1 / 53

NEST Roadshow 2004

www.cordis.lu/nest. NEST Roadshow 2004. New and Emerging Science and Technology NEST. FP6 - Where does NEST fit in?. Focusing and Integrating Community research. Thematic priorities. “Wider field of Research”. Support to policies. NEST. SMEs. Genomics. IST. Nanotechnologies. Food.

almira
Download Presentation

NEST Roadshow 2004

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. www.cordis.lu/nest NEST Roadshow 2004 New and EmergingScience and Technology NEST

  2. FP6 - Where does NEST fit in? Focusing and Integrating Community research Thematic priorities “Wider field of Research” Support to policies NEST SMEs Genomics IST Nanotechnologies. Food Citizens Aeronautics Sustainable dev. International co-operation JRCc Structuring the ERA Strengthening the foundations of the ERA

  3. NEST and the FP6 Thematic Priorities • NEST complements the Thematic Priorities • NEST covers new and emerging areas of science and technology - a wide scientific scope • Where a long term societal or economic benefit may be expected • NEST encourages multi-disciplinary research • BUT lying outside or cutting across the areas covered by the FP6 TPs

  4. NEST objectives • Stimulate visionary long term research at the frontiers of knowledge and at the interface between disciplines • Give researchers freedom to develop and prove their ideas within the broadest possible limits • Respond rapidly to new problems and opportunities

  5. What mayNEST achieve? • Enhance the creative potential in European science and technology • New science, new principles in emerging fields, new techniques and basic technologies • An increased responsiveness to possible problems arising from new discoveries • New communities of knowledge in emerging areas • Strategic inputs for the development of future European research initiatives

  6. Two modes Open domain: • ADVENTURE • INSIGHT • NEST SUPPORT 235 M € Overall Budget Focused actions: PATHFINDER

  7. Implementation Through standard FP6 instruments • Specific Targeted Research Project,STREP: To provide funding for research activities. • Co-ordination Action, CA: To provide funding for networking and co- ordination. • Specific Support Action, SSA: To provide funding for activities in direct support of NEST

  8. Second Call OPEN DOMAIN • Call reference: FP6-2003-NEST-B • Call date: 17 December 2003 • Budget: 30M€ • (ADVENTURE, INSIGHT, NEST SUPPORT) • No major changes w.r.t. 2003, • (except enable CA for ADVENTURE) • Closure dates: 14 April, 15 September 2004

  9. Second Call PATHFINDER • Call reference: FP6-2003-NEST-Path • Call date: 17 December 2003 • Budget: 35M€ • Actions: “Synthetic biology”; “Tackling complexity in science”; “What it means to be human” • Closure date: 14 April 2004

  10. Presentation • The OPEN mode • ADVENTURE, INSIGHT, NEST SUPPORT • The FOCUSED mode • PATHFINDER • Instruments and Evaluation • STREP, CA, SSA • Feedback from first evaluation • The PATHFINDER topics 2004 • Synthetic biology, Tackling complexity in science, “What it means to be human”

  11. www.cordis.lu/nest NEST ADVENTURE Reference document: download from www.cordis.lu/nest

  12. ADVENTURE:The mandate “research in emerging areas of knowledge and on future technologies, in particular in trans-disciplinary fields, which is highly innovative and involves correspondingly high (technical) risks.”

  13. ADVENTURE„If only ...“ • Neural networks had been the result of an ADVENTURE project • The atomic force microscope had been developed in an ADVENTURE project • The first in vitro demonstration of motor-proteins had been made in an ADVENTURE project • PCR had been developed in an ADVENTURE project • etc, etc, ...

  14. The “Spirit of ADVENTURE” • Exciting, pioneering research with the aim of opening up new avenues for progress in science and technology • Freedom for researchers to define new challenges and pursue new ideas • Across a wide scope of science and technology, but lying outside or cutting across the Thematic Priorities • With a special interest in novel multi-disciplinarity • High risk / high gain, with challenging and tangible objectives

  15. What ADVENTURE projects are NOT! • Research that falls within the scope of the Thematic Priorities • Research without clearly identifiable novel aspects • Open-ended research without tangible and challenging objectives • Technology demonstrations • Combinations of existing technologies • Research of interest to a particular industrial sector without broader applicability • Research related to implausible and hypothetical phenomena

  16. ADVENTURE(non-exclusive) examples • A “first” in demonstrating a scientific phenomenon, enabling a range of subsequent developments • Development of a new mathematical technique, and proof of practical application in other research domains • Early development / proof of a novel research instrument, opening new prospects for analysis or control • Application of new science in a highly original tool / technique and proof in principle of its applicability • A highly original or unconventional approach to a known problem, opening the possibility of a breakthrough

