And so our strategy for international cooperation. Last May, the Commission issued to the so-called communication. Communication is basically a policy document, an official policy documents prepared by the commission and presented to the two college Slater's that the Council and Parliament as checking if you like, the main principles and direction, which policy and this one was on international cooperation, research innovation, and NVIDIA know BIM. The basic principle is that wound European research, policy and funding to be as open as possible to international stakeholders. So to promote openness is yet more victories in recent insertion ration, but with the difference compared to the past, meaning and more attention, more emphasis also maintaining a level playing field and ensuring reciprocity. But also like protecting the European values. Like and research integrity or academic freedom. January, quality, and and open access. For now. The most important one, the first defers the tool for promoting this strategy is to, to, to strengthen multilateral partnerships. I will believe that by teaming up not only with one country, but with several key strategic partnering countries and most effective before addressing challenges and the objectives linked to the green and digital transition or to go. So here under this and she like an actual lying abs to promote initiatives like Mission Innovation for the all Atlantic Research Alliance and several other initiatives. And if you look at, but there is also the bilateral cooperation that is important. Here. The idea is to, to really, to invest in policy dialogue and cooperation with key strategic partner countries. To be selective in doing so, and to focus only on few selected shared priority areas. Of course, the US is one of our, if not, the key strategic planning control for you. And I very much recommend like voodoo, climate of cooperation and openness to international cooperation with the, with the, with the new administration of courses. So we believe here there is a lot of potential for working together with science policy and funding organizations like the NSF or the partner battering and G or not, or NIH to define together shift priorities and to follow up with some concrete actions, coordinate elections. Yeah, and now in a nutshell, okay, the rising Europe is also supporting low and middle income countries for which we provide funding. We provide funding. Whereas for the industrialized in highly developed countries, the EU does not provide such a finding. But there are some exceptions, exceptions. There are some interesting exceptions, relaxation we mentioned. So I will not repeat this. Maybe only mentioned the association to rising Europe, which is well for information is the possibility to associate the some countries beyond the neighboring to horizon Europe, countries that have a high level of development. And also they shall become democratic values and principles. Now, how to participate for, for, for us researchers and innovators. Of course law, they have to team up with multi beneficiary consortium. So the idea is to run for the US actors to work together with European ones and submit a common proposal to the problem that will be assessed and selected and funded. The successful. So these projects, these proposals are typically involving many more three countries with three partners. But typically there are many Min-woo having many more of them. Even up to 20 partners in one project, because the project by gate, the budget can range between 500 to have 220 €1 million per project. And there are some tools that can facilitate the search for a partner. And one is mentioned here in the finding and tenders portal of rights in Europe. However, there are some cases in which modern beneficiaries are also accepted. And this is also interesting for you in the US, as I said before, European Research Council grants or the married couples got grey actions. Now, remember at the beginning I said that are more of almost one topic In my work program 21 to the two open to participation from researchers from all over the world. Now you see 200 plus, which is only a fraction one doesn't because these 200 plus topics over actions, how shall I can explicitly and specific, encouraging international cooperation for, for specific countries and regions. So it's a subset to the 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0 topics is available. But 200 topics arch like and particularly encouraging international cooperation. That is seen as a kind of a good value for the proposals. Now I want to go even deeper and looking at topics which are targeting specifically cooperation with the US. There are several of them in different areas. I tried to list here the most important ones is not exhaustive, but just to give you a flavor of different, if you like, and areas, topics and objectives that you could pursue together with European searchers and prepare a proposal for eventual funding by arises Europe. So in cluster 2, this topic is politics and global governance, or policies and indicators for sustainable development. Cluster 3. First responder capability gaps. I'm just reading it on a clean slate or the days all these topics, but this is just to give you an idea. And then if you're interested in some of them, of course, you can research into the horizon, your portal, and you can find all the details of the requirements, the timeline, and how to prepare and submit applications. Everything is really provided in the portal. Classifieds. Climate, energy mobility is quite crowded, meaning them many topics that are specifically targeting and encouraging cooperation with us. You see them listed here. There are many of them are linked to climate goals, to energy, renewable energy, sustainable biofuels. And there are many on connected, cooperative, automated movie ID. And then gases six also some opportunities, interesting opportunities. Features here. And social politics of nature-based solutions and nature-based therapy for health and well-being. But then I wanted to go back to cluster 1. Because this is a special class of one is about research. And there is an important exception here because US entities, organizations, researchers, companies are eligible for horizon year of funding. So they can be funded, they can be included as equal partners in the proposals and Selectric projects. They can receive funding as any other European realization. And the reason for this exception, which is a multiple important exception, is that we should like me, I'm an agreement with NIH whereby the NH is also a funding and funding European researchers applying and I'm playing and were selected in the projects funded by NIH. So this is a way to reciprocate this disagreement. Here. There is a lot there are a lot of opportunities because already for the first three years then more than 50 topics and open to, to the US. And you see here, there is a wide range of areas in the field of f. Now, very briefly, multi-lateral initiatives. So in addition to participation arising Europa, we want to promote cooperation with us through the lateral initiatives Mission Innovation is a very successful one on clean energy and search. The whole Atlantic here, Michigan relationally main interlocutor is US Department of Energy. Than the all Atlantic Ocean Research Alliance is about studying the function over the ocean, how it can also contribute to find solutions for climate change, for addressing climate. And the main interlocutor here is a NOR. Arctic research is also very interesting and politically very important. International by the photon or the group of earth observation. And then we field or else there are several, there are many multi-lateral initiatives where the US is engaged. And our commitment and efforts is to, to reinforce our bilateral dialogue with us so that together we can be stronger partners within these multi-lateral initiatives. I mentioned irregular somebody scribbles quick reactions which are fully open to us researches and you can also get funding. Got civil actions from Dr. v2, path exchanges and global fellowships and European Research Council. This also, as I mentioned before, these are shrew-like and high hi, high-quality, large-scale grants that are given to principal investigators from any country in the world and also American researchers and back into funding as long as they conduct their research Europe, by the other Harker can be conducted in the US. Now, little practical information. You're finding in tenders portal of rising Europe. There you can see really a lot of information. Can search by topic. So you can, you can also look at previous projects for partners and for your projects. It's quite a comprehensive tool that's I encourage you to use, of course, if you're interested in teaming up with European organizations. And with that, I conclude my presentation and some links that can be useful for you. And I thank you for your attention. Thank you. Thanks very much. I really appreciate. Great, great overview. So I'm happy that bust out your things hour in just the Shah is here at Indiana University with the only US school and British artist respect evidence experiences, transatlantic cooperation. Perfect. Can everyone hear me and see my slides? Awesome. So let's put this together and realized that I do a lot of talking about the science I do bit, but not a lot of speaking about how we actually go about getting our funding. So this was a little bit new to me, so please bear with me. I tried to to write it from the perspective of of my experience with two Horizon 2020 projects. It they're very sequential in nature. 11 was we submitted our proposal in 2015 and the other in 2020. One we were not successful but, but ranked very high. And the, and the other one, we were successful. And so I'm trying to build experience off of that that might be useful to this and to put this in perspective and you can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Horizon 2020 was the predecessor to the horizon program that he just discussed. So I think there'll be several commonalities between my I think my experience is still relevant. But but again, he can step in and cut me off if any of this isn't them useful anymore. But, um, so we were engaged in, in two projects. They have some of them, I'll go buy them by their very short titles of a file of talks, which was the one that was not awarded and precision talks, which was awarded. I just want to note that these were considerable funding amounts. And and to put that in perspective, I am put up here my attempt at some, some clickbait with, with this image. And what I'm showing here is just the frequency distribution of the amounts awarded. And I think there were 3,778 what were called Research and Innovation action projects. And well, most averaged and this is a pretty high average in this kind of $5 million range. And half of them fit between 3.26.2 million. There were some really large investments made in science by this program, including the one to our project, which ranked, I think in the top 8% and it was around $25 million when you do the conversion. And to put that in perspective, these are some NIH efforts that launched ink and catalyzed major, major initiatives within the US. And you can see that that Europe's investing heavily. Science and putting a lot towards these projects. So I wanted to give you that kind of individual project perspective because I think that that's big and, and to really make the point that there's a lot of money on the table here. And it's going to a lot of good, good, good science. Will. You know, when I was putting this together and I do want to say, you know, I'm giving a perspective. Our large group says you're going to come to find out, I wasn't the core writing team for both of these projects. And that gets down to about a number of, of of five individuals. But I'm definitely speaking on behalf of a lot. And some of it's my personal experience and some of it's kind of the group experienced. This was my personal experience. I found that navigating the portal that we just saw, that funding and Tinder portal. It was definitely a learning process. And just navigating the RFP was, was indeed tricky. And I clicked a screenshot from the get support page of the first one. He quickly realized that one of our task is we have to build a lot of partnerships when all of most of the help features here are how to go about actually acquiring partners. And you'll see that at least the projects we are engaged with required quite a bit of, of partnership. And the partners for ship was spread around Europe and the US. It was also spread around academic institutes and industry because in part of it were tasked with translation. And my interpretation is, is one of the ways that the European Commission succeeds in translation this to really pull in industry in some of these final, final steps. And so this is a look at our, our, our two projects. And I've kinda put them both on the left and on the right. The, the, the phyla toxic. This was our initial one. It involve 28 partners and 12 countries. And you can see none of these were from academia. I ten where from public research institutions. This would include in the US teams like Lawrence Berkeley National Labs. And it also include the small and medium size enterprises. We scaled that back a bit and our, and our latest efforts and reduce that down to eight countries. And you can look at the distribution here. One of the points I want to make is that, you know, when you look at putting one of these together, one of the biggest things is building this team. And for us as academics in doing this in kind of the circles we typically run. And in the US we had built teams that were full of other academics. They also engage some of these research institutions. But we were struggling to come up with some of the requirements around small and medium-size enterprises. And we were fortunate to have the help of the European Commission. But one of the big helps here was, as Diego said, it was really critical for us to get to know that the Joint Research Centre in this because they play a role is, is, is honest brokers, they end up partnering with winning bids. So they don't care. They don't go in as collaborators on the proposal, but they have to work with anyone who comes up on the proposal. So they were very great at giving us good advice. Telling is kind of where we had holes and telling us some suggestions on how to fill those holes. And it was really comforting and talking to them because they, they are really fair and how they do this and they give advice to the strengths and weaknesses of your proposal without mentioning any other. So it made us feel good that they were doing the same when they spoke to other teams. But I will say and this first one, we were probably a little late in the game and, and getting, attracting some of the small and medium-sized enterprises because many of, you know, it is limited space. Some of these directives are more focused and so you got contact some of these businesses and they're already engaging with other teams and, and, and many don't want to to partner with more than one team just to keep things. I'm open. I don't know if there's restrictions on that or not, but we found many of the groups we approached had already partnered with teams. And so in the second effort, that was probably the first thing. The thing we did first was really to secure our team. I do want to say that these proposals are very different than even like sinter proposals through NSF, our program projects like P450, 2D6 through NIH. They're laid out differently. How you bring the components together is, is very different. And, and because of that, it can take a little bit of extra time just to, and you can see how ideas and how you present these things develop over time from our, our first effort here with this. Kind of work packages that we presented in a figure like this to a scaled down six work packages in the, in the second proposal. When really work package 1, 2, 3, and 5 was what was being delivered with the first projects, we really kind