www.esf.org SEE Expert Meeting and Ministerial Round Table Strengthening Scientific Research and Higher Education: from bilateral to panEuropean cooperation Session 2: Participation of SEE countries in European and International Research Programmes SEE COUNTRIES’ PERFORMANCE IN ESF PROGRAMMES AND IN OTHER CROSS-BORDER COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH INITIATIVES Vanessa Campo-Ruiz, MD PhD Science Officer to the Chief Executive European Science Foundation Tirana, 21 May 2010 1
24
Embed
Esf see countries performance in esf programmes and in other cross-border collaborative research initiatives
Presented during the Ministerial Round Table on Science and Higher Education. From Bilateral to pan-European Cooperation held over 21-22 May 2010 in Tirana, Albania
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
www.esf.org
SEE Expert Meeting and Ministerial Round Table
Strengthening Scientific Research and Higher Education: from bilateral to panEuropean cooperation
Session 2: Participation of SEE countries in European and International Research Programmes
SEE COUNTRIES’ PERFORMANCE IN ESF PROGRAMMES AND IN OTHER CROSS-BORDER COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH INITIATIVES
Vanessa Campo-Ruiz, MD PhD
Science Officer to the Chief Executive
European Science Foundation
Tirana, 21 May 2010 1
www.esf.org2
1. The ESF and the SEE Countries: who is who
2. SEE Countries Performance in EUROCORES Programme
3. Collaboration between European research organisations: a survey conducted by ESF
INDEX
www.esf.org3
• 30 countries
• 79 Member Organisations
Research Funding Organisations
Research Performing Organisations
Academies and Learned Societies
The European Science FoundationIndependent, non-governmental organisation established in 1974
A common platform to collaborate across
all scientific domains and geographical boundaries
www.esf.org4
ESF Committees and their Units
Standing Committee domains
• Humanities
• Social Sciences
• Life, Earth & Environmental Sciences
• Medical Sciences
• Physical and Engineering Sciences
Expert Board/Committee domains
• Marine Sciences
• Polar Sciences
• Space Sciences
• Radio Astronomy
• Nuclear Physics
• Materials Science and Engineering
www.esf.org5
ESF Member Organisations
Our 79 MOs include
11 Member Organisations from
6 SEE Countries:
Croatia (HAZU and NZZ),Romania (CNCSIS), Slovenia (ARRS, SAZU and SZF)Bulgaria (BAS and NSFB), Greece (NHRF and FORTH) and Turkey (TUBITAK).
www.esf.org6
ESF Instruments
STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION
Exploratory Workshops Research Conferences
Science Policy Briefings Research NetworkingProgrammes
Forward Looks EUROCORES
Member Organisation Fora
www.esf.org7
• The single, Europe-wide research programme scheme with a bottom-up approach (theme-wise), covering all scientific disciplines.
• Themes are proposed by scientists and assessed by ESF Scientific Advisory Board. Applications undergo international peer review, coordinated by ESF.
• Research funding remains national. No common pot: research teams are funded by their national organisations.
• Networking is funded by MOs, and coordinated by ESF (funded by EC until 2008).
• Currently, 52 programmes “open” with 23 of them at the networking phase, involving 66 funding organisations and over 1,000 researchers , and a total funding of 161,2 M€total (triannual).
EUROCORES
European Collaborative Research Programmes
www.esf.org8
EUROCORES
Applicants/Beneficiaries
Research Teams from Universities and Research Organisations
Teams 30
Countries 3 or more
Duration 3-4 years
www.esf.org9
HOW ARE SEE COUNTRIES
PERFORMING IN THE
EUROCORES PROGRAMME?
www.esf.org10
EUROCORESAn opportunity to collaborate beyond ESF membership
* Number of collaborative links enabled through EUROCORES between researchers from 2001 to 2007 in funded collaborative research programmes (as Project Leaders; Principal Investigators; or Associated Partners).
www.esf.org11
Programmes vs publications (data from ISI WOK)
SEE COUNTRY EUROCORES2001-2007
PUBLICATIONS 2001-2007
BULGARIA 35 16.641
CROATIA 7 16.305
GREECE 59 70.240
ROMANIA 58 25.726
SERBIA 10 9.546
SLOVENIA 16 17.015
TURKEY 165 >100.000
ALBANIA -- 460
BOSNIA HERZEGOVINA
-- 934
FYR MACEDONIA -- 2.435
MONTENEGRO -- 419
MOLDOVA -- 1.707
KOSOVO -- 68
www.esf.org12
HOW DO SEE COUNTRIES
PERFORM GLOBALLY
IN ALL CROSS-BORDER
COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH?
RESULTS FROM
ESF SURVEY
www.esf.org
Background of ESF Survey
• In 2009, realising the insufficient data on collaboration between European research organisations outside the EC Framework Programmes, ESF was invited to conduct a survey.