  17. ADVENTURE Implementation • Specific Targeted Research Projects, STREPs • Coordination Actions, CAs • Project budget: indicative funding range from 800.000 to 3.000.000 Euro • Funding period: up to 3 years • Consortium: At least three independent partners from three member states or associated states - of which at least two member states or associated candidate states

  18. ADVENTURE STREPsEvaluation criteria • Relevance to NEST objectives [4/5] • Scientific and technological excellence [4/5] • Potential impact [3/5] • Quality of the consortium (FULL proposal only) [3/5] • Quality of management (FULL proposal only) [3/5] • Mobilisation of resources (FULL proposal only) [3/5]

  19. ADVENTUREFirst STREPs selected http://www.cordis.lu/nest/projects.htm BIODEFENCE - “Rapid induction of passive immunity against weapons of bioterrorism using transformed GRAS (Generally Regarded As Safe) organisms” THE OPTICAL NOSE - “An on-line, non-invasive and total-profiling” instrument for trace gas sensing applications in medical sciences INA - “Imaging with neutral atoms” ATOM3D - “Advanced techniques for optical manipulation using novel 3D light field synthesis” CHIRALTEM - “Chiral dichroism in the transmission electron microscope” EA-BIOFILMS - “Electrochemical control of biofilm-forming micro-organisms” ELCAT -“Electrocatalytic Gas-Phase Conversion of CO2 in Confined Catalysts”

  20. www.cordis.lu/nest NEST INSIGHT Reference document: download from www.cordis.lu/nest

  21. INSIGHT: The mandate “research to assess rapidly new discoveriesor newly-observed phenomena, which may indicate emerging risks or problemsof high importanceto European society, and identify appropriate responses to them.”

  22. INSIGHT„If only ...“ • The hormonal activity of certain chemicals had been proven by an INSIGHT project (Endocrine Disruptors) • The link between Creutzfeld-Jakob and BSE had been proven by an INSIGHT project • The Ozone depletion in the Atmosphere by Perfluorated Compounds had been shown by an INSIGHT project • The impact of a new technology, e.g. ICTs, on societal behaviour (e.g. life style, communication, work , consumption, criminality) had been anticipated by an INSIGHT project

  23. INSIGHT projects • Should have an anticipatory function • Should address possible risks associated with new phenomena; high potential risk; significant scientific uncertainties • Project outputs should be aimed at decision making. Analysis of the uncertainty should allow the concerned actors to frame strategic choices about future action • May need to challenge orthodoxy and/or address complex or inter-disciplinary questions

  24. INSIGHT projects : hypothetical examples • Discovery of potential faults to new medical or engineering practices or materials that could cause significant risk for humans in the future • A new chemical, pharmaceutical, bacteria or virus found in the environment or food that could have serious future consequences for humans, wildlife or plants • Elaboration of a new methodology that could prevent spread of newly-observed bacterial or viral infection between humans or livestock • A new phenomenon in genetics that indicates serious ethical or health-related problems in the future

  25. What INSIGHT projects are NOT! • Policy evaluation studies • Technology foresight studies or technology assessment studies • Research that legitimately falls within the scope of the thematic priorities • Research addressing topics in on-going “risk debates”, which are “open-ended” or projects without plausible or convincing evidence to their real or potential existence

  26. INSIGHT STREPsEvaluation criteria • Relevance to NEST objectives [4/5] • Scientific and technological excellence [4/5] • Potential impact [3/5] • Quality of the consortium (FULL proposal only) [3/5] • Quality of management (FULL proposal only) [3/5] • Mobilisation of resources (FULL proposal only) [3/5]

  27. INSIGHT: Implementation • STREPs for the support of research • CAs for networking, e.g. of national organisations or responsible regulatory bodies • Budget: up to 800.000 Euro Commission funding • Funding period: 1 - 2 years • Consortium: At least three independent partners from three member states or associated states - of which at least two member states or associated candidate states

  28. INSIGHTFirst STREPs selected http://www.cordis.lu/nest/projects.htm PERFORCE: Perfluorinated organic compounds in the European environment PORGROW: Policy options for responding to the growing challenge from obesity

  29. www.cordis.lu/nest NEST SUPPORT Reference document: download from www.cordis.lu/nest

  30. NEST SUPPORT: The mandate … to assist in the development and exploitation of NEST activities • attracting good proposals • shaping and refining modalities • establishing future actions