of scaled back how we did this because one of the things you have to do is convince the the commission that you can manage this project. In the end, you have a bunch of partners that are coming in and they're, they're putting up a heck of a lot of money and you have to really convince them that this is something you can deliver. And so I really want to, to make the case here that it's much different. And because of that, it can take up a lot of time. I think for the first one, we probably were about eight months of of of work organizing. I think when it came to the rioting, we held a meeting and I was trying to pull up my notes and couldn't find it. It was either late October or early November of 2014 with the due date of of of late February 20, 15. And we took the approach which was entirely wrong at that time, to distribute the rioting across all these groups. We laid out tight schedules and we thought it would just be a management effort to get all these pieces in in time so that we could edit them and and deliver a proposal. About mid January, we realized we were failing miserably through this kind of distributed effort approach. And we went to really a core team effort. There were think was the first week of February, there were were five of us that that landed in a some kind of bed and breakfast or hotel room in, in Heidelberg, Germany to, to say, let's take what we have and, and get a draft of a of a proposal on paper as quickly as we can. And we did that. And I think it took us about 10 days to turn that into something that could then be edited. The problem that we didn't realize this first go around with that. You better get ready for the tables because there's a heck of a lot of tables that are are required for these submissions. And I remember probably the last full week of this submission just probably on like a 24 hour clock, just typing in information in tables, trying to just get this to be a legitimate submission in the end. And, you know, all that to say is, is, is we did get it and I'll show you new stuck into something that was really funny about that submission that also goes to navigating that portal. But, but by the second effort, we were much more savvy and how we did this. We already knew we were going to use a core team approach. We, we got the team now doubt right away, we really streamlined kind of how we wanted to deliver things. When we started out on the second go around, I think we were still at 10 work packages and we really narrowed that down to six and we were trying to push it down to to even getting it to fewer. And we made the strategic decision to hire. She might go as a writer, but she was definitely a thought distiller and a science translator. Her name's Elizabeth Andrews. She's actually based out of Bloomington, Indiana, but she she's done work on on many of these Horizon 2020 proposals in the past. I don't know her success rate, but she certainly was successful for us. I've worked on or with other projects. I can't sing her praises enough for pulling these large efforts together. And in fact, we've even hired her as one of the science translators for, for this project moving forward. So I told you it can be tricky navigating this portal. I show you here the deadline. So this means the portal closes. You can't do any activity after February 24th at 7800 hours in Brussels. And high note right here, we made that deadline all of 17 seconds. So it sure was a big effort to try to get this in, but it was if you were scrambling at the end down to the very last second thumb on that first go around the other one. We are really savvy in and had things down. Well ahead of time. I love that screenshot. And here's where I want to just note that that these efforts take a lot of time and it takes a lot of time to build. So I think I said that first effort, we started about almost a year out. So sometime it in We had actually formulated our idea and 2013, this opportunity arose in 2014, and we submitted it in 2015. We were able and I should note that despite that kind of hectic operation that I, that I presented to you, we actually did quite well. We learned. So we submitted it in February, I think it was June, we learn that we had to participate in we had the opportunity to pursue to participate in a hearing. They had one at some follow up information from from our group. I think they gave us a very short turnaround time on that. I remember having a meeting one day and then logging in. I think it was three in the morning to participate in this hearing where we were answering questions for the commission. And when it was all said and done, we weren't selected for that project, but told me we're we're in kind of the runner-up position. Like it was really down between our project and, and, and one other. So, you know, we could have just ditch things that, that effort and, and run our separate ways, but we took a different approach. We leveraged that finish. It has given us some, some leverage within, at least around this topic of precision toxicology. It a given us some awareness with with especially with the regulators because this was this one was one that was really being done on behalf of, of, of regulators. And we formed a spin off kinda consulting firm from that, that allowed us to go in and consult directly with those regulators. So we, we're, we're now getting a collaborative consulting projects through the European chemical agency. Through this spin off, we had grouped together by forming a large consortium and not letting them sit idle. But during that time, we put proposals into a couple of ´ó·¢¿ìÈý²ÊƱ grand challenges. There were two, McArthur and 100 in and change bids that we we put in four, and we put an application into the to the United Kingdom grand challenges research fund. These were all really large efforts. And then the call came around in 2019. And in fact, it was one of our colleagues at the JR see that really drew it to our attention and suggested that we kind of pull our team back together to, to put this in. We said, well, our teams still together. So that was that worked out well. So what was the 2013 to 2020, 18 years and seven large proposals, and we were finally successful. So it does take time to kind of build these and put these in a position where someone's going to feel comfortable handing you a large check to go out and change the world. And so now we're tasked with how do we build this into kind of the next steps and and and secured the next pieces of funding. And we're already working on that. I might just have a few post awards postwar thoughts. First, I want to thank you for agreeing to have dispute settled in Brussels because this turns out it's the number one sticking part in. Once a proposal gets judged successful in actually setting up an award. And in fact, we lost at least one partner. And I think it was two partners during this process because there and one of them was the was the NIH. Despite Francis Collins efforts to, to get kind of reciprocal funding flowing between Europe and the US. Nih couldn't sign off on some of the details of the contract. We were fortunate here I want to say that the program officers there are just amazing. They knew all the partners inside and out. You're like, well, how well does someone and, and, and Brussels know someone at Indiana University. But as soon as the NIH dropped out, they were doing work with fruit flies. They said, Well, your partner, Indiana University can pick up all of that work and, and not miss a beat. And we were already thinking along those lines, but it was nice to have a really on top of that program officer to do that. I want to note that the the proposal deliverable bulls are, are more contractual than I've ever dealt with, were tasked with delivering. I'm delivering these, you know, it's not we're, we're not tasked with giving it our best effort. You know, it's still science. Science is engaged in here, but the deliverables have to be handed in at the end, were contracted to do that. And the management is very different than the US. One of the biggest deals is that budgets on reporting on 18 months cycles. So the other thing with the budget that I thought was very unique is they cut us a check for like 40% of everything to kind of get things going. And then when that runs out, you know, we're we. Request these dollars, but then they don't come in until every 18 months. So it's just kind of a new thing to do to get used to and how words are, are, are men. And so anyway, that's all I have. Thanks everyone for giving me the opportunity to tell about my experience. And hopefully it's, it's useful to someone out there. And I'm happy if anyone at ´ó·¢¿ìÈý²ÊƱ wants to discuss this further or seek any guidance. I'm I'm happy to chat about this and at anytime. Thank you. Hey Joe. Or fortunately, you have been through this procedure and it can charge them and sites. So that was really, really helpful. So thanks very much. I want to, I want to turn it over to see if people in our audience questions. And and I think it's great, It's our purchases through ´ó·¢¿ìÈý²ÊƱ. If you have a question, you can turn your camera on, that would be helpful. That's a possibility, but also, I think the best way to do it, like they use the raise hand function, which is found under the reactions tab at the bottom of the Zoom portal. So that way we can sort of feel the questions as they come in. And so if there aren't any questions, I absolutely as well, but I think I want to I really want the opportunity for some other people thought. And to maybe clarify or ask our presenters questions. I can I can kick-start, but you also could, but basically as a question, yes, please. Yes. Thank you so much for this very informative session from all levels from and I asked them not, not from a knife as one and say u and our colleague from Bloomington full weren't quite extensively to reach this extraordinary milestones them, Thank you, Joy. I'm a professor with ´ó·¢¿ìÈý²ÊƱ School of Social Work and I met recently kitchen community to engage education. And my question is if my recent partners are not only part of the EU countries, for example, you also have Bosnia as wild lands constable. My question is more to diego. If the horizon Europe on so targeting those countries. Thank you. Good. Diego. Yeah. Actually, the country saying been named memory to Europe. They can become associated to horizon, to horizon Europe. So that means that once the association process is completed to sign an agreement, like a treaty with you. And they're, researchers are treated exactly like researchers from a human, the state. So you're fully eligible for funding. So if you want and we can not say that to the program targets this country because these countries, I fully intend to fully integrated into the program. So yes, of course, you can also include partners from from these countries and yeah, absolutely. Thank you. Thank you. Great question. Thank you. Team. By the way, I didn't recognize you as a team with a beard. For this wonderful presentation and given as a broad information and encourages us to apply. I do research in Latin-America. I do research about municipal governments and sub-national governments in the region. I found that it is quite difficult for me to applied in to good ends related to the region. So I would like to hear then it buys thrown all of you to I need to partner with someone else in the region in order to apply for grants or me, I do a directly draw Indiana University. A lot of rocks and your thoughts on everything? Yeah. Claudia, thank you for the question. We don't excuse me. 1 my thoughts together in real-time. So NSF, we, we don't have active, active collaborations. I like a formal mechanism really in much of Latin America at the moment. So for us it would be you, you Claudius the US PI applying to an appropriate NSF program. I'm sure you already know that the your colleagues then from Latin America would. At least from the NSF model, would, would need to seek funding elsewhere. So we don't NSF is not we're agnostic as to the the country. It's more looking at who's the team? What's the, what's the research question? How is the team working together to answer that question? So I don't I can't speak to who you're working with, but but for us it would be, you know, who's, who's, who's the best team to pursue that, that research project. As I mentioned before, It's very rare circumstances where NSF funding would go toward a foreign person or entity. It is possible if that person or entity doesn't have, they have no means of getting their own funding. And they provide a resource. Resource, broadly defined, if they provide a resource to the project that just can't be replicated through a US source. So I feel like that's not a very satisfying answer. But the way that NSF works, That's, that's the advice that I have at the moment in Cuba. Diego, I wonder from the US perspective on that, you mentioned, you know, lesser, lesser developed countries, or is there a way to triangulate thinking about your partners in that way? From selling euros researcher, yes, indeed, you need timing then. Nothing America down to b, sub continental countries in different political developments is so we provide them a commission provides funding for civil like American countries, presence of Argentina now for it. I mentioned those or not, I'm not funded. The Brazil isn't funded. Mexico and Chile. From this year, also Colombia and abundant on the other subpart of it or funding. So what I mean, and of course, or whether it is better to have several countries represented or not. Well, as emits opec, not really RNAs. We don't need, you don't need necessarily to have researchers from different countries from Latin America, except in one case, except when there are topics or calls that refers specifically to CELAC. Celac is care group of Latin American countries. We have a specific dialogue in agreement, a new strategic roadmap between you and these countries are Ks, of course, would be It's quite natural and important and that you involve researchers from other countries. And of course the neon American colleagues and organizations can also join. And if we're talking about health and L for Ariadne in US, organizations are also eligible for funding. Thank you, Dean. Thank you. Great repressors when no SLA. Thank you for great presentations. This was very informative. So my name is Sarah software. I snack, I'm a professor at the ´ó·¢¿ìÈý²ÊƱ School of Public Health. And I work mostly in the areas of machine learning and statistical methods as they're applied to health applications. So one question that I had, and I have to say I have to admit right away, majority of my funding comes from NIH. Unfortunately, my NSF applications, and this is not a job that Dr. Nikolaus, but they were not as successful as my NIH applications. But the question that I have actually two for the panel is, I already have some collaborations in Europe. They are not necessarily in the countries that NSF has bilateral agreements. For example, I have collaboration in Poland is not something that's I, I'm just trying to see where I could go next to develop them more. Maybe with the finding both from an assault from horizon, not for other European programs. I know it's a very general question, but it's something that has been on my mind on rots on the one you are today where I can I can start on on that. And I, it's probably a very similar answer to Claudius situation with, with Latin America. So I will say that though we do have these typically bilateral collaborations with the countries that were listed for that, those lead agency opportunities. Just to say again, that international collaboration can be part of any proposal that comes into NSA. It's just a matter of where the funding then comes from for the partners. So for Poland, you're right, we don't have a formalized mechanism working with the funding agencies in Poland. But that doesn't mean that you can't have a Polish collaborator on proposals that come into NSF. It just means that they would have to seek funding through other mechanisms. So that's the sort of the beauty of the lead agency