• Sample= 40 Research Funding Organisations (RFOs) and Research Performing Organisations (RPOs).
13
www.esf.org14
The objective of the Survey was to map the cross-border collaboration between RFOs and RPOs, identifying successful models and bottlenecks.
This information is important because these organisations together manage most of the research funds in Europe.
This information is timely at the advent of Joint Programming in Europe, for these organisations are expected to join forces in funding this major initiative.
www.esf.org
SURVEY SAMPLE 40 organisations in 25 countries
• 28 are RFOs
• 10 are RPOs
• 2 are mixed
Mixed
Research
Funding
Organisation
Research
Performing
Organisation
Countries of responding organisations
Mixed
Research
Funding
Organisation
Research
Performing
Organisation
Countries of responding organisations
4 SEE COUNTRIESRESPONDED:
• Slovenia (ARRS is RFO)• Romania (CNCSIS is RFO) • Greece (NHRF is RPO) • Turkey (TUBITAK is mixed)
15
www.esf.org
SAMPLE:Heterogeneity of organisations
CONCEPT
• RFOs: councils: award competitive grants
• RPOs: run institutes and use ear-marked money funding permanent positions
• Mixed concept (e.g. MRC in UK, or TUBITAK in Turkey)
FINANCES
• Budget of organisation: 3.200 – 10 M€
• Budget share European collaboration: 47% to ~ zero
16
www.esf.org
METHODOLOGY 40 organisations replied to a questionnaire on:
• Formal cooperation agreements
• Implementation of EUROHORCs Money-Follows-Researchers agreement
• Other means to allow grant to follow researcher
• Participation in joint programmes– Jointly performed/funded programmes?
– Common pots?
– Career advancement/personnel exchange programmes?
• Are schemes open for researchers based abroad?
• Procedural issues, legal obstacles
• International joint publications
• Any new developments, aims, priorities
17
www.esf.org
Main findings (1 of 3)
• Relative budget for European collaboration is independent of ”absolute research budget”
– Highest relative budget, amongst them some with relatively small total budgets: PL, GR, NL, LU, SE
• Cross-border collaboration agreements
– Champions: FR, DE, IT, Nordic countries, UK
– Multi-lateral collaborations: via D-A-CH, NORDFORSK, ESF
– Money-Follows-Researcher agreement
• 20/42 have signed
• 8/20 have signed but not implemented
• Implementors: D-A-CH countries (DE, A, CH), Flemish BE, LU
• Case-by-case implementors: DE, SE, UK18
www.esf.org
Main findings (2 of 3)
• Cross-border funding: flexible when linked to joint programmes, particularly if managed through a reliable ”handling agent” such as ESF.
Not so flexible for individual projects.
• Procedural issues: ample experience in joint handling of programmes, peer review and decision making. The majority are bilateral collaborations, but multilateral are increasing.
19
www.esf.org
Main findings (3 of 3)
• Cooperation agreements beyond Europe
– Champions: DE, ES, FI, FR, IT
– Mostly with China and USA
• Cross-border cooperation between individual researchers: no databases are in place, but the trend seems to be to collaborate most within Europe, mostly with France, Germany and the UK.
• Demands from researchers:
– more funds for cross-border collaborations,
– more international mobility and collaboration in doctoral and postdoctoral training,
– larger use of international infrastructures to enable long-term cross-border collaborations.
20
www.esf.org21
ESF IS ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF
INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATIONS
ESF MEMBER ORGANISATION FORA FOR:MO Fora are science policy discussion platforms
• Evaluation of Funding Schemes and Research
..Programmes (2007-2009)
• Science in Society Relationships (2010-2012)
• Evaluation of Publicly Funded Research (2010-2012)
• Evaluation: Indicators of Internationalisation (2009-
..2011)
• Joint Foresight for Joint Programmes (under preparation)
www.esf.org22
FINAL REMARKS
Research assessment now focuses on “efficiency” and “quanti-quali balance”: not only in input, but also in integral output, both short-term and long-term.
E-Val from MRC in UK is an attempt to monitor a range of outcomes from MRC-funded research each year, including academic publication, collaboration, destination of researchers, public engagement and influence on public policy. Results show where strategies are not working, and where successful initiatives need to be further funded.
Different research fields may need different indicators.
www.esf.org23
CONCLUSIONS
There are great opportunities for multilateral research collaborations for all SEE countries, both between themselves and with the rest of Europe and the world.
EC FP7: Associated countries: Turkey, Croatia, FMR, Serbia, Albania, Montenegro, Bosnia & Herzegovina. Moldova is also an Internat Coop Partner Country.
ESF instruments: EU and non-EU countries are welcome to participate.