View
214
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
<9th of February 2007> <1/46>
Part 3: ERA-Net CIRCLEClimate Impact Research Coordination for a Larger Europe
FFCUL, Lisboa
Martin König, CIRCLE coordinator
<9th of February 2007> <2/46>
content
1. Putting the puzzle together:Brief introduction into the ERA-Net scheme and short history of CIRCLE
2. What is on our agenda until 2009?Brief overview of the CIRCLE Working Plan
3. What we already have:the CIRCLE extended country reportand other recent results
4. CIRCLE’s little helpers:homepage, newsletter, intranet, database
<9th of February 2007> <3/46>
Step 1:Systematic exchange
of informationand best practice
Step 2:Identification and
analysis of commonstrategic issues
Step 3:Development of first
joint activities betweenthe programmes
Step 4:Preparatory activities re-garding the implemen-tation of transnational
research activities
overarching:
Management and communication
Stepwise deepening of integration level
Creating an ERA-NET CA with a structuring impact on the ERA
The ERA-Net scheme -1
<9th of February 2007> <4/46>
The ERA-Net scheme -2
33
11
44
22• Information exchange & best practices
• Common strategic issues
• Joint activities
• Joint/common calls (fixed for 2005/2006)
Ambitions of ERA-NET CAprojects:
<9th of February 2007> <5/46>
71 % gain of efficiencyif bird flu doesn’t interrupt us
The ERA-Net scheme -3
Fly unorganised and waste resources Get aligned and save resources
<9th of February 2007> <7/46>
Short history of CIRCLE -2
CIRCLE’s partnership:– From seven partner countries in CIRCLE SSA to now– 25 partner institutions from 19 partner countries (including observers) in CIRCLE CA– More might join in future
<9th of February 2007> <8/46>
European Commission
Advisory BoardPolicy Branch
Science Branch
Executive Boardconsisting of
Coordinatorsupported bySecretariat
WorkPackage leaders
Management‑WorkPackage
(“LEAD”)
WorkPackages
…Task TaskTaskTask
ContractorsCommitteecontaining all
consortium membersIn case of need:
Programme OwnersCommittee
In case of need:Certain task
leaders
Short history of CIRCLE -3
<9th of February 2007> <9/46>
Gather all necessary prerequisites for getting operational:– Extend and further update our knowledge base about
CLIMA* programmes and their• Scientific content and policy context• Management and administration• Dissemination strategies• Project evaluation and selection procedures• …
This is already very far developed now!
* abbr. stands for CLimate IMpacts and Adaptation
CIRCLE –our agenda until 2009 -1
<9th of February 2007> <10/46>
Set the focus for our cooperation:– On a topical level (what are the most striking
issues and research gaps, which we want to tackle within CIRCLE)
– On a technical/operational levelor how to design the transnational activities
– Cooperate with other ERA-Nets on both levels
This is starting now and shall be pushed here at the CIRCLE APM!
CIRCLE –our agenda until 2009 -2
<9th of February 2007> <11/46>
CIRCLE
marinERA
BiodivERsA
EuroPolar SKEP
CRUE
IWRM.Net
Possible cooperation
URBAN *
Side step: CIRCLE-related ERA-Nets
* just starting
<9th of February 2007> <12/46>
To develop all necessary “enablers” for transnational activities like joint calls:– Topical or geographical CIRCLE working
programme(s)– Common evaluation schemes– Modes of operations for joint calls like
– mutual opening of programmes– Pooling administration and evaluation, but fund projects
nationally– Joint calls with geographical/juste return principle– Completely open calls
CIRCLE –our agenda until 2009 -3
“virtualcommonpot”
“realcommonpot”
<9th of February 2007> <13/46>
CLIMA projects running from CIRCLE joint calls
Joint CIRCLE working programmes (lasting beyond 2009)
Joint central unit which handles the continuation of CIRCLE
Propose an FP7 E R ANet+
HARD
FACTS
Having had staffexchange
amongCIRCLE partners
Avoidedduplication in CLIMAresearch by aligning
our research agendas
Made use ofinfrastructural synergies
SOFT
FACTSmaintain CIRCLE as one of the
“best-practice ERA-Nets”Co-operating with neighbouring ERA-Nets to the degree possible
R E P U T A T I O N
CIRCLE –our agenda until 2009 -4
<9th of February 2007> <14/46>
Side step to a promising approach: The CIRCLE GROUPs (WP3)
MED
CEES
Mountains
Idea behind theGROUP concept:Similar sets of impactsPossibly joint implementation of adaptation measures
Related Question:One CIRCLE work programme (overarching topics)CIRCLE work programme per GROUP (regionally specific topics)
Developing Countries
Atlantic/Coastal
Nordic
<9th of February 2007> <15/46>
CIRCLE –simplified working plan matrix
WP 1 LEAD: PM, administrative reporting, Organisation, Extension of partnership
WP 2 CONTINUE: long-term vision beyond 2009, policy watch, ERA-Net plus, Art. 169
WP 3 GROUP: groups take sets of CC impacts into account for MED, Nordic, Atlantic/Coastal, CEES, DC
WP 4 SPREAD: detection of target groups and dissemination via Homepage, Newsletter, Roadshows,…
WP ILEARN
Information
base
WP IIPLAN
Strategic
foci
WP IIICONNECT
Joint
activities
WP IVFULFIL
Transnational
activities/calls
<9th of February 2007> <16/46>
The CIRCLE Extended Country Report (INGV / MATT, Italy)
Other recent results
WP I LEARNWhat we already have
<9th of February 2007> <17/46>
Preface Executive summary Countries
– Climate zone(s) – Key vulnerabilities– Extreme events– National Impact Scenarios– National Adaptation Strategy – Climate Research Landscape– National Research Programmes on Climate Change
Impacts and Adaptation Acknowledgements References
Extended Country Report STRUCTURE
<9th of February 2007> <18/46>
Key vulnerable areas– Mountains (Alps)– Coastal areas (Baltic, Mediterranean & Black Sea's)
Key vulnerable sectors– Water resources (South & South-East Europe)– Agriculture (South & Centrum Europe)– Ecosystems (marine ecosystems & wetlands)– Tourism (South-East Mediterranean coasts)
Extended Country Report MAIN OUTCOMES
Key vulnerabilities
<9th of February 2007> <19/46>
Heat wave in 2003 – Triggering adaptation measures in: health,
agriculture, hydroelectric power supply and tourism.