opportunity is it eliminates that uncertainty of going through two processes. So yeah, gosh, the way that, the way that the NSF works, it don't have much I don't have much good advice to offer. I would say that talking we always say regardless of the circumstances that talking talking with the program director of that particular program is always a great thing to do beforehand. And seeking whatever advice they have for that particular program. When looking at international collaborations and proposals that we do receive. Broadly speaking, looking to make sure that the, the team that's pulled together is a true team. What are the, the components at the different, different researchers are working on? That. All of that blends together to really push ahead whatever the research question is. So it's not like a nice ADL, I'll add on that someone from Poland is there, but it's truly an integrated project and everyone is bringing something to the table. Yeah. Jared Diego, any thoughts on this was a good good question. I was raised. Okay. Okay. Other questions. Thank you. Roxanne? I had one y one question. I thought it was E R. I wanted to ask a question about your reflection on Joe's experience. I know you may not see the whole. First I thought hearing about the team building was really, really helpful thing brought up researchers at ´ó·¢¿ìÈý²ÊƱ was based on your experience, Diego, was that sorted? Typical typical of other stories you've heard or or needs to build these transatlantic teams or, or how much do you think that, that shows kind of persistence and staying with it is grateful, is, can we generalize in terms of speaking to the success of other Horizon 2020? Now horizon Europe puzzles. It has affected that most of the grounds resident 2020 and now also in the rise of Europe on quite large, should the budget is large, up to 20 million new rates have really big, big budget and they involve a lunch, large number of partners. So this, this creates really a big complexity. So I mean, I can only, if you like animals, share a solidarity with Joe about all the efforts that he has done. That's structural thing. It has been a decision to target big project. So meaning fewer projects, but with the bigger size rather than many hundreds of thousands of smaller projects. Okay, It's a difficult process, of course. This being said, the success rate is between 10 and 15 percent. So it's very competitive. Main, main, main proposals that prepared and submits it. And beyond those who are eventually selected and funding. In fact, there are many other, many other proposal which are very, very good quality. So meaning that okay, it's possible, it requires an F4, but it's possible given the possibility of getting 20 euro. Of course, this requires an investment and there is a risk that this investment doesn't pay off. Course as an API competitive processes. What I wanted to mention is that in Horizon 2020, there has been a quite strong participation by US organizations about retirement critically about 7800 participations, or which almost 400 in collaborative projects, which are more like time-consuming and more substantial. So almost 400 US institutions went through the process and were selected for funding. What were selected, were selected them in the project were selected. Some of them were funded. Other, other we're not funded. And then there are some 1400 participations into money. It's Kronos cuckoo reactions. Also the biggest share tree-like of third country participations in Horizon 2020 comes from the US. And also importantly that beam. And that's really a remarkable 200, 200 ERC grantees from the US. That's quite very large number and got very important funding and to pursue a really high-quality research. So I mean, so far, the USS scored very good results. But of course, seeing on personally, I think it's not enough if we look at the potential and signs of us and that's what we will try to do from now on in the next seven years and to step up if you like. Both of the participation, rising Europe, but also the dialogue and the coordination of actions between NSF or with other funding agencies in the US? That's good to hear. Yeah, I know, I know in my own field and political science, we often think about partnering with European institutions, should think about ERC or are those kind of platforms. Because sometimes the fun, the other charities or the calls are more aligned thought were interested in doing that. Some of the eggs, NSF, or vice versa. So I think, I think researchers need to keep that in mind, right? Especially if they are working with collaborators. By a lot of us do that are based European universities in an agency. So I think, I think that that's a good point. If there are any other questions or thoughts I had I had I had I went Jonah Joe, humans. Remind me, did you mentioned that you had tried I guess I wanted to hear a little bit. I bought your your team's decision to pursue funding through Horizon 20 running just on a basic level and maybe mentioned this and I missed it, but was this sort of seen as Horizon 2020 is probably the best spot or to get the kind of debt for your project or was it a sense that there was the NIH or NSF or other agencies that you could have gone through to us just tried but didn't didn't find a good fit there too. So a couple things. So that's a great question. It was the first opportunity that came out directly around a platform we were conceiving. So in other words, the kind of science behind a large consortium of us, we're, we're kind of developing. And it was the first one with a directed activity towards it. I also want to say it because you said is it, Is it better or this or that? Just the way the the, the question the the way the RFP was ask and it's very applied nature and directing towards deliverables and that kind of, you know, more contractual nature of it. We didn't have to worry about some of the things that probably would've killed a proposal like this going up and as it was written in front of NIH or NSF in that, you know, when you just some of the science we used gets task as fishing expeditions and things like this. And, and in fact, we we had conversations with with Wojciech who's now the director of NIH S. And he's like, Oh, good grief. I don't know how I can help you get this out of study section. So we're working on that. We're working on, on how to, to put this fourth and in the US environment, but just the structure that proposal are allowed us to, to, to do things in ways that were required different than opportunities in the US at the time. So it did in some ways fit better. And the, the kind of last point I want to make is that our first effort that we put in the US wasn't allowed to to to receive funds. So all our funds had to come from post docs visiting our labs and doing work that was funded through this in our labs or graduate students shared. And it really wasn't until the kind of the second one we're going after with kind of the rules had changed and we were allowed to bring, I think it was some significant funding to, to Indiana University from, from this project. Thanks, Thanks for sharing that. That's how cool. I didn't have one last one other question that I get to go have questions I can jump bang. But I was, I also, I thought maybe Roxanne and people might be interested to hear more if you can speak more about this technical innovation partnership that might be coming on the horizon. That sounds very interesting and I think. Do you have any inside, inside the Obama? They feel they need to pull up talking points that we've been using and those of other presentations, but I don't have handy. So I can say that it's it's a a new director. It that's that's under consideration. We are I think everyone knows for for us, our fiscal year ended unless a month ago and we are working under what's called a continuing resolution, meaning that we don't have our our subtle budget for for fiscal year 2022. But against that background, we have there's positive reaction undoing this new director it, or something like it coming from the, the House and the Senate. It's meant to, it's meant to really bring together. As the title of the director says, technology innovation and partnerships. It's really meant to put a finer focus on, on that aspect of the research enterprise. So our director likes to talk in terms of applied, applied research versus basic research, or looking at the spectrum of, of the research enterprise. You'd like to talk about it as like the two strands of the double helix of DNA. Like there's the blurring, the lines between basic research and applied. So that gets more to the innovation piece of it. In terms of partnerships. I mentioned briefly during the presentation of partnerships broadly, not just not just academic, not just government, but what about the private sector? What about NGOs? What about philanthropies? So really considering prompt partnerships, perhaps a bit more broadly than NSF had before. So we will, we will wait, wait and see Tim to see how things play out. But it's, it's really an exciting new sort of lens. I think at NSF. Taking some taking some pieces of work that we're already doing across the other directorates. And again, just focusing so focusing in on that that aspect and technology innovation and partnership. Okay, well thanks, it'll keep our eyes on, I think it's a great idea that by creating a new director at your kind of highlighting that rather than keeping it buried right within other projects, programs, and directorates you aren't already having. So it might just be a positive reorganization to kind of, you know, pop up. So that's great. We're almost out of time. If I wanted to just ask our panelists and there's the other points that you wanted to make our comments directed, Diego. Yes. Your team? Yes. Just finite final comment, actually a piece of information you may be interested lean. Like to introduce you to clone BATNA, who is one of the participants, is our science counselor in Washington DC since the beginning of September. So he's part really on our team working really in tandem with us, with us in Brussels on promoting relations and cooperation with the US. Position animation. So I'm sure, I mean, you can, you can, you can contact him and count on him for getting more information horizon Europe. Also another mission is prolonged. You want to say a couple of words? Or thank you, Diego. I'll be very short just to say hi and say I'm available for any additional information you might need. It's true that with the online tradition we have started two years ago. There's enormous difference of being in DC or Brussels as you can see. But of course, if your planning any events in person, I'm happy to join. I'm available for traveling all across the US and I'll be happy to promote the US participation in Horizon Europe as you have them greatly today, Diego. Thank you very much tool and I'll I'll leave my contact details in the chat. Thank you. Excellent. I was just starting to ask if you would mind doing that. That's great. Thank you. Okay. Well, if there are any other closing comments I really want to for coming out times, I really want to thank all of our presenters, rock San Diego and Joe. And I hope that you, you and the audience and those participated found this useful. Please tell your colleagues about this. This, we will make this recording available. And I hope that this can be kind of the basis for and do that, do let me know any feedback whether you'd like to with focus and other regions of the world, the weather, how we at the, at the ´ó·¢¿ìÈý²ÊƱ gateways can help with your international engagement in international research collaborations. We really want to, to be a partner with AI researchers on this field. So thanks very much. Thanks again, Andrea and Annabell and have a good rest of your day. Thank you. Bye, everyone. Thank you. Bye. Thank you.

Description of the video:

Hello and welcome. My name is Andrea Adam Moore. I'm the Director of the Indiana University Europe Gateway based in Berlin, Germany. It is my great pleasure to welcome you all to another session of our European Encounters, which is a very informal gathering of ´ó·¢¿ìÈý²ÊƱ faculty with European colleagues. And we have a very special session today. And it is my great pleasure to welcome my dear colleagues. Michael Brose from Indiana University and my friend, Antonina from Jagiellonian University who I first met I think it was in 2018 when we hashed out the idea for a workshop at the Europe Gateway about Sinology during the Cold War. And today's session is, well, the celebration of the product of that workshop that actually took place in November of 2019 at your way. And the product that came out of this wonderful gathering is the book edited by Michael and Antonina, Sinology during the Cold War. I'm sure you'll get to it - hahaha, there it is, on cue. So it's wonderful to have you both here. Also, all your contributors, or not all, unfortunately, not all, but most of the contributors to the book, to see most of the participants of our workshop again, even if it's virtually today. But I congratulate you all to this wonderful book, and I'm very happy to welcome you all. Just a few remarks on the technical side for our outside participants or audience, we will have a few words of welcome. And after that, we, that the book will be presented by the contributors. End. After that we'll have some, some conversation between the authors before you all will be invited to ask your questions, and we would like to ask you to put your questions in the Q&A section of this Zoom webinar. And our moderators will get to those questions towards the end of the session. But please feel free to put your question in at anytime during the webinar. With this, I would like to hand it over to my colleagues from Jagiellonian University and professor Joanna Dyduch. Thank you and welcome. Thank you very much. Your colleagues, your friends. I'm really delighted and really privilege that I can on behalf of the Institute of Berlin far is based at Diego learning recipe. To participate in this book talk, I must say that we are extremely happy and proud that these started in 2019. Corporation resulted with such a wonderfully amazing proved the publication that getters academics, scholars from I would say many at, let me, a few countries. Among them, united states, Mongolia, academics from, academic from Austria, Romania, and Hungary. So this is something that we really appreciate and, and we really, we are really, really happy about it. Just to mention that just yes, the day the book publication has been a global acknowledged during the ceremony and he said if the faculty council and the presence of 200 and it was addressed to 250 community members of our of our faculty. So thank you very much for inviting me and also I'm really looking forward to hear and to listen more about the book itself. And my, let's say, personal gratitude to Antonina, who gathered and who inspired colleagues from and who coordinate the work of colleagues from our institute. And it's really great to see among the authors of this important publication, important volume, five colleagues from the institute. So once again, thank you very much and I'm really looking forward to learn more. Thanks. Thank you, Joanna. Thank you. Thank you for welcoming us and for your very warm and kind words. I have the privilege to say a few words about the book before we move on to the first part in which all of our contributors will have a chance to say a few words about their, their papers. So as the title of the book suggests, we're actually talking about the two very hot topics you might say. Because so one element of what we are going to discuss and what we discuss in the book as the Cold War. And it was already stressed by, um, we started this project in 2018, I guess, before the very cold war became, so to speak, a sexy topic. Because right now so many experts say that there was a Cold War Two reality and making the kind of comparisons between the current Sino-American revelry and the original Cold War. However, we kind of started it before it became fashionable. Again. There's