 So yes, I will start, as I mentioned, with a short introduction. So what is the FITFAR-i project? So FITFAR-i is an acronym for Fostering Improved Training Tools for Responsible Research and Innovation. So what is responsible research and innovation? We all know that science and technology can create risk and ethical dilemmas. Therefore, our eye seeks to bring research and innovation into the open to anticipate consequences and to involve the society. Societal actors such as researchers, citizens, policymakers, businesses, or NGOs work together during a research process to better align the processes and outcomes with values, needs, and expectations of society. So in short, it means that our eye means to involve all stakeholders at all levels to minimize the potential negative impact of research and innovation. So they have developed many definitions, each of which emphasizes different components. And we've summarized here a few. So our eye can mean mutual responsiveness between innovators and social actors. It can mean responsibility for the future impacts of research and innovation. And it can mean alignment to research and innovation process and then it outcomes to values, needs, and expectations of the society. Or it can mean reflexivity on the moral acceptability of new technologies and innovation. More practical, our eye can be seen as an umbrella concept. So it includes different key criteria and also conceptual dimension. So on this slide, you can see the key criteria that it includes. So such as gender equality and ethical dimension in the research process and content, then open access to research results, formal and informal science education, and also public and societal engagement, and governance, so aiming at creating models for these other five components. And more recently, also the key criteria sustainability and social justice or inclusion have been added to this concept. So the conceptual dimensions you can see here. So diversity and inclusion, for example, means that you involve as early as possible a wide range of actors to strengthen the democracy and also to broaden your sources of expertise, different disciplines, and different perspectives. Then our eye also means to be anticipative and reflective. So you can envision the impacts and reflect on the underlying assumptions and values and the purposes. So to try to see how your research would affect the future. Then one other conceptual dimension is to be open and transparent. So it means to communicate the methods and the results and inclusion into an able dialogue with the public. And the last conceptual dimension is responsiveness and to be adaptive to change. So this means that you are able to modify your mode of thought and behavior according to the circumstances or the feedback you get from including societal actors. So this is the definition of our eye. And I also have a definition of open science, a bit short here now. So we took the definition from the Foster website, which says that open science is a practice of science in such a way that others can collaborate, contribute because the research data, the lab notes, and all other research processes are freely available. And the terms under which they are available allow the reuse, the redistribution, and the reproduction of the research. And in short, we can say it's the movement to make scientific research data and dissemination accessible to all levels of an acquiring society. And here is just a picture of the four fundamental rules of open science, so transparency, accessibility available and free and reusable. So just to illustrate this in short. And now I would like to take a few minutes to talk about the Fit for Our Eye project. So we are a project with a consortium of 12 partners from nine countries. And we have one more year to go, so we started in 2017. And the project moves from the assumption that there's a serious gap between the potential role that our eye and open science could play in the research environment and that they actually play. So there is a potential for improvement in that sense. And Fit for Our Eye is intended to help mainstream our eye and open science through transforming them into a set of strategies and means. So we work towards two key objectives, so to bridge this gap and activate institutional change. One of them is training, and the other one is governance settings. And we have free strands that we work on. So the first strand is the analytical strand. So we want to understand which trends, barriers, drivers, interests, and values influence the adoption of our eye and open science. And for example, also do sectors in national context play a role. And then we work on a testing strand. So we observe our eye and open science in action. And how we do this is that we conduct for co-creation experiments to figure out possible solution in terms of training approaches and governance settings to see what works and what doesn't. And then the third strand is the proactive strand about promotion and sharing. So we want to promote changes, develop training tools, and evidence-based guidelines and governance settings. So just quickly, so what we've done so far and what we are currently working on. So in the analytical strand, the first activity was the mapping and benchmarking process with the key question, why is our eye less widespread, accepted, and embedded in research organization than it was expected? And in order to analyze the diffusion and embedment of our eye and open science and to map these general trends and barriers, our approach was to do a literature review and a set of focus groups and a benchmarking exercise. And the result of this was a 142 deliverable report on the literature review. So what we tried here is to summarize this a bit. So we created these graphics. So you can see here on the left-hand side the critical trend-shaping signs, such as hypercompetition or increasing pressure and assessment systems or the increasing mobility of researchers. On the right-hand side, we have some barriers of our eye and open science, which can be, for example, resistance to change or the uncertainty about the concept or, for example, lack of training. And here you can see drivers of our eye and open science. So how can our eye and open science be moved forward? So these can be political, economic, or social, technological, or environmental. And there are seven different ways to interpret our eye and open science. So perspectives, how to see it. So you can, for example, look at our eye from a democratic perspective. Or you can see our eye as an opportunity or for management or to better align the values of society and research. And the report and the literature review on also these visual graphic summary are available online. So here we include the links. And if you want to learn more about this mapping and benchmarking exercise, we already had one webinar about that. So you can access the link and watch the recording. Yes, so that's for the analytical part. And in addition to that, we've also conducted or we are conducting for co-creation experiments, as I mentioned, to observe our eye and open science and action. So for our partners, organizing these experiments where they have focus groups and interviews to engage with their environment in their research institution. And so an experiment can be described as an exercise of engaging different actors. So the quadruple helix actors, which are university, industry, policymakers, and society into the design of a research project. And this is how we want to understand how institutions need to change their organizational frameworks and allow better our eye embedment and to provide an enhanced value for the actors. So you can find more information on that on our website. And we will have a blog post about each of the experiments in the coming weeks. So stay tuned. And we will post that on Twitter and share it with you. And also, we will have another webinar about the experiment for sure. So then in terms of activities, we've also done, in terms of training, we've done a content mapping and meta-analysis of the training materials that are already out there. So my colleagues created and integrated our eye and open science taxonomy. And we are collecting our eye training materials on the foster portal. So you can go there. And you also can now get notifications if there are new resources. So this is also mentioned in a blog post on our website. And yes, today we will learn about the second part of our understanding strength, analytical strength, which was a sectorial diagnosis about the variability of our eye and open science. And I would like now to pass on the word to Harold van Lenten. I'll stop sharing now.