Floods in 2002 & 2005– Triggering consideration of: reorganization of
health care services, the need for an effective flood-risk-management strategy.
Extended Country Report MAIN OUTCOMES
Extreme events
<9th of February 2007> <20/46>
Assessment of the projected climate change impacts at national level– Multi-sectoral: several Countries.– Integrated approach: only a few Countries.
Standard IPCC climate & socio-economic scenarios– Climate scenarios: GCM, RCM – Socio-economic scenarios: IPCC SRES
Extended Country Report MAIN OUTCOMES
National Impact Scenarios
<9th of February 2007> <21/46>
A National Adaptation Strategy exists only in FINLAND; Adaptation Strategies are under preparation in FRANCE, UK and NORWAY. – Most of the other existing adaptation measures focus on:
flood defense, natural hazards prevention, environment protection and sustainable resource management.
Long-term planned proactive adaptation is still to be implemented by most of the European Countries.– European Countries need to develop adaptation measures
mostly in the sectors: health, water resources management, ecosystem’s management.
Extended Country Report MAIN OUTCOMES
National adaptation Strategy
<9th of February 2007> <22/46>
EU Climate policy: mainly focused on mitigation– Mitigation
• EU-wide Carbon trading scheme• European Commission target of 2 °C• EU Action Plan on climate change
– Adaptation• EU Commission: proactive and reactive adaptation & climate
related risks • ECCP’s working group on adaptation
National Climate Research
Extended Country Report MAIN OUTCOMES
Climate research landscape
<9th of February 2007> <23/46>
Extended Country ReportMAIN OUTCOMES
National Programmes on Climate Change
Most (89%) of the considered European Countries (18) have a National Programme on CC Impacts & Adaptation.
Almost all the Programmes (92%) encompass basic climate science (climate, climate change, climate protection);Most of them (84%) focus on climate change impacts assessment; A lower part of them (64%) covers adaptation issues, too.
24
64
84
92
0 20 40 60 80 100
Basic climate science
CC impacts assessment
Other
To
pic
s
Adaptation to CC
Focus of research
Occurrence (%)
11%
89%
Countries with a Programme
Countries without a Programme
<9th of February 2007> <24/46>
Provide an up-to-date complete and basic knowledge on climate change impacts and adaptation initiatives within Europe.
Document key facts of existing National Programmes, including scientific content as well as management and financial aspects.
Exchange knowledge and experiences to learn from each other, assist identifying best practices and finally promote cooperation.
Extended Country Report WHAT TO EXPECT
<9th of February 2007> <25/46>
Extended Country ReportWHAT TO EXPECT
The Executive Summary gives a direct overview of the key findings
CIRCLE ESSENTIAL OBJECTIVE: “Facilitate the research needed by European and National decision makers to design effective yet economically efficient and feasible adaptation strategies”.
CIRCLE will continue investigating these features in depth within its ongoing tasks, keeping them up-to-date.