a kind of interesting thing and of course, the second element is China itself. However, in Boca, we do not really talk about China. We talked about how China was perceived throughout the Cold War. How China wants, describe how China was. What scholars, what experts were saying about China and how they present in China in their works. So you might say that we are referring to good old Nietzsche: "There are no facts, there are only interpretations" and these implications we're going to focus on. And I guess this is the most important lesson that we can draw from this publication lesson to us living in 2022. How much our contexts, our environment, impacts on the way we perceive the world. In democratic countries, we are very proud to say that our eye can then yeah, it's free and we are free to do whatever research you want. However, in fact, we do also have our own problems, our own challenges. In a way, we also have our own lenses. They are not communist nurses anymore. Yet there are still some sort of lenses would also impact on how we perceive the world and China. In this particular case, I hope we will have a chance to discuss the contemporary research on China and how we perceive China in our countries today. Later on in the Q&A session. So without further delay, I have the pleasure to pass the microphone at the product. These people, to my pal. Hi everybody. Welcome and thank you for joining us in this introduction to this book. Let me give you just a few words of personal background for the origins of this project from my side, because I am not a scholar of the history of China studies. So I come to this somewhat new, but actually this, this idea of, of understanding the history of China studies or Sinology came to me already in 1992 when I was living in Taiwan as a, as a graduate student at National Taiwan University. And towards the end of my stay, a big conference on sinology in Europe though, or the history of sinology in Europe was, was hosted at National Taiwan University. And ever since then I've been fascinated by views of China from other parts of the world. It's not a topic that has been exhaustively researched or written about. But ever, ever since sitting in on that, on that conference in 92, I've thought and especially since I've been involved in China, studies as a, mainly as a historian, I thought, isn't it important to understand how other intellectual spaces view and viewed China? And when I met Antonina, the two of us began to talk about exploring this topic in some depth. And, and it occurred to me. I'm talking to, I'm, I'm working with a colleague from Poland who is a young and rising star in the world of technology. And yet, I don't know thing one about her environment, her intellectual environment, her the, the, the intellectual legacy of similar logical studies in Poland. And so I, I proposed to Antonina that we examine this topic from what I would view, at least from my position in the West, as a almost completely understudied area of, of intellectual discourse. Sinology, as done from former Soviet Bloc states during the Cold War. So that's kind of that, at least from my end of things, this is one of the, one of the reasons that we came up with this intriguing workshop at which has culminated in the book that we're introducing today. I think for me too, this is, I'm really thrilled with the outcome of the workshop because we, it exemplifies cross-cultural collaboration. It also exemplifies what I think is an ideal coming together of scholars from a range of positions. But also we have a range of, of, of experience from very senior scholars to, you know, rising stars. And, and most of these people's work, at least to my knowledge, is almost unknown in the West because they're publishing in their own native languages. And unfortunately, people like me don't read Hungarian and Polish and Mongolian. So I think this work is fabulous. I wish that we had had the space to publish even more. But perhaps in a subsequent workshop, we can extend the study. As Antonina also said, I think, I think this study is important, not just as a historical artifact of what was done during the Cold War. I think there are also huge implications for, for those of us who are in similar logical studies. There are also huge implications to understand what, what is China doing now, because we all know that China is rising. There are obvious parallels to the situation regarding China and Russia's relationship during the Cold War today. And I think there's a lot, even if it's not explicitly addressed in the articles in this book. I think there's a lot that a person can take out of these contributions that will help us better understand the situation today. So I think with that, I'm going to turn it over to my colleagues and let the panelists proceed to tell us about their work because they're there the voices we want to hear from mostly. So Antonina, can you remind me who is first? What what's the order of of of progress here? Absolutely. I think we can follow the order of the articles in the book. That means that it would like to invite Professor Jerzy Bayer who has the richest experience when it comes to sinology because he served as a diplomat, but also as a journalist and a scholar. So Professor, could you please tell us a few words about your intriguing and very much paper to add on to that. When we were talking about this, this introduction, this, this Zoom meeting, I would also like to hear from panelists if they wish to do this, to also talk about that. Provide a few thoughts on, on contemporary issues. It, but that's completely up to you. I know that's kind of outside the scope of this particular book. Okay, Professor buyer, please. Hi, Good. It's my great pleasure and honor to talk to you. I have to apologize for my technical problems. I think they arise from that. I hate technology and IT in particular, and the technology high hates me. So I had been struggling, you know, fiercely to get the picture. But my video doesn't work. So the only way we can communicate is just to use voice. And to start with, well, I've, again, I have to say the time. 100, you know that my chapter, my piece is an introduction to the book. And as Michael and tend to lean, I've already told you. It may be the case of my, of a specific feature of my story because I had been loyal to this special, to go sinology for a more than 50 years now. But I kept changing forms of carrying out my profession. I've been a journalist, Dealing with the East Asia. When I worked at The Press Agency in Poland. Then I spent seven years in China as a permanent correspondent, also covering Mongolia and North Korea, the communist part of East Asia. Then high changed my job and became law, became a diplomat. And finally, I decided to be a scholar because during the day, my employment for a ministry just don't currently, I kept writing books, books about China's history, about the history of Sino Tibetan relations, about Mao Zedong. And this is exactly the area I tried to focus on. I mean, relations between China and some neighbors. Then history with a special focus on modern history and contemporary and present political affairs. Well, it may stem from me. First professional and I was journalist who was very closely following events in China. I was a professional China watcher, both when working in Europe and when employed in China proper. Then, due to such a comprehensive feature of my story, I think it was chosen as an introductory chapter. Because what I, what I want to show in my chapter is the general picture of sinology at the backdrop of the communist system. That's why I deal with the, some problems sinologists and, well, I think other fields of Oriental studies had to do with, under the communist system, it was only not only the case of Poland, but the same thing happened in Hungary, in East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, Romania, and Mongolia and so on and so on. For example, the lack of funds to have access to Western literature, to be able to participate in exchange of scholars in international conferences. Then the question of censorship imposed by the Communist authorities in all so-called socialist state. Then the case of well, personal and political freedom were, as philologists, like each and every scholar and researcher working in the field of international relations had to do with home the very exact censorship and the imposition of so-called ideological correctness up on all the academicians. So it was not possible to express one's mind in a free way. Everything had to be subjugated to the official policy which was perceived by the ruling party and by the Communist state. So I deal with these problems in the first case. Then I present my own, let's say, intellectual CV and show how I fulfilled my sinologist mission. And finally, I present. Fields of activity of Polish sinologists, I had to do it. I mean, those who were my lecturers, my professors, because the first-generation of Polish sinologists as still remembered, the Second World War or even decades before the Second World War. And then they are immediate successors wherein people who joined the sinologist profession after the Second World War and particularly after the People's Republic of China had been proclaimed. And then on, on the base of ideological, on the base of the ideology and the close contacts between the Communist China, communist Poland. In our case, many students have had the chance to study the language and history and literature and so on and so on in China. So they form the second generation of you sinologist. I'm, I done to present the case of the third-generation because these are people who joined the profession after the political breakthrough, I mean, after 89, 90. But whatever I had to do with in the 70s, in the 80s is described in my chapter. So to be more specific, I talk about research in literature. Turn in history. Can religion? Because that was a very interesting and rich study in case of Poland and also in philology, translation, including very specific and very detailed to word translation by one of Poland's leading philologists . So these are a major topics which I touch in my, my chapter. So I hope it will be useful for those who would like to have an idea about what problems we had to encounter in Eastern Europe just to have any idea of China. Thank you. Thank you very much, professor, I must say, but your paper was absolutely fascinating and what was striking to me when I sell it for the first time. And when I listen to your paper during our workshop 2019, is that how much, how much attention was paid to the writing? Chinese, but not really the compensations. And it was shocking how we were describing that they were pretty much know or almost no classes of speaking Chinese into as you had to practice your listening and speaking skills through listening to some radio programs, some Chinese radio programs. So it was absolutely, absolutely something revealing. Now I have a great pleasure to introduce Professor Susanne Weigelin-Schwiedrzik, who is very well known German sinologist. And I must say that Michael and I were absolutely thrilled where Susanne, when Susanne accepted our invitation to join our workshop, as she's a very, very well-known and distinguished specialist on contemporary China, the 20th century history of China, including issues such as the memory of the great famine and the Cultural Revolution. Susanne, the floor is yours. Thank you very much, Antonina. especially for your generous introduction and fall, providing me with the opportunity of introducing my chapter here. Thank you also to language, to have invited me to be part of this project. And I must say that I didn't hesitate a minute when I received the invitation to accept the invitation because I felt at the moment I received the invitation that I had to do something which I had not done so far, but which I should have done much earlier. I remember very well that my professor, professor v2f. He told me after I had finished my doctoral thesis. Now you have to write something on the history of sinology in Germany. And I was very, very young at that time. And that's sort of looked at him and thought, if I do this at this moment, this will be the end of my career. And I think this was maybe the main reason why I didn't do it at the time. But now I'm at the end of my career and it's very easy for me to speak up on some of those issues which I have encountered and thought about since the 1970s. Although the paper which I contributed to this book is not a personal remembrance of what has been happening among German sinologist since I had come into the field in the early 1970s. However, my paper is also characterized and impacted by my own experience of sociology in the Cold War. As I tried to answer a question which has been at back of my mind from very, very early on. How come that in Germany, especially in the western part of Germany. The, what we call modern China studies is a very, very marginalized field, even within the field of sinology. So up until recently, the majority of my colleagues in Germany and in the German speaking world where actually people who focused on Ancient China, on ancient Chinese philosophy, history, literature, or you name it. And they did not work on issues related to contemporary China. However, when I entered the field and 1970, 1970's, I had two reasons to actually decide for myself that I want you to go into a totally different direction. I want it to be a specialized specialist on modern China. And I decided to do this at the age of 16 when I was in the United States as a high school student. And with this sort of reading the newspaper and saw that China and the US were actually re, approaching each other. And because of that reason, I will suddenly received an enormous amount of information on contemporary China, which I had never received by reading a German newspaper. And I realized immediately that use about contemporary China were very, very diverse and that people who stubbornly rejected China with just as many as those who maybe naively sort of had hoped that if the US and china could come together than the world might change fundamentally. And so I already decided at the age of 16 that I want you to learn modern Chinese. However, at that time, German universities did not provide for the opportunity to learn modern Chinese at a high level of proficiency. And the only school that actually provided this opportunity was steam them enough. Or you entitle search bar, which is a very special school that had been linked up with the German Foreign Ministry right from the beginning of the Weimar Republic in the early 20th century. And the wonders Republic Deutschland, the Federal Republic of Germany, sort of inherited this institute. And it wasn't Institute in Boston and affiliated both with the university it and bond and with the foreign ministry. And this is where I learned my Chinese and only a fuel. A few years later, only two years later, I was given the opportunity to go to China and study in the People's Republic of China. In the situation when the Cultural Revolution had still not come to its official end. And when Mao Zedong was still alive, I encountered him dying in 1976 and I was at Beijing University studying philosophy. When the so-called Gang of Four, the entourage of Mao Zedong, including his wife, were suddenly expelled from office. So I went through really, really interesting times and was very short. I wanted to be a specialist on modern China. How come that all the other colleagues didn't do it, didn't take this decision. This was the starting point for my contribution to this volume. And I tried to give a couple of different answers to this really, I think, interesting question. So first of all, I looked at the geopolitical situation of both East Germany and West Germany and might understand immediately that east Germany was part of the socialist camp, had very friendly relations with the People's Republic of China up until the Sino-Soviet split in the 1960's. And for that reason, people who went into Chinese studies in the German Democratic Republic actually decided