1 / 52

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.

saulf
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 objectives • Stimulate visionary and pioneering 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

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

  5. Key characteristics of NEST funded activities • 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

  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) • 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. Outline of Presentation • The OPEN mode • ADVENTURE, INSIGHT, NEST SUPPORT • Evaluation • STREP, CA, SSA • Feedback from first call • The FOCUSED mode • PATHFINDER • Topics 2004: • Tackling complexity in science • Synthetic biology • “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 “support 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 Scanning Tunnel Microscop (STM) or atomic force microscope (AFM) 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 FP6 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 Implementation • Specific Targeted Research Projects, STREPs • Coordination Actions, CAs • Project budget: indicative funding range from 800.000 to 2.000.000 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

  17. 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]

  18. 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” BIOPLASMA - Bio-engineering by atmospheric plasma treatment

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

  20. INSIGHT: The mandate “support 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.”

  21. INSIGHT„If only ...“ • The hormonal activity of certain chemicals had been proven by an INSIGHT project (Endocrine Disruptors) • The discovery of prions, or the link between Creutzfeldt-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 behavior (e.g. life style, communication, work , consumption, criminality) had been anticipated by an INSIGHT project

  22. 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

  23. 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

  24. 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]

  25. 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

  26. 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

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

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

  29. NEST Support: The specific areas • Promotionofinteraction with the research community • Engagement of the research community in the process of identifying future research opportunities • Analysis of methodological and technical issues associated with the NEST research domain

  30. NEST Support Implementation • To support the implementation of NEST • 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)

  31. 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

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

  33. Instruments Overview

  34. NEST Evaluation Key Elements (1) Peer review, following EC Guidelines on quality and fairness • 2-stage process for STREP • 1-stage for SSA and CA • Pool of Evaluators covering all areas of S/T • A panel of high-level scientists with a broad perspective and a good appreciation of multi-disciplinary issues with inputs from specialized remote referees

  35. Remote individual assessment with specialist referees (~150), followed by high-level inter-disciplinary panel (~30-40 members) to decide on final assessment High level of transparency to proposers: Evaluation Summary Report (ESR) with all evaluators comments send to proposal coordinator In addition, the panel provides a few paragraphs reflecting its opinion NEST evaluation Key Elements (2)

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

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

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

  39. NEST needs evaluators The success of NEST will depend on the success of its projects - the selection is crucial • Specialists for remote refereeing - in all relevant fields • Generalist scientists, with a broad overview and an open eye for high risk, multi-disciplinary research • Potential beneficiaries: from industry, regulatory agencies, policy makers, ... Please Register, or nominate experts, through!www.cordis.lu/experts/fp6_candidature.htm

  40. www.cordis.lu/nest FEEDBACK FROM FIRST CALL See also www.cordis.lu/nest

  41. Call: FP6-2003-NEST-A Outline/Full Proposal Stage • Following closure date May 14, 2003 • 187 proposals were received • 14 were not evaluated (late or non-eligible) • 28 proposals retained (3 SSAs selected for Negotiation, 25 STREPs invited for Full Proposal Submission)

  42. Call: FP6-2003-NEST-A Full Proposal Stage (STREPs only) • Following deadline Sep 24, 2003 • 25 proposals were received • 25 proposals were evaluated • 1 proposal, although evaluated, is incomplete • 10 proposals selected for negotiation

  43. STREPs CAs - nil SSAs - 7 proposals, 3negotiation/contract 166 Outline proposals 25 Retained for stage 2 10 Negotiation Proposal numbers

  44. Call: FP6-2003-NEST-A Outline Proposal Stage • Following closure date Oct 22, 2003 • 276 proposals were received • 11 were not evaluated (late or non-eligible) • 33 proposals retained (1 SSAs selected for Negotiation, 32 STREPs invited for Full Proposal Submission)

  45. STREPs CAs – 5 proposals, 0 Negotiation SSAs - 9 proposals, 1 Negotiation 251 Outline proposals 32 Retained for stage 2 ? Negotiation Proposal numbers

  46. 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 first call

  47. 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 (I)

  48. 5-page OUTLINE proposals are not about describing an idea for an area of work. They should contain a concise description: What exactly is the novelty of the proposal What are you planning to do and how? What may one expect as a result of the project? What would be the impact on science and technology A degree of quantification might be useful Messages for Proposers (II)

  49. Innovations in social sciences and economics are valid for NEST as long as they conform to the requirements set in the reference documents Proposals on mathematics are also welcome providing that the new techniques are coupled with the development of knowledge in other scientific and technological spheres Messages for Proposers (III)

  50. Please read the NEST reference documentshttp://www.cordis.lu/nest/publications.htm Please specify one single Activity Code: ADVENTURE, INSIGHT, NEST SUPPORT, PATHFINDER Please use the Electronic Proposal Submission System, EPSS PLEASE DON’T SUBMIT LAST MINUTE“A deadline is what it is!” Your NEST NCP (National Contact Point) will help you the NEST NCP informs, advices and supports potential applicants in the preparation, submission and follow-up of NEST project proposals Final advice

More Related