  31. NEST Support: The specific areas • Promotion of interaction with the research community and the identification of opportunities for research under NEST • Analysing the conduct of highly advanced science and technology in the European context, and on a comparative basis, and the specific socio-cultural and economic factors affecting its performance • Analysing the dynamics of scientific and technological change, and management issues specific to high risk and interdisciplinary research • Improving the methodological basis for addressing systemic and societal vulnerabilities to science-based hazards

  32. NEST SUPPORTFirst SSAs selected http://www.cordis.lu/nest/projects.htm NEST-IDEA: NEST Information on Development of Emerging Activities ATBEST: Assessment tools for Breakthrough and Emerging S&T NETIAM: New and Emerging Teams in Industrial and Applied Mathematics

  33. NEST - Evaluation Peer review, following EC Guidelines on quality and fairness • 1-stage or 2-stage submission scheme • A panel of high-level scientists with a broad perspective and a good appreciation of multi-disciplinary issues • With inputs from specialized remote referees • Full, open and transparent feedback to proposers

  34. Key characteristics of NEST projects • May fall in “any” area of research • Research not falling within the Thematic Priorities • Novel, possibly multi-disciplinary, possibly unconventional • Well focused objectives, which are ambitious but clear, possibly risky, and consistent with the scale of the project

  35. www.cordis.lu/nest FOCUSSED ACTIONS PATHFINDER Reference document: download from www.cordis.lu/nest

  36. Build and consolidate European capabilities in promising emerging (interdisciplinary) areas, for the long term. Actions of up to EUR 10m or more; several STREPS, one or more CAs Annual calls for proposals; several topics per call First call autumn 2003, closure April 2004 PATHFINDER: The mandate

  37. www.cordis.lu/nest INSTRUMENTS AND EVALUATION Reference document: download from www.cordis.lu/nest

  38. Different actions require different Instruments • Specific Target Research Projects • for ADVENTURE and INSIGHT • Co-ordination actions • for ADVENTURE and INSIGHT • Specific Support Actions for NEST-SUPPORT

  39. Specific Targeted Research Project (STREP) in NEST • Targeted, well-defined research and technology development • Minimum of three partners from three different Member States or Associated States, of which two must be Member States or Associated Candidate Countries • Typical duration of 2 to 3 years • Typical 50% funding (or 100% additional costs)

  40. Specific Support Actions (SSA) in NEST • Main purpose: to support the implementation of NEST in FP6 • May cover information and communication, conferences, seminars, expert groups, operational support…. • Typical duration up to 2 years • Grant to the budget up 100% • Scale ~ 50 - 200k Euro • Minimum of one partner from a Member State or Associated State (but generally more)

  41. Evaluation of OUTLINE STREP ProposalsADVENTURE and INSIGHT Remote referees, individual assessments OUTLINEproposals Anonymous Stage A panel NO Prepare full proposal in ~ 2 months

  42. Evaluation of FULL STREP ProposalsADVENTURE and INSIGHT Remote referees, individual assessments FULL proposals Non anonymous Stage B panel NO Negotiation and contract

  43. Evaluation of CAs and SSAsADVENTURE,INSIGHT, NEST SUPPORT Remote referees, individual assessments Proposals Non anonymous Panel NO Negotiation and contract

  44. www.cordis.lu/nest FEEDBACK FROM FIRST EVALUATION See also www.cordis.lu/nest

  45. Call: FP6-2003-NEST-A • Following closure date May 14, 2003 • 187 proposals were received • 14 were not evaluated (late or non-eligible) • 173 were evaluated • 166 STREPs (2 stage procedure) • 7 SSAs (1 stage procedure)

  46. Approximate breakdown of STREPs • Medical 38 • Biological and environmental 41 • Physical 48 • Applied technologies 5 • Social, cognitive, economic 18 • Mathematics 16

  47. Proposal distribution • A good distribution across EU countries, Associated Candidate countries and Associated countries

  48. Results • 25 STREP proposers invited to present a FULL proposal by September 24 • 3 SSA proposals have been retained and are being negotiated • Suyccess rate of the 2nd stage is about 35% (10 out of 25)

  49. The “5-page OUTLINE proposal” concept has been well-received The transparency of the feedback to proposers (ESRs) appears to have been well-received No need for major changes to the evaluation methodology; remote individual assessment plus a strategic panel Feedback from the evaluation

  50. NEST proposals should “lie outside or cut across” the Thematic Priorities Many proposers appears insufficiently aware of the basic principles behind NEST: ADVENTURE: novelty, ambition, risk, impact INSIGHT: risks arising from novel phenomena Support actions must help in implementation of NEST INSIGHT and ADVENTURE are different things. A project must be designed for the one or the other Messages for proposers

More Related