to go to China to work on contempt issue is related to contemporary China. To learn the language in a Chinese speaking environment. And to be enthusiastic about China. Whereas the people in the Western part of Germany, the Federal Republic of Germany, decided they wanted to shy away from politics. So their conclusion, drawn from the experience of the Third Reich was actually that they did not want to get involved in politics. And their conclusion from the Western Germany, its relationship to the US and Western Germany being part of the western hemisphere was that we leave it to the Americans to actually look at contemporary China. We look at ancient China and we don't get involved into politics. So the easy answer would be, so in Eastern Germany, people were not shy to get involved in politics. And they actually were very enthusiastic about modern China after 1949, of course. And they were enthusiastic of having him the opportunity to go to China and study there. Whereas in Western Germany, people shied away from China. People actually did what did not want to get involved into the analysis of contemporary China. And for that reason they went into ancient Chinese issues. However, when you look at the situation more closely, you will realize that in both parts of Germany, many colleagues from the phonology actually tried to not get involved into politics in Eastern Germany. This of course became a very hot issue once people realize that the relationship between China and the Soviet Union was not very good. And when they started anticipating the split and when they split, it finally happened. So those people who had been in China, who had been really enthusiastic about China had some way somehow solve the problem of being looked upon as not a 100 percent in line with what the Soviet Union and the leadership of the German Democratic Republic actually wanted them to be like. So their reaction was, why don't we shy away from involvement into politics? And where did they go? They didn't go into ancient China. They went into linguistics and eventually developed a very, very interesting study program which was focused on developing the capacity to act as an interpreter and as someone who did translations. And in German, in the western part of Germany, in the eastern part of film, you would both Sea Peoples trying to shy away from politics, looking at China from an angle that would not make it so difficult for them to shy away from politics. It is this shying away from politics, which is now haunting our field. Even after reunification. We are still shying away from politics in a situation where the broken tension between the United States and China and Russia is actually putting Europe in to a very, very difficult position. And I think it is our duty as specialists on China to help our population and our decision-makers to take informed decisions. But the field, not up to this kind of challenge. This is mainly what I wanted to add in my contribution. Thank you very much for listening. Thank you, Suzanne. This is your paper and interacting with you in the workshop with it's fascinating to me that one of the things that really strikes me about your comments, this, this business of, of sinologist shying away from involvement in, in political affairs, right? Or political history really strikes me. I, I'm trained as a historian and I will never forget one of the first encounters I had with my PhD advisor at Penn. He explicitly told me Brazi, never get involved in Chinese politics only, only study the past. And I think that this, you know, as historians, we are conditioned, historians are conditioned to look at the past, not the present. But I have always found this. I've felt this to be a mistake because I think historians also can weigh in on the present based on what happened in the past. Anyway, I will move on. I could talk at length about this, but it's a fascinating interaction people have and that. Okay, so I'm going to introduce our next colleague, Peter Vamos. He's a scholar from hungry and has written extensively on, unfortunately for me, it seems like most of his work has been published in Hungarian. And one of the other narrative threads running through the R workshop. And also, when you read, and I hope you all do read this, this book. What's him bit one of the things that's embedded in the book, especially if you read the footnotes, is how much work each of these people has created. That is not available to people who don't read Hungarian or Polish, or Mongolian or Romanian. I don't quite know what to do about that because, you know, nobody gets credit for translating work. But I think it's extremely important. And, you know, I was really thrilled to have her join the workshop because he has published extensively. And his contribution in this book is, it gives us just a little taste of some of the deep work he's done on phonology. So without further ado, I'll turn it over to Peter. Thank you very much, Michael. It's really my honor to be able to contribute to this volume. Well, I am a historian of modern China. And my story begins where my personal story begins, where my paper and more or less, in the late eighties, when I started my Chinese studies at, which was the only Chinese department in Hungary at a university In 1987. Now, Michael, you asked us to comment on the present as well. We have three Chinese departments in Hungary. One of those is at the university where I have been teaching for 25 years. It's called curly University in Budapest. And I'm also a senior research fellow at the Research Center for the Humanities in Budapest, where I work at the Institute of history. My focus of research is the history of China. So i'm, I'm trained as a historian as well. And some of the topics that I have been working on are related to my paper here. So It's Sino-Soviet block relations, sign of Hungarian relations during the post-war period. But one of my fields is the history of Christianity in China. So if we speak about the paper that I have written and contribute to this volume, it, It's about coordinated research on modern China in the Soviet Bloc during the second half of the Cold War period. The story starts more or less with the Sino-Soviet split. And the first subsection of my paper introduces the situation in Hungary, the institutional framework of Chinese studies. In Hungary. During the sixties and seventies. We had very few people who could speak Chinese. And we're working on issues related to China in one way or another. A few of them were working on classical Chinese language culture history. But there were those who went to study to the PRC as the birth of the students in the 19 fifties and early sixties. And when they came back to Hungary, to Budapest, they became the professors at the Chinese department. So some of my professors, they had firsthand experience from the PRC. They were the ones who could speak Chinese fluently. And they worked as interpreters for the government as well. At some point, they were serving as diplomats in Beijing. So they had a very rich experience similar to Professor buyer. So, but we had only a handful of these people, like less than 30. And They were the ones who had to cover China for the academic world as well as for the greater public, so for the, for the public opinion as well. So they were involved in this process initiated by the Soviet Party Central Committee, especially IT department for the relations with the fraternal parties of socialist countries. And now all these cooperation was coordinated mainly by the Institute of the Far East at the Soviet Academy of Sciences. So and my, my paper introduces in a chronological order this process of institutionalization and the details of the meetings and the discussions which served as the platform for policy coordination for the Soviet bloc. The first period is the late sixties and early seventies, when the institutional framework was established within the block. The second phase is the period between Mao's death and the announcement of the reform and opening up the period or policy in China which witnessed increasing soviet pressure. But on the other hand, slow polarization from the Allies side. And the last part that deals with the 1980s when this coordinated research slowly loses significance. So basically this is the skeleton of my paper. And I can go into details in the Q&A session. Thank you very much. Thank you so much. Actually, I must tell you that after we had our call for papers out, predator wrote to me asking whether whether he could join. I think it was already after we have completed the list of participants, but we got an e-mail from him and it was amazing because we found out about because detailed, meticulous search on inter keep, especially in Hungarian complex but also more, more, more, more broadly. So, So Michael and I were absolutely thrilled that paper also was on board in this project. So without further delay, I have a pleasure to invite Noosgoi Altantsetseg to tell a few words about her paper Alta is the professor in the School of International Relations and Public Administration of the National University of Mongolia. And she graduates from the faculty of Oriental Studies at the Saint Petersburg State University. Alcohol, the floor is yours. Thank you. Antonina. Do you hear me? Yes, we hear you. Okay. Okay. Thank you. I am sign all the juice. I graduated there from the Saint Petersburg State University with a degree of Oriental Studies and Chinese history. From them my students time, I constant case study China because for Mongolia is very important neighbor. China. For China, Mongolia also is important neighbor because our Mongolian and Chinese and land borders. So longer for ten hours, longer of Mongolia, Awesome, longer borders. So I studied China is very important for Mongolia. It was a long time. My paper focusing on the Chinese studies during the cold bar. So my paper, pen and paper, they thought the Mongolian Chinese studies doing the Bible called the war idiom. Why double called for? Because everybody knows Cold War. It was bleak. I said, Well, most between socialist and capitalist system. I mean between Soviet Union and the USA. It, that time it's. Called the war. And also that time target and Chinese delicious was in there called the period. So my Arctic of type of Mongolia in that bubble called won't, because Bigtable is, if we can say they're a little smaller, a double your code there between the Soviet Union and China because Mongolia, everybody knows located between Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China. So at this period, this very interesting period for development, Mongolian Chinese studies spirit. My article. Focus just on their Mongolian Chinese despite the study, this article divided by 4 2 status. Because Mongolia, second socialist countries of the Soviet Union, Mongolia was in 1924, translated into a socialist country, the second of the Soviet union. And then in tennis tablets in 1949, China become a socialist country. From 1949. From this time, Mongolia and China established diplomatic relations between two socialist countries. But from this time until 19 nineties, Mongolia Chinese delicious was divided into two stage I can skip because no first stage. This covers the period from the 1949 man Meet 1960s until time for the Cultural Revolution in China. These posts time was the relations between Mongolia and China was very friendly relations. At that was the focus upon a principle such that the tuple mu to help, middle assistance. So in that time, first Mongolian students, I may, I may assign all they just they were able to study in China chinese language. Janice Carter, I'm Janice yesterday. So on, of course, are in the other fields like technology and other fields. But of this period, more than 10 Mongolian schoolers ban. They woke up in the sinology field that I mean in the China Studies. At that time, they first period day we're focusing on the China status data books and showing to the people how socialism is built in China, how the achievement in China. Also many books nowhere else and the letters are translated from Chinese to Mongolia and also speech even mount that bone density european. This kind of tenuously, this translated into Mongolian. Chinese history books also translated into Mongolian, not thundering go into Mongolian. Also in China, was also translated Mongolian historical books and speaks of a Mongolian lead the song, it was same mutual respect situation in them. If the mode that you first have to say more than 10 years, this kind of research we're doing that them back. But the beginning of 19 sixties, Mongolian Chinese delicious was worst because it depend of the Soviet Union and Chinese the deletions. They start to see a conflict between the Soviet Union and China. This conflict, because Soviet Union and China, of course inclusive for Mongolian political situation. And that time event complex between Soviet Union and China starts Mongolian. Mongolian keeps the side in the Soviet Union site. They can see. And that time has cost Mongolia hasn't been able to send scholars to prepare in China that Pam Mongolia in National University of Mongolia Stat open Chinese language department. This department also the teachers who started in China. They were Foundation, I think stat teach me Japanese language and the guy he's driven. So our second This is a huge contribution, the cool, lonely in chain that they put the foundation for their future development for Chinese studies in Mongolia. And after they're called the period between China and Mongolia, he was not able to send students to China for their study. China and language and thought decile. So that Pam of the 990s have them, ladies 70 set in Mongolia at home and be prepared at the cutaneous studies students. Some students were sent to say that Soviet Union, for example, I was one of them and also studied in St. Petersburg University Oriental Studies. This is focusing on Chinese history and on the Oriental Studies. Not been the time that a country like India, Europe depends on. So the second time, also Mongolian, I'm tennis that this was developed but I can see it was they were put in there in that the label of study that Pam, Mongolia also find two people label box and on China and Mongolia establish it, I think was in 1968. This issue applique Study Center at the academic science. Eat. This put foundation for epidemic level study China. So from beta, the spam business of Asia and applicant center was rename it at they will put in for East, East Asia than Institute of International Studies and so on and so on. So still, this China studies. They people now working at the Academy of Science in there very important institute prosthetic China also the how to say Chinese studies still continuing in our country. So of course, between Mongolia and China, what this quote by mean between vanco because the Mongolia, Mongolia in China, Mongolia is both the national minority region of China. Inner Mongolia is very long border severe. In Shenzhen when we got there, have also Mongolia support them, also Tibet, this very important nationally among industry reaching from Mongolia because Mongolian and Tibetan we had reached 70 lesion. We are not ghosts and lumps, so we have cultural and their religion that editions we tip it. So in the court, the period for Mongolian, Chinese, Mongolian, mongolian scholars paid more attention for their nation on my mind, on the damp and the Cultural Revolution period, this was assimilation policy through this panda from national minority. It was one of their main topic for Mongolian Chinese studies sector. And also in that there was a competition between their historical issues because Mongolia and China also the Cold War period. Different opinion about yesterday. Everybody knows this. You, I'm Dennis, during the Yuan Dynasty, Mongolian was terminated in China building the Kingdom as the China and Mongolia both were under that my room. So our historical connection, a historical issues is very important to good academic standing, academic research, that quarter period also was a bit hard to say. Mongolian Studies more paid more attention for their historical issues between common issues from miles to save Chinese used against their study when Gordon hysteria among others listed there, There's also studied Mongo live in January does this. But this period, it's all very different attitudes, different opinion about Mongolian history. So, so I can see many men as a poet stages. So from there man, myth of 1985 when the Soviet Union starts perestroika and the opening perestroika and the People's Republic of China also judge foreign policy, start Soviets and the Chinese. Dishes become more warm, bath them are Mongolian Chinese studies also pay more attention to the Chinese foreign policy. For the basic idea is share Asia and Pacific concern. We study time when more deeply, also Chinese economic reform and Chinese economic development. Now this also Chinese foreign policy is this share of this, the share and the how to say Silk Road project. All of these things now are very thick tip of Mongolia. Awesome Mongolian soldiers More attend. For Chinese studies. Even in this quarter period, the tennis that this was limited because their political competition when Mongolia also maintain their ideological influence from the Soviet, Soviet Communism. And now it this way it now open and now now idealistic attitudes could give them, They 10000 studies. So it's, I want to say, thank you very much the cause. I think this Mongolian Chinese started Mongolian sinology in the English language. It may be first my article in English because Mongolia, we published some articles in Russian before, some articles I publish it in China, but it was also given lectures in chairing that in India and Japan and other East Asian countries about them ongoing Chinese, Mongolian, Chinese status, Mongolian sinology. But nowadays, I am very happy in my attic, publish it in English. