1 About the European Science Foundation
ESF Update The future of Nu. PECC and Expert Boards and Committees within ESF and Science Europe Thibaut Lery Senior Science Officer, PESSC tlery@esf. org 2
2011 Review of ESF Expert Boards • • • Took place between April and August 2011 All 6 ESF Expert Boards assessed by one Panel Chair: Martin Huber Other Nu. PECC-related members: – Professor Shoji Nagamiya, J-PARC, – Professor Dan-Olof Riska, Helsinki Institute of Physics, Helsinki – Professor John Simpson, STFC, Sc. & Techn. Facilities Council, UK General outcome with regards to Nu. PECC was positive. Review Panel overarching statement: – “Nu. PECC should continue to provide its valuable, unique and essential role for the European nuclear physics community. Nu. PECC should continue to provide European strategy guidelines, strengthen collaboration and coordinate European bids and projects. ” 3
2011 Review of ESF Expert Boards Recommendations • General recommendations – ESF should continue to strongly support Nu. PECC and its mission – Nu. PECC should maintain its special status as an Expert Committee of the ESF or Science Europe. • Pan European communication. There is a need of pan-European communication on science results and achievements. A dedicated web page should be considered in addition to Nuclear Physics News. • International relations. Nu. PECC should foster stronger relationships with similar organisations world-wide. • Public awareness. Nu. PECC is encouraged to develop further its PANS (Public Awareness of Nuclear Science) activities. • Nuclear applications. Nu. PECC should strengthen its coordination of applied nuclear physics. To our knowledge there are many activities at national level, but not much coordination on a European level. Areas of interest are for example nuclear technology based medical diagnostics and therapy, security, environmental science and nuclear energy. 4
ESF Situation (1) • Latest event: ESF Governing Council (Munich, 26 -27 April 2012) and related Expert Boards and Committees (EBC) Joint ESF-Science Europe Task Force meeting with EBC Chairs and Secretaries (26/04) • Spirit of these meetings: willingness to find solutions for EBCs • SE Members made it very clear that they will solely handle strategic activities, not operational ones. At the same time, it seems clear that the largest Member Organisations of ESF do not want to envisage paying membership fees to two international organisations beyond 2015 • This does not rule out the possibility that ESF might remain as a Members Organisation, but does imply that the membership model would have to change and that many existing large members would wish to terminate all financial or other liabilities 5
ESF Situation (2) • Some members, including large ones, indicated that they could support being customers of ESF – or a successor organisation – i. e. buying services on a case-by-case basis or on the basis of a multi-annual contract after 2015 (precedents exist in the UK) • Two scenarios will therefore be prepared for decision at the November 2012 Assembly – Complete closure of ESF by end of 2015 – Possible successor organisation, complementary to SE, with the mission to provide services required to support ERA but which are not on the SE strategic plan (in support of the implementation of its strategy) • Mandate was given to ESF to prepare alternative business models for such a possible successor organisation • It was recommended to wind down the ESF Standing Committees by end of 10/12 and replace them by reduced Core Group(s) to ensure continued scientific oversight until 2015 6
ESF Situation (3) • The ESF Expert Boards and Committees also met prior to the Governing Council (separate interviews for each EBC, plus a joint discussion) • The Chairs formulated a joint declaration • The future of the various Expert Boards and Committees would have been discussed at the Science Europe Assembly which has taken place on 24 May • The joint ESF/Science Europe Task Force has met again on 29 May and normally finalised its recommendations for ESF’s and Science Europe’s governing bodies regarding EBCs 7
The Munich Declaration (1) • A step-wise approach is proposed, as several issues can only be solved after Science Europe has agreed its future portfolio and when ESF has more certainty regarding its own future • However, certain issues require rapid decision or action, such as the possibility for some of the EBCs to be able to engage in external contracts. This will require a legal entity • Preserve the EBC scientific independence and pro-activity • The EBC capacity for influence at European level should be preserved and enhanced • EBCs provide strategic advice that Science Europe could and should be able to use, and EBCs would benefit from direct interactions with the SE structure. It is, therefore, possible and important to establish partnerships with SE in the delivery of strategic advice (e. g. through publication of joint position papers) 8
The Munich Declaration (2) • ESF is the appropriate organisation presently to cover strategic and operational/legal aspects for EBCs • The period after 2015 and the intermediate period should be addressed urgently as a follow-up of the work done during this consultation. The transition period (between now and the end of 2015) is especially critical • The activities of the EBCs need to be included in the discussions on the setting-up of the ESF Multi-Annual Plan as soon as possible, and agreed upon at the November 2012 ESF General Assembly. To ensure continuity and credibility, it is vitally important that the EBCs are fully operational during this transition period. • Finally, Member Organisations of all stakeholders (ESF, Science Europe, EBCs) should be kept well-informed during the transition period of the positive steps being taken by all parties towards finding a future base for EBCs. 9
Next steps • For the moment, ESF is the appropriate organisation to cover strategic and operational/legal aspects for EBCs. • The ESF is preparing alternative business models for a possible successor organisation towards finding a future base for EBCs. • The successor organisation could be an umbrella organisation hosting all the existing Expert Boards and Committees and potentially new ones (Computational sciences, Mathematics, astrophysics, astro-nuclear physics, chemistry, graphene, etc). • The Physical, Engineering and Space Sciences Unit will run a large study on Scientific Community Needs over the summer. We want to understand their needs that EC, ERC, SE or national programmes may not fulfil. We may ask for your contribution. • There is a need to coordinate strategies at international level for collaborations and joint ventures. 10
Скачать презентацию 1 About the European Science Foundation ESF
cd584c21f69ea7c1b327193e89b662f6.ppt