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

SEECOUNTRY

EUROCORES2001-2007 (*)

Preferred partners Collaboration w/ other SEE

BULGARIA 35 NL (5), FR (5),DE (4) Turkey (2), Greece (1)

CROATIA 7 NL (2), DE (2), UK (2) ---

GREECE 59 NL (9), ES (8) , FR (8) Bulgaria (1)

ROMANIA 58 DE (11), NL (8), CH (8) Turkey (6)

SERBIA 10 DE (2), FR (2) ---

SLOVENIA 16 UK (4), DE (3) ---

TURKEY 165 DE (35), NL (23), CH (14)

Romania (6),Bulgaria (2)

* 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.

www.esf.org24

Thank you for your attention