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Altantsetseg. It was a great pleasure for me to have Professor Altantsetseg on the panel because I am a historian of the Mongol conquest of China. And I'm here to tell you that if there's one really great example of a colonial subject liberating itself from its colonial master. It has to be the story of Mongolia is liberation from the King and from Chinese ongoing attempts to master Mongolia. So now I'm going to turn to our next scholar who contributed to the volume Andreea Brînză, brings us the story front of, of sinology. In Romania, which is also if, if, if nothing else, it's even less known than any of the other top in the, in the West. So Andreea, Please. Thank you so much, Michael. It's a great pleasure to be here with you and to talk about Romanian sinology during the Cold War because even you mean, yeah, these topic wasn't too. So approach, approach. And I will jump to the main fat or findings of my research and my article. So I will start by saying that for me, I think regime, not what, I wasn't just influenced by the Cold War, but it actually developed during the Cold War. So we have a mean, yeah, this sinology that didn't appear beard or organic. On the contrary, it was created from top down by an exchange program, PhD student program that started in the 50s. And back then, the first generation of sinologists were formed. And as the apparent, this is, I can say that the first-generation wife was composed by 55 students out of 2000, they went to China. They started for, I think five years and they came back to media and all became renowned. Knowledge is one of them and became an ambassador to China. And another one created the section of Chinese language and literature at the universe of biochar as though the first branch of Chinese studies. Yes. And with these stacked chart is that it appeared a new wave of sinologist. Those sinologists forming in Romania. Yeah. I can say more about these these Romanian section and how the synodic period, but I have limited time so we can buy more in the book or in the book in my chapter. But again, I wanted to add is that as a characteristic, as a characteristic of Romanian sinology, as knowledge during the cold, where I can say that, that sinologist didn't have the freedom to approach of the topics that they wanted as though politics, international relations, geo-politics, economics. So because of that, their main area of focus was on language, studied, on culture, on philosophy, and even of history, but not so much on modern history, but on ancient history, more like ancient history, let's say. And these so bad then we can find it even today. Even after the fall of communism. Because although the Chinese studies, in Romania evolved, they evolved and you can see how evolution of them. We still don't have classes that approaches topics like geopolitics, economics, or international relations. So to conclude, I want to say that knowledge in the Romanian sinology has quite a short history. And it is very much connected to the China-Romania relations. And but today we can see an improvement and the interests for China, the expanding. So because they know that they have limited time. This is my presentation. I am looking for for the questions and thank you. Thank you so much, Andrea. It's great that we have for a chapter on Romania. And it's because for me as a little bit specific case and the complex of our Cold War Eastern European countries, especially because of the figure of Ceaușescu and how key kept developing good relations with China. Whereas other countries, other satellite countries had to follow the centroid from Moscow and could not develop for such friendly relations with Beijing. So now it is my great pleasure to introduce Diana Lin, who is a professor of history at Indiana University Northwest, who is originally from Beijing. And Diana carried out some research on a Czecho-Slovakian researcher. Diana, the floor is yours. Thank you, Antonina. So my interest in Charles law pre-check began with a fascination with projects scholarship, and I mean, with him as a person, I was fascinated with how he was able to navigate between the communist world and the capitalist world. In 1967, he was in the United States or a semester actually, he was a Harvard. It was the year of, it was in China. It was during the Cultural Revolution where when all communication between China and the United States was cut. But as a check sinologist who check was able to accept an invitation to lecture at Harvard and teach two courses are modern Chinese literature there in the fall semester, It seemed at the time that some kind of bridge could be built between humanism, communism, and other bourgeois values, as exemplified by Harvard. And push Act was making a contribution to sinology. Acknowledged by both the West and at Western and Eastern Europe and in North America in the field of modern Chinese literature. Although that kind of a connection was a precarious one. And it was quickly overturned after the Prague Spring when the pro dupe check and pro reform project was, who was for socialism with a human face, was expelled from the Czech Communist Party. However, before this happened, it was remarkable that some common communication and common understanding could be achieved through Eastern European communist and Western sinology. Western sinology through projects efforts. For instance, legal even reminisced. That project was the first distinguished scholar invited by Harvard to lecture on modern Chinese literature at the time. Because it was the field which was nonexistent in most American universities. Legally attributed is PhD dissertation, which was also revise for publication as the Romantic generation of modern Chinese writers. Published in 1973. He attributed it to projects pioneering research on the subject at hand in modern Chinese literature that led him to his thesis. Another professor at UCLA, a theater hitters, who is professor emeritus at University of California, California, Los Angeles, also reminisced that it was the worker proof check that provided a new and creative framework of modern Chinese literature and gave him enough courage to devote himself to that field. Which in America of the 1970s, it was as though it was still a rather insecure field of study. So an end in 1963, 1962 and 1963 project and the CT Shah had engaged in a debate about how to assess modern Chinese literature in Tombow, which is Dutch journal published by Brill. So one envies the communication and connection pre-check was able to make between the East and the West. And how he used his unique synthesis between Marxists, didacticism and croc school structuralism to build a rich understanding of modern Chinese literature. While Marxism median, prioritize social transformation as the most important goal of a writer. Humanism and individualism, which are products of western modernization, made him appreciate artistic expressions and creative imagination in a writing and Prague School, scratch structuralism synthesized with Marxism, enabled him to see artistic expressions as part of a system and see literary texts as not existing by themselves, but our heart, our larger context, which they illuminate. And so by identifying the lyrical as a valuable characteristic of Chinese creative writing, which applied mostly the poetry but also to some novels or check what to use. This is structural framework and made an original contribution the modern Chinese literature. But combined acts of creativity that wonderfully lengths a subjective with the outside reality. The type of linkage that project created between the East and the West would still be deeply appreciate it today as we seem to get into a new round of war. And communication becomes strained when China and the West are finding it increasingly difficult to find common ground or a common discourse to describe the same thing. We need sinologists like who will build bridges and create new insights through a rich synthesis of traditions from different cultural and ideological backgrounds. Thank you. Thank you, Diana. Your work is really great and it's, it's a pleasure to have a colleague who is just up the road from where I am in Bloomington, colleague in the Indiana University System, doing such important work. I'm going to turn the floor over to my colleague Antonina to tell us briefly about her paper. I'll say one thing about the paper that is in the book. It's kind of a, it's a pity that we weren't allowed to have the visual images that Antonina included in her workshop paper because she had, she does a lot on visual analysis of portraits of Mao and propaganda posters as part of her work. And I'm hoping that she'll be able to publish that in a separate venue at some point. So Antonina, the floor is yours. Thank you, Michael. Yes, indeed, I analyzed how Mao Zedong was portrayed in Polish publication from 1949 until 1976, so until Mao's death. And so basically when they say portray, I mean, those of literally how, what kind of pictures, photographs of Mao Zedong were republished and polish publications. But I also did some discourse analysis to find out how Mao Zedong was described in Polish publications and basically law both in 960 Sino-Soviet split. So before the period Mao Zedong was glorified. I'm interestingly, even the fact that he engaged peasantry instead of a prokaryote as the main basis of the communist revolution. Even this thing was kind of justified and dwells explained that he just had to adjust Marxist Leninism to Chinese conditions. Whereas after 1960 and especially during the period of cultural revolution back in Poland, the very same way he adjusted boxes, moneylenders to Chinese condition was fiercely criticized. Job as the distortion all for Marxism-Leninism. So basically in my paper, I show how the Soviet context and the evolution of Sino-Soviet relations impacted on the way Mao Zedong wants to publish publications. Hope that period. However, I must stress that the main thing I'm really happy about and I feel really honored for, is the fact that I had the pleasure to be co-editor of the book. So I think this is enough what I should say about my own paper, because it's just a very, very small contribution. So now I have a pleasure to introduce my colleague from my university who took a look at cinematography of China. How Chinese movies where I received in the Cold War period, and how they were researched on professional yeah. Piotr, the floor is yours. Yes. First of all, I want to thank you Antonina and Michael for invitation me to such great project. And I'm a specialist on the field of film studies. And generally I'm interested in Asian cinema. But of course, the reception of this cinema is, is, is very interesting. And especially when we talk about China's cinema. And in my text, I described situation that distribution of China's films. China cinema was some kind of a mirror of political, social relationship between Poland or Soviet Bloc generally and China. And, and my text was generally divided into part. In first part, I described the distribution factor, you know, which is very interesting because between 1940 to 451966, this in Poland, we've got almost 50 timess films which were made in mainland China, of course. And generally those movies were, were, were propaganda films. And in the time of, of, of splits political relationship between Soviets and Soviets, soviet block and China. There was a little gap in this, in this kind of activity and in IT's Communist, Communist government. And Important. We got lots of movies that China's movies especially will shout, especially martial arts movies which, which were made in Hong Kong. And it was very, very interesting situation because it is some kind of of main, main, main focus on the stack. So that's that communist politics used. Hong Kong movies, which are movies which are Mm-hm. Which were deeply rooted in this Chinese spiritually. For, for reshape, reshape, reshape social, social environment in Poland because, because they wanted to make some kind of alternative, our alternative spiritual order or spiritual factor. Which can, which, which could destroy, or maybe, maybe, maybe more interesting than, for example, the Christian Spirituality. And that's why the popularity of Hong Kong cinema in ITs, in Poland. But it is very interesting that, that, that's in communist country like, for like Poland. That the cinema of Hong Kong now did the cinema which in my opinion, which was fundamentally rooted in the, in the classical, classical culture, classical Chinese culture were screened. And that's why, that's why this kind of, this kind of cinema, Chinese cinema, in fact, we're, we're representation of Chinese culture were screened in our country. But of course in, in, in my text, I described, I described film studies which interested in China's Sinaloa. In fact, in fact, in the 80s, in late eighties and nineties, we can, we can build in film studies which are interested in dinos 15 among Chinese culture in China cinematic culture. And I think that this situation will be much more, much more interesting now because we, we've got open and access for, for China's see them not only Chinese in their mouth from Mainland but of course Chinese Nana from Hong Kong and from other apart part of the world when Chinese activity to Chinese student activity, where or our mate. Thank you very much. Thank you. Yeah. So last but not least, now let's turn to the Lord to meet her. But before that, I would like to just mention that we also need to taper by Ádám Róma, who unfortunately could not join us today because of some of our other work commitments. However, his papers equally interesting because he had the chance to examine unpublished auto- biography of Barna Tálas, probably the most famous Hungarian expert on China. So I do hope that at some other, okay, we will also have a chance to invite to add them in to learn more about his paper as well. So as I said, last but not least, Michał, floor is yours. Hi everyone. I cannot turn on the video because it tells me that that means data should do it, so. Uh-huh. Okay. Our good hi, everyone. So technical with overcame overcome technical issues. So hi everyone. My name is me has been an associate professor of political science at the beginning in university. And