In the context of globalization and urbanization, rural development faces many challenges, such as population loss and uneven distribution of resources. This paper analyzes the similarities and differences in sustainable rural development strategies between China and Europe through a comparative perspective. China has optimized land use by relying on land policy innovations, such as the household contract responsibility system and the “separation of three rights”, as well as the construction of small towns; while Europe focuses on private ownership and market mechanisms, and supports agricultural and rural development through the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Using literature review, comparative research and policy analysis, the study shows that the policy innovations in China and Europe, each with its own focus, have been effective in promoting agricultural output and rural social development. Particularly noteworthy is that the “three rights” policy has increased agricultural productivity through the liberalization of management rights, while the European CAP has contributed to the diversification of the rural economy and environmental protection through continuous reforms. This study emphasizes that through policy innovation and international cooperation, combining the strengths of China and Europe, it is possible to provide a new model of sustainable development for the global countryside. Specifically, through the establishment of Sino-European R&D centers for agricultural science and technology, exchange of talents, and cooperation in green infrastructure development, technology transfer and application can be accelerated, cultural exchange and understanding can be promoted, and the sustainable development agenda for global rural areas can be jointly advanced.

Purpose: Today’s challenges underscore the importance of energy across all segments of life. This scientific paper investigates the multifaceted relationship between energy efficiency, energy import reliance, population heating access, renewable energy integration, electricity production capacities, internet utilization, structural EU funds, and education/training within the framework of economic development. Methodology: Using data from selected European countries and employing self-organizing neural networks (SOM) and linear regression, this research explores how these interconnected factors influence the journey toward a sustainable and prosperous economic future. Results: The analysis revealed a strong connection between energy efficiency and numerous socioeconomic factors of modern times, with most of these connections being non-linear in nature. Conclusion: As countries work toward sustainable development goals, prioritizing energy efficiency can contribute to improved quality of life, economic growth, and environmental sustainability.

Introduction: In Central Europe, in Hungary, the state guarantees access to health care and basic health services partly through the Semmelweis Plan adopted in 2011. The primary objectives of the Semmelweis Plan include the optimisation and transformation of the health care system, starting with the integration of hospitals and the state control of previously municipally owned hospitals. The transformation of the health care system can have an impact on health services and thus on meeting the needs of the population. In addition to reducing health inequalities and costs, the relevant benefits include improving patients’ chances of recovery and increasing patient safety. The speciality under study is decubitus care. Our hypothesis is that integration will improve the chances of recovery for decubitus patients through access to smart dressings to promote patient safety. Objective: to investigate and demonstrate the effectiveness of integration in improving the chances of recovery for decubitus ulcer patients. Material and methods: The research compared two time periods in the municipality of Kalocsa, Bács-Kiskun County, Southern Hungary. We collected the number of decubitus patients arriving and leaving the hospital from the nursing records and compared the pre-integration period when decubitus patients were provided with conventional dressings (01.01.2006–2012.12.31) and the post-integration period, which entailed the introduction of smart dressings in decubitus care (01.01.2013–2012.12.31). The target population of the study was men and women aged 0–99 years who had developed some degree of decubitus. The sample size of the study was 4456. Independent samples t-test, Chow test and linear trend statistics were used to evaluate the results. Based on the empirical evidence, a SWOT analysis was conducted to further examine the effectiveness of integration. Results: The independent samples t-test model used was significant (for Phase I: t (166) = −16.872, p < 0.001; for Phase II: t (166) = −19.928, p < 0.001; for Phase III: t (166) = −19.928, p < 0.001; for Phase III: t (166) = −16.872, p < 0.001). For stage III: t (166) = −10.078, p < 0.001; for stage IV: t (166) = −10.078, p < 0.001; for stage III: t (166) = −10.078, p < 0.001). for stage III: t (166) = −14.066, p < 0.001). For the Chow test, the p-values were highly significant, indicating a structural break. Although the explanatory power of the regression models was variable (R-squared values ranged from 0.007 to 0.617), they generally supported the change in patient dynamics after integration. Both statistical analyses and SWOT analysis supported our hypothesis and showed that integration through access to smart dressings improves patients’ chances of recovery. Conclusions: Although only one segment of the evidence on the effectiveness of hospital integration was examined in this study, integration in the study area had a positive impact on the effective care of patients with decubitus ulcers, reduced inequalities in care and supported patient safety. In the context of the results obtained, these trends may reflect different systemic changes in patient management strategies in addition to efficient allocation of resources and quality of care.

European commissioner for the Internal Market, Thierry Breton, told Le Journal du Dimanche in January 2022, “Existing nuclear plants alone will need 50 billion euros of investment from now until 2030. And new generation ones will need 500 billion”. This paper considers whether these values are realistic. Further, it asks whether these investments would yield an internationally competitive European nuclear power infrastructure given that the nuclear power industries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development member countries have lost global nuclear market share to Russian and Chinese firms since 1995.The paper investigates whether the European nuclear industry even with massive investment can compete with the Chinese nuclear industries. It concludes that the European (in particular, the French) nuclear power industry will be unlikely to be cost competitive with the Chinese nuclear power industry unless financing and new plant orders are immediately forthcoming. To achieve carbon neutrality, the issue becomes whether European Union countries can afford indigenous nuclear technologies or will need to import nuclear power plants from Asia.