This report presents a review and elaboration of meta-analysis of Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS3), focusing on the priorities identified by regions/countries, and policy measures at regional and national level. The first part of the report presents the key findings of a structured dialogue with experienced practitioners from across Europe. It benefits from a methodology of structured interactions with regional and national policymakers, across time, adapting and pursuing a cohort-type approach. It has also relied on results of a Smart Specialisation Platform (S3 Platform) survey of policymakers. On the one hand, analysis has brought new dimensions to the fore. First, coherent policy road-mapping, fostering regional economic transformation, emerged as a pivotal issue that deserves more attention. Regardless of the label used (policy road-mapping, techno-economic road-mapping, regional transformation road-mapping), the key point is the realisation that there is a host of policies that must be in tune with the transformational promise of S3, in order to reap its fruits. One of the most powerful examples is the importance of human capital for the success of S3 - or any sustainable exercise pursuing growth - and the way S3 can be undermined by relentless austerity drives that push human capital away. Other notable messages emerged in this meta-analysis, especially through the active structured involvement of front-line policymakers. Quite encouragingly, it was stressed that the Smart Specialisation approach is perceived as a broad development strategy, and not just a mere setting for the use of regional funds. Policymakers also confirmed the importance of maintaining momentum in the Entrepreneurial Discovery Process (EDP), as well as the need to simplify and harmonise financing instruments. Furthermore, certain underappreciated issues have been identified as critical: they include ensuring consistency in communication about the Smart Specialisation approach and policies to stakeholders, and nurturing a continuous dialogue across sectors and disciplines to boost cross-fertilisation. On the other hand, the review of priorities led to a methodology, which can still be implemented without recourse to computational power at this stage. However, as the number of priorities grows, a programmable algorithm may well be needed. This report hints at how such an algorithm can be built; the goal would be, in a sense, the obverse of what is sought by web navigators' rank algorithms. Instead of seeking many relevant responses to queries, the objective would be to provide concise syntheses reflecting many different contributions, seeking common elements among them. Developing it would require policy backing, and a separate, prioritised, and resource-demanding project. Finally, the meta-analysis of priorities allows regrouping them to extract common vectors of emphases across regions, as bottom-up input towards mission-oriented themes that carry cross-regional economic transformation potential. Through the process above, eighteen groupings of priorities (priority families) were identified. Some of the highest ranked ones, reflecting many regions/countries priorities, involve activities that are always high in such lists (e.g. health-related); others however entail activities that are often overlooked. One very important such grouping/family, with many countries and regions in its ranks, is the agri-food family, where research and innovation can often be high-tech indeed. Another very important - and usually overlooked - grouping involves tourism and culture. This includes targeted tourism, as well as quality-of-life experiential tourism, and indirectly proposes a new 21st century approach to the concept of competitiveness. Beyond such groupings and examples, the ultimate specific identification of vectors should ideally involve a broader discussion/validation process. ; JRC.B.3-Territorial Development