I'm delighted to be here half an hour was writing about and will partially about polished sinology and partially about other aspects. So my article is entitled China's handling the, sorry, the China, China people are impulse October, Poland and impact on Polish sinology. And it tells a story which is basically three-part story. One is about the events of 1956. The other one is the general atmosphere in Poland. Senior file. Now atmosphere and the last parties about the Polish sinology. It's based on documentary, such beautiful arises and individual in-depth interviews which either I or other researchers with our Polish sinologist. So, well, why I wrote this article? Because when I was super interesting for me, why China became, became an interesting topic or people in 1950s, Poland, why some people became interested in China. Why they decided to study sinology and made her lifelong commitment. And all these aspects that surrounds such, such things. So what was the reaction of the families and what was basically the intellectual climate? So the core of my article. But before that I need to introduce and I do it in the, in the article. So I, I write about and the events of 1956 when China helped to stop the Soviets than the Soviet tanks from, from rolling into war. So basically, this is a well-known event in Poland. It's called the October or internationalism. Sometimes it's called the Polish October. And, and basically the, the fact that it's undisputed, what is this disputed? Is that the scale of this help, and I deal with that in this article. But what is more important is that this just gives a good protects to talk about the atmosphere. This is what I call China, China fever in Poland, because we had a generation, the first effectively the personalization of Polish sinologies. Although there were some people who, who started data sinologist carrier earlier on. But as a generation, as a group of people, this was the first one. And, and that was, that was fascinating. Why? Why they started going to China? They became interested in China and my hypothesis was that, Was it a herd of hidden anti soviet is important. This was, this hypothesis was developed during the discussion, during our conference in Berlin in late 2020. So, so, so I tried and I tackled this hypothesis that, well, the hypothesis was the following, that basically there was a sort of hidden anti, anti Soviet. Isn't that because they didn't like Soviet Union. They, they they switched into to China. But unfortunately or fortunately, I, well, the evidence I found that the sources I found, they didn't confirm this hypothesis. That what they found was that people became interested in China because of China itself. It sounds quite simple, but the fact is that and this is the cultural aspect of, of my article, is the fact that China was the first other for post-war poles. So the first, I would even use the currently politically incorrect word exotic. But because Poland ham, became so unitary, including ethnic unity enforced unfortunately after half an hour or two, then China became the first exotic other four for the balls. So when, when I read the memoirs, when I talk to people who remember these times, they were saying that basically Poland was so gray now, so, so boring where he has China was fascinating, exotic. It goes also Prospero's that may be some strengths. Somehow. Then sounds strangely, But, but I was before the Great Leap Forward. So basically, the economy have shortages. This is of course a Hungarian term, but it can be applied to other Eastern European countries as well. So Ebola, we had this economy of shortages various. In China it was not that bad in the 50s. And salt. So this is, this is one thing that against the background of gray, hopeless Poland, China was an adventure. And there are some great stories like GitHub logic story, who was one of the first students who went to China. He married a Chinese girl. That was also a, a, a story because Zhou Enlai had to consent to give his consent to this, to this marriage. So, so and gradually goes from a tiny village in the countryside all and so the story about him first going to China and then coming back with the Chinese wife is absolutely hilarious. So, and so and I have some other stories like that in the, in the article. These, this part was, what's the best one, I would say when writing, when two people who are talking. And it mostly why they chose China was one thing was because they were faster than I did. But that was not the not, not the only reason. Sometimes it was simply a blind chance that out of the sudden a deed appeared, a possibility appeared. And the youth that had so some kind of bake interested in studying something far distant exotic Jin or something Easter. Combination of these factors, there is a story of, of Borofsky, one of the Polish sinologists, who when he was a child or a teenager, she was reading newspaper to his grand grandfather who was not able to talk to read any longer. And because of that, he knew about the political situation in the world. So when there was a delegation from the, from the central government in, in his school. And delegation was of course, looking for some bright students. He was the one. They chose him because he's knowledge exceeded the knowledge of other students greatly. So these kind of stories are very, very vivid. And, and, and they, they will paint the picture of a, of a generation for whom start studying in China/ sinology was an adventure and became a life lived bounce profession. But then of course, politics move, moved in and the general good atmosphere in Singapore, these relations deteriorated due to Sino-Soviet split. Now although Polish communists, they tried to minimize the damaged, but unfortunately that was beyond data will or control. And ultimately the, the, the, the atmosphere waned and, and little of it remains. So it's at, but it's fascinating anyway that, that it, it lasted. As for the third part, the last part about the sinology in Poland and talking and writing more about the ways of them of avoiding being, being controversial. So mostly that meant hiding from contemporary issues. And we already, during this, this webinar really already talked about that in Germany. So, so basically that was a very similar story that Han China or better still even earlier. Now it was a good topic. whereas Kuomintang or let alone Chinese People's Republic was not as one of the one of sinologist whom I interviewed told me that anything that was after the May Fourth Movement was off limits in formalin. So, but they survived thanks to this, to this attitudes they were, they survive because the politicians didn't care about them and they could, they could study, they could to conduct studies about, about China. So these three parts are, are in my article 1956 than the atmosphere. Well, a collective image of a, of a generation. And finally, and finally, this, this part about sinology. So, so that's it. Thank you so much for, for inviting me to this project. I'm delighted to know that all. I was delighted that I was able to be in Berlin back then. I'm super happy that that I was in the volume and that I am that was not. Thank you so much. Thank you. So should we open it up now to discussion? I know there are some observers. If you have any questions or if you want to debate something or ask about extensions of any of the work, please feel free to do so. I'll just make a couple of comments. One of the things that really strikes me after having participated in the workshop and also in the editing and collecting and editing of these, of the papers that went into the book. One of the things that strikes me is the, in some senses, the randomness of the careers of the early sinologist. Certainly this is true in the story of Barna Tálas. the eminent Hungarian sinologist that Adam Róma's paper talks about. I was really struck by the fact that this scholar began his career because he was essentially assigned to go to China and I'm paid or Vamos can probably talk more about, about tawa says career if that's, if that's something we want to devote to. But I guess I'm struck by the fact that a lot of these careers were completely random or possibly due to political influences, our particular political issues that were prevalent in their time period. And then I, I wonder about what's the state of China Studies today. So for people like myself who have been focusing on Chinese minority issues, I have lots of thoughts about where that might be going in the present. And I'm trying to link up some of that with some of the issues that were discussed in these papers, but I'll I'll let I'll turn the floor over to other people at this point. My thought people might, perhaps before we discuss the state of personality today, we have a question in the chat box from Mr. Sean King. So if you don't mind, I will read it out because it's a question to Dr. Weigelin-Schwiedrzik. And here it goes, East German. Better way. I hope that the contributors can, can see that the Q&A section on bone on the bottom of the screen, alright, East German, North Korean relations became strained in the 19 seventies and eighties because among other thing is Pyongyang nationalist vacation drive toward the south contrasted greatly with each purlins Hanukkah era. I've got a policy of no German unification. Do know if similar GDR PRC tensions existed and that such tensions existed. How might those tensions have impacted center CINAHL logical studies in the former GDR. So Suzanne, would you answer this question? Thank you very much. This is really a very interesting question and I think I cannot give a very convincing answer. But as far as I know, there has always been a certain tension between the Eastern part of Germany and the People's Republic of China related to the unification issue. At the beginning when the GDR was still going for unification. Of course, they could sort of always say, you know, when they hour both countries will be reunited and no problem. But then with the GDR going more and more into a direction of the so-called two-state theory. Actually, the PRC side was not very happy because as you might know, after certain period of time, both West Germany and East Germany accepted to be two different states as members of the United Nations. Which was a philosophy that both the People's Republic of China and the Republic of China did not accept for their own situation. And so it was a problem. But I think at that time, under the leadership of Zhou Enlai, diplomacy was comparatively soft handed in China. For that reason they didn't make this a very prominent issue. When finally, 1980's the TDR and the People's Republic of China. We approached each other and we had a certain time during the 19 eighties when both students from Western Germany and Eastern Germany were actually present at Chinese universities and Shanghai and Beijing and Shanghai and so on, so forth. So I think it is what, it was very much due to the kind of diplomacy on the Chinese side that made it possible for the GDR to sort of circumvent this problem and have better relationships to China when it saw that this was something it needed to have. And especially because of economic reasons. I make this sound or for clarification for your very interesting answers. So let me go back to what Michael was talking about. So the state of contemporary phenology or China studies. Because in our book we're also explaining what kind of definition we are accepting because there is no single definition of sinology and China studies sometimes they are treated synonymously, sometimes they mean a little bit different branches of research or studies from China. So anyway, we will trying to accept as wide definition as possible without excluding anyone. As we know that some expert focus express both is some literature and language of us focus on international relations and political issues. So if I can jump in and ask again the question given by Michael, what is the state of sinology today or the state of China Studies and where are we going from here? Perhaps I should give the floor to Professor Bayer again, who has the richest experience and maybe, maybe we can learn some lessons from The history of sinology and China studies, professor are you with us. Yes, I am. I am. I've seen the question concerning the difficulties to learn. Chinese and tolerance phenology in general. Points from damaged the obstacles which I signaled in my article. I mean, some financial limits and constraints. Lack of Freedom and expressing one's called Mind and so on. I think the worst thing ever, it was the lack of teaching materials. I don't remember whether I mentioned in my article, I know that the first time I had to do with the Chinese tapes and linguistic laboratory was almost at the very end of my studies. That was the fifth year of my studies. Because before that we had no access to any teaching, all day Material. No tapes, no records, nothing. That it was almost an app for it, you know, because during my fourth year of study, the program had only one hour of contemporary Chinese. There was only one lesson per week. So this is nothing. You can, you can check the admittance list, but not learn a language. What language should be. So I think that was the limits. Another limit was that there was only one Chinese language section, had the Oriental Institute in Warsaw. Nothing else. Now almost every important university in Poland has got the Chinese, say, chair, Institute section or whatever. So you can learn, you can learn sinology, or at least you can learn Chinese without the background, time in history, political economy, and so on. You have some specialized. Is the egg along in university, which I think is the best. As far as contemporary China is concerned, it gives us some insight into the past. About the proportions are much better than with strictly. See knowledge is phenological departments to other universities because they focus on the past, on Ancient China, and on tradition, on history and so on. They don't give as much knowledge as an hour about contemporary China. So if we sum it up and take into the aeration that the production as far as the number of gray to eat is concerned, was something like a few people every two years because they had admission. Enrollment was carried out once every two years, intermittently, Japanese, Chinese, Japanese, Chinese. So that was the routine procedure. In the sixties, in the seventies, then the frequency of enrollment was doubled. So it meant that every year there were new students are Chinese words your university. And in the second half of the eighties, some while not sinologist about Chinese language courses started at some other universities outside Warsaw. So that was a big progress. But at the time when I studied and that was 69, 72 core, nothing like that. So the number of gray Dewey's was very limited. The access to teaching and learning materials was again, very limited, or we may say restricted because, for example, and a nice books or records sort of contact was prohibited. I remember from my experience when I started learning Korean and of course I used to visit North Korea very frequently is the Polish Press Agency responded in Beijing, but to South Korea did not exist on our political map. I made a trip illegally in December 18 for this, I wanted to see South Korea. And then I had to use all possible tricks. Just to convince you, note the chief editor of my press agency, that that was a tourist trip or something like that. So I defended myself effective. But it was close to a disaster because they could recall me, you know, from, from my post in Beijing just in retaliation for my, let's called misbehavior, ideological and political misbehavior. I never okay. About that. Never from and not to observe some abstract, abstractive rules or completely illogical augmentation, nothing like that. So if we compare the past with the present time, so of course now it's, I mean, they are people may really learn. China, may learn about China. I may learn Chinese and they may, let's say, plan something for the future. While in our case, it was hardly possible. Did