http://www.circle-era.net/results/ Link: ‘national research programmes on Climate Change’
Link: ‘executive summary of national research programmes on Climate Change’
<9th of February 2007> <26/46>
Report on Dissemination Practices (UBA, Austria)
Extended Programme Administration & Management Report (SEPA, Sweden)
Report on Projects Evaluation & Selection Practices (INGV / MATT, Italy)
Other recent results
<9th of February 2007> <27/46>
Overview on the current dissemination practices applied by the CIRCLE participating Programmes
– Programmes & Projects Promotion: • Overall Information• Website• Brochures / Newsletter/ Reports• Events• Media
NEXT WORK:
“Best practices” “Differences and similarities”
Report on Dissemination Practices
Joint CallJoint Call
<9th of February 2007> <28/46>
Report on Dissemination Practices
PROGRAMME DISSEMINATION & COMMUNICATION STRATEGY
42%
37%
21%
Have a strategy
NO strategyPlan a strategy
PROGRAMME INVOLVEMENT OF STAKEHOLDERS
26%74%
Do not involve stakeholders
Involve stakeholders
PROGRAMME WEB SITE
32%
68%Have a web site
Do not have a web site
BROCHURES / NEWSLETTERS / CALLS
74% 26%
NOYES
<9th of February 2007> <30/46>
Report on Dissemination Practices
MEDIA
32%
68%
Not promoted through media
Promoted in media
32%
68%
Not promoted through events
Promote themselves in events
PROGRAMME EVENTS
http://www.circle-era.net/results/ Link: ‘dissemination practices of national
research programmes on Climate change’
<9th of February 2007> <34/46>
Review and analysis of programme management procedures of the participating research programmes
– Programme Development and Overall Information– Programme Execution – Project Monitoring
This work is IN PROGRESS and will be finalized soon!
NEXT WORK:
“Differences and similarities” “Most promising practices”
Programme Administration & Management Report
Joint CallJoint Call
<9th of February 2007> <35/46>
PROGRAMME DEVELOPMENT
Funding body: all the reported Programmes (19) are funded by governmental bodies
Main motive triggering Programme development: gaps of knowledge detected by Programme owners and/or Scientists.
Stakeholder involvement: high (74% of the reported Programmes )
Gender perspective: low (only a 26% of the Programmes consider gender equality in the evaluation of proposals)
International cooperation: foremost cooperation on research at a scientific level but also in the evaluation process
Programme Administration & Management Report
<9th of February 2007> <36/46>
PROGRAMME EXECUTION: INTRODUCTION TO THE EVALUATION OF PROJECTS PROPOSALS
Eligibility: – Eligible applicants: Universities, governmental and private research
institutes, private companies– Eligible Projects: all types of research (basic, applied, interdisciplinary)
Most important Evaluation Criteria:– Formal criteria: application form, deadline, consortium and cost– Textual criteria: scientific excellence, consortium expertise, innovation,
trans- and inter-disciplinary research and quality of proposal Language of the calls:
– Half of the Programmes uses National language only, the other half both National language and English
Programme Administration & Management Report
<9th of February 2007> <37/46>
PROGRAMME EXECUTION: EVALUATION OF PROJECTS PROPOSALS
– Main expenses: salaries for scientists and for lab. personnel & assistants; but also: equipment, field campaigns, travels, outreach
– Possibility to include/fund foreign partners:
Programme Administration & Management Report
Within the 63%:• 33% can fund/include
foreign partners but under special conditions
• 17% can include foreign partners but without financial support.
32%
63%
5%No info
YES
NO
<9th of February 2007> <38/46>
PROJECT MONITORING
Operators: foremost external experts
Monitoring of quality, finances and management: very differentiated (Progress report, Final report, Midterm evaluation, Final evaluation, Post evaluation)
Control of finances: differentiated (special reports)
Programme Administration & Management Report
<9th of February 2007> <39/46>
Overview and analysis on the current Project Evaluation and Selection procedures applied by the CIRCLE participating National Programmes– Projects Evaluation
– Overall Information
– Evaluators
– Evaluation process
– Evaluation criteria
– Review
This work is IN PROGRESS and will be finalized soon!
NEXT WORK “best practices” “differences and similarities” “criteria of greatest importance”
Report on Projects Evaluation & Selection procedures
Joint CallJoint Call
– Projects Selection
– Research topics
– Projects Selection process
<9th of February 2007> <40/46>
Report on Projects Evaluation & Selection procedures
FLEXIBILITY to A NEW JOINT CALL
26%
32%
42%
Flexible
Not flexibleNo info42%
PROJECTS EVALUATION PROCESS
5%11%
47%
37%
Two-step procedureOne-step procedure
Both the procedures No info
37%
PROJECTS EVALUATION CRITERIA
27
53
79
0 20 40 60 80
1
2
3
Scientific Excellence
Relevance for stakeholders
Scientific quality Imp
ort
an
ce
(1
=h
igh
es
t)
Most Important Evaluation criteria
Occurrence (%)
<9th of February 2007> <41/46>
Report on Projects Evaluation & Selection proceduresPROJECTS PROPOSALS EVALUATORS
5%
63%
32%
External
Both External & Internal
Internal
OPEARTOR OF PROJECT SELECTION
26%
58% 16%
No info
Funding body Other entity
SELECTION OF RESEARCH TOPICS
5%
37%
5%16% Bottom-up defined programme
Predefined by top-down programme
Combination of the others
No info
32%
Open
<9th of February 2007> <44/46>
CIRCLE’s little helpers -2
CIRCLE Newsletter– 1st issue has just
been sent– Will be published every
2-3 months– Possibly one larger
CIRCLE journal per year– Subscription via
CIRCLE homepage
<9th of February 2007> <45/46>
CIRCLE’s little helpers -3
CIRCLE Intranet (CIRCA) (information repository)– For working documents– Reduces Email
attachment traffic– Access for all interested
colleagues– If you wish to have
access, please let us know
Recommended