you hear me? Yes. Oh, yeah. Okay. Michael, you raised your hand? So yeah, I would like to, I would like to extend professor Bayer's comments about the limited access to materials and in his period of time. And I wonder if we're not entering a similar situation now. Not because there's a dearth of Chinese languaged teaching materials or other materials that have been made available by China. In other states. My concern is rather with the, what I've experienced as a, a, an incredible restriction or limiting of access to archives in China for foreign scholars. And perhaps this is due to, perhaps this is limited to certain fields. So for example, I've been researching for a number of years ethnic minority issues in, in the PRC. And it is, I'm going to say it's impossible now for me to go to any archive in China and be able to research that topic at this point in time. I don't know if others have that same experience. But what I am concerned about is in some ways, a return to the kind of situation that Professor buyer talks about. I'd be interested to hear how, what other people here think about this or people in the, in the audience as well. Thank you all. Might be, maybe just to start with, I may quote, says some some of my experience. Because when I use Post-its in China for the second time and that was between 92 doubles, three. I used to travel around China a lot without asking any permissions for it. The any approvals and anything like that? No, Not until it was only ones over six years. That to me, my wife and my younger is Tania know because we learn together in a Christian Beijing than in Shanghai where I was Consul General. We used to travel by car. I also driver. So we all also visited Tibet and speaking areas in Shanghai and even entertain part of Tibet. And say that word no, no restriction to as we were stopped by the Chinese police only once. And that was our last trip in October to W3, just two or three weeks before leaving China. At that time, access to libraries and archives was possible. While not everywhere and not to in each and every situation. But in most cases, it was possible, it was even possible to copy some materials to Xerox to that. Many books were available. For example, as far as the history of Sino- Tibetan relations is concerned because that was the focus of my academic interest. Practically speaking in the countryside. February had been printed in the People's Republic of China and is still survived until that time was available. I, I bought, you know, a number of old books from the fifties, sixties, from the seventies. And so an old bookstore is the only thing you know, shop attendance had to do was do the two dusted them because they were in such a state that you hardly could read the title out. Or they serve as a support to, you know, for for a cabinet and onto wooden cabinet two, which was almost splitting apart. But they were still available. You could buy it, you know, for let's say five yuan or six yuan, which was an enormous amount of money for local people at the time. Now, of course, situation is much, much better. I, but I think this is the result of China's self imposed isolation. Because I'm a friendly, China is going that way right now. Particularly before the 20th Party Congress do to be held in November. This year. It's a, it's a sort of a very conscious action I think, taken by the Chinese leadership. Because China has been using the COVID pandemic as a pretext, as a very convenient critics and limited, limiting contact with the outside world. For me, it's evident, I don't know whether other people agree with it. But when exchanging views, you know, with many scholars and China watchers and political analyst. I came across the point of view quite, quite often that this is how I see it. Thank you very much, Professor. I have a two other contributors raising their hands. So I will allow myself to Susanne and then to Peter. Thank you very much. I think I'm Michael in my field which is contemporary Chinese history and politics, the situation is very much the same as you described. So while up until nine to 2012, we were quite happy to go to China, exchanged views with our colleagues, go into archives, both archives in big cities as well as in the countryside. This is not possible anymore and it's not only not possible for us foreigners, but it's also not possible for our colleagues in China. Many of those departments that were focused on contemporary Chinese history were a closed people have now gone to go back into King and Min history rather than doing post 49 Chinese history. The archives they, they collected actually also being closed are not allowed to put them online anymore and things like this. So the situation is totally different from the times before 2012. And I think it's not getting better but worse. On the other hand, I must say that at least in the German-speaking world, we're also wondering how people who specialize on contemporary China will be viewed within the next month to come. Because if we compare the situation, our situation with a situation of our colleagues who specialize on Russia. We see that there are now being extremely criticized for trying to explain why Russia is the way it is. And some of what we do as sinologists working on contemporary issues is that we tried to explain why China is the way it is. And this is understood as being too much in favor of Russia. And these people are asked to do self-criticism. Not only people in academia, but also journalists, people who are in businesses, people who are in leading position or who were in leading positions in the past and had good relations with Russia. And I think that many of the young people who are now writing the PhDs on contemporary China wondering whether they chose the right topic because they feel that they're going to be, to be met by enormous problems for the, for the RIA if they deal with issue of contemporary issues related to China. So the field is actually under high pressure for both sides from, from, from China as well as from our home countries. And we're only waiting for our universities to give us instructions for how to deal with the situation. And unfortunately, many universities in the films became world immediately broke up their relationships with universities in Russia. And we feel, you know, that if things go into the direction that A jury just said, I think that our universities will ask us to shy away from politics again. Maybe go into ancient China's, into the study of ancient China rather than doing contemporary China issues. Despite the fact that I repeat, I think that our decision-makers, our public, the people in our countries need to be informed what's going on in the world, including China and including version, pater that flower is now yours. Peter is gone. Where is Peter? Peter we saw your hand. Yes, I'm sorry. Yes. Okay. So I muted myself. So just a short comment on Michael's observation. This is a book that came out recently. It's a sign of Hungarian relations, 409, 289. So this is the calligraphy of Sanger, who are probably the most prominent Cold War historian in present-day China. This book contains a 180 hungarian documents and not a single Chinese one. And the simple reason is that I did not have access to those Chinese materials. When I first was able to do research in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs archives in Beijing. That was in 2005, I think a year after. The collection was made accessible for for, for, for, for both scholars in general. The promise was that they would declassify documents on a regular basis. So the first stage was 950, 255. The second stage came in 2006, when I was fortunate enough to be the first foreigner to access the material after it's declassification. And I collected a significant number of Chinese documents on Hungary and the Hungarian 56 revolution. I actually, I translated them and publish them in Hungarian. So they are available now in Hungarian. Selection is available on the post-war history quad we're International History Project website as well in English. But after that, this process first slowed down. And as Michael and Suzanne just mentioned, after 2012, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs archives practically closed down. So it's not possible to get any significant document from from them. So this is just a brief comment. And I thank you very much. Do we have any other comments from our contributors on the state of the current state of phonology and its future prospects and challenges our piece. Okay, thank you. I want to say is what does sinology we talked about that there are additional sinology, this learn Chinese language, literature, history and religion, so on. But now China is rising country. Though young population and students, they more interested Nowadays today's Chinese economy and the Chinese foreign policy. This kind of a field of research and listed the young generation in my time. I mean, the during the Cold War time. In the typical work and plan, the folks that are on the exact topic. For example, national minority policy chain lead to the debate in Mongolia zones on now this, this Mason and minority issues. I think it's in Mongolia. How to say it? The more week I have, the more attention paid today's Chinese economy and the auto policy and the Mongolian Chinese relations, so on. Then they also in East Asia policy. So I want to suggest this may smell minority issues still in China. Now, I have problems that Tibet and Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia, even there. I mean, two years ago, maybe in, in Mongolia at this Xi Jinping policy where guests teaching Mongolian language in secondary school and it is very difficult to find a job if you don't know Chinese language, so on, so on. So, uh, how to be in their future. Because, you know, hello, Mason and minorities, so many minority in the tiniest minority. Him about the cards, it's not minority. So my goodness, and Tibetan, and this isn't an oak or their own tradition, own language, our own culture and history in today's there also have, of course, they included then Chinese economic policy in the throat, but they also have some problems how to be in the future. What simul that you're not on the language, history and tradition. This, I mean this traditional sinology. Now this, We have to, Today's Chinese policy, how we will do our research in China. This is my comment. Thank you. Of course, one of the really interesting things, if there's any nation at this point that is uniquely situated to either deal with or may be an intermediary between Russia and China. It would be Mongolia because of your geographic position, but also your historic position vis-a-vis China and Russia. And that may be the something that we need to explore in future workshop. Thank you. Yes. Exactly. Left-hand microphone to Diana. Okay. I just want to make a very quick comment about sinology. I agree with Alta that, that, that the study of sinology, I want to focus on the second part of our discussion, which is how China is changing. Chinese police policies are changing. So where we're also dealing with a rapidly China that is rapid aid redefining itself as communism receives and nationalism becomes more prominent. So when China redefines itself and actually is also undecided over whether to define itself as a modern nation state or as a civilization. I think the debate and still ongoing in China. And of course, in either definition, a question about menarche nationalities is, is a, a should play a prominent role. But so far it is not. So as, as China redefines itself and as China hesitates on what to do with its own identity, I think the study of sinology becomes more complicated. And there is less common ground between, say, an official Chinese statements about itself and Washington or foreign sinologist outside of China? There their definition. What China, yes. Yes. Yes. Quick, quick comment. I think that there's a chance for Chinese studies that in Tang, Chinese culture is more and more interested not for only sinologists and for example In the field studies. There are in fact lots of books about the, about the Chinese culture where were written by, by, by specialists from the field of film studies. But I think there is one danger which she's very serious that I have noticed that the Chinese government unified culture. For example, I wanted to, I wanted to grab some information about Hong Kong cinema. And those information are prohibited now. And for example, lots of movies from Hong Kong. I can, I can reach in Europe or in the United States by, but I cannot reach those materials from Hong Kong. And, and, and this unification is in my opinion, very dangerous. But, but, but the, the positive factor of, of, of this case is that not only sinologists are interested in Chinese culture, but but scholars from the other fields of academic, academic activities are interested in Chinese culture. Not, not only of course this chart, this modern Chinese culture, but, but, but traditional Chinese culture. And after all, we've got the Taiwan. So Antonina could can, can say a few words about this. But this, this, this, this situation is quite, quite the great danger that's dangerous that, that they, they, they wanted to communicate this disease feel for China's culture. Thank you very much. Okay. I'm unfortunately going to have to end our discussion. We were supposed to and 30 minutes ago as Antonina just informed me. I could go on and on. I think it's a fascinating discussion. But I wish to thank each of you. I also want to thank Andrea and Annabell, who are the two people that run the Indiana University Berlin Gateway office. With none of this would've been possible without their hard work on our behalf. They were very generous hosts. And I am fortunate to be at Indiana University that has spent an enormous amount of money and continues to spend an enormous amount of money to keep these international gateway centers open so that scholars like us, we can have these meetings. So my sincere thank you to both Andrea and Annabell for this. Antonina, any last words? Well, thank you, Micheal. I think I think we are, we are both very grateful to Indiana University Europe Gateway and our contributors for the wonderful work. And patience, especially responding to our endless emails when we are in the midst of the editing process that I think the result is very nice and I guess my plan, I are both very proud of it and we're very honored to work with all of you. So I guess we're kind of wrapping up our discussion. Not very optimistic way because it seems that there are challenges ahead and things are not going the right direction when we talk about freedom, access to information. and broadly understood cooperation with China and China experts probably would have all heard about cases when Chinese students even have problems now with the getting passports to study abroad, they are discouraged to study abroad to Chang, these colors are also discovered to have for contacts with the following scholars. Unlike it was ten years ago when actually there was a pressure to publish in American journals, for example. Now we can see the opposite tendency. So Mao, China has kind closing its borders, not opening up. So let's help. This process will not continue through the extreme are but somehow which will be reversed. And I hope that people like our wonderful quench your thirst will help others understand China. Because, because it's probably, it's very easy to blame China for everything present China as the main enemy. But the real question and the real task is to understand China and talk to China, discuss with China, negotiate with China and so on and so forth. Not to build another cartoon. So once again, thank you very, very much. And for the last two sentences, I will pass the microphone back to Michael. Thank you everyone. This has been great. I hope to see you all again at some point in person, and I hope that we can continue these discussions. Much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you many, many. Thanks. Bye-bye. Bye. Bye. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.