1 / 19

Cooperation on Research Infrastructure – The Nordic/Swedish Perspective

Cooperation on Research Infrastructure – The Nordic/Swedish Perspective. Lars Börjesson. Nordic Research I nfrastructure C o-operation. Some specific examples on nordic cooperations Nordunet – high-speed data network Nordic Datagrid F acility ( Nordugrid 2004) 2006-

odette-hardy
Download Presentation

Cooperation on Research Infrastructure – The Nordic/Swedish Perspective

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. Cooperation on Research Infrastructure– The Nordic/Swedish Perspective Lars Börjesson

  2. Nordic Research InfrastructureCo-operation Somespecificexamples on nordiccooperations • Nordunet – high-speed data network • Nordic DatagridFacility (Nordugrid 2004) 2006- • Nordic OpticalTelescope ( 1980s) • NORDSYNC – Nordic participation in ESRF (Grenoble) • EISCAT (FI, NO, SE) 3D upgradeonESFRIroadmap • ESS – Scandinavia ESS • MAX lVsynchrotron • BBMRI Biobanks, Nordic co-operation • NordFAIR • CESSDA • BUT…… - most RI cooperations are outside the Nordic umbrella

  3. Nordic Cooperation on RI, examples • Open national or regional RI to othercountries • manyexamples in various areas, informal • Joint Nordic Research Infrastructures • Nordic OpticalTelescope, Nordunet, NDGF, MAX IV • Joint Nordic participation in international RI • ESRF, FAIR, BBMRI (biobanks) • Host of international research infrastructures • European SpallationSource, EISCAT

  4. NOS-N and RI Joint Committee of Nordic Research Councils for Science Founded – Nordunet A/S, Nordic OpticalTelescope, Nordsync, EISCAT, Nordic data gridfacility, Nordic e-Scienceinitiative, NorduClic, NORDSIMS and havebeendecisive and helpful for Nordita, Mittag-Lefflerinst ESS and MAX IV • No money, no decision power - onlycoordination and joint actions ! • Only action whenthere are matching Nordic interests • Largerespect for eachothers science policy and funding systems • Trust

  5. Characteristics • Bottom-up approach for inititiatives • As littlebureaucracy as possible • Lean organisations • Distributedcharacterwhenpossible • Consensus approach for decisions • Trust

  6. MAX IV and ESS – world leadinginfrastructures

  7. 16 x

  8. MAX IV 2015

  9. MAX IV groundbreakingceremony Nov 22, 2010

  10. Issues for Nordic RI cooperation • When to go Nordic ? Addedvalue ? • How to start initiatives – bottom-upthrough national research councils • How to shareresources and costs ? Nordic key, scientificuse…. Reserchers from othercountries • How to organise (foundations, stichtung), companies, hostuniversities, ERIC) ? • How to coordinate – NOS - organisations, NORDFORSK • How to set priorities ?

  11. Paneuropeanroadmap, 2006 and 2008 • 44 infrastructure-projekt in all areas • Pillars for the development of ERA • No EU-financing on investment • Strong structuringeffects in memberstates – ownroadmaps

  12. National priorities of infrastructures All areas National and international RI ESFRI-projects are a strong element No regional or Nordic roadmap National roadmaps

  13. How to coordinate on the Nordic level ?

  14. Conference conclusions Largepotential formore Nordic collaboration on research infrastructures, • fieldsof strategicinterest to the Nordic societies • fields of particularNordic scientificstrength, such as climate, energy, health, welfare and eScience. Opportunitiesfor increasedcooperationrelatingto RI: • Joinforces in international projects, e.g. in ESFRI projectswhen Nordic interestsmatch. • Betteruse of and easier access to existing, small to medium-sized Nordic infrastructures • New joint Nordic infrastructures that underpin excellent research, e.g. related to the Nordic top-level research initiative • Establish international facilities in the Nordic countries (e.g. ESS, Eiscat_3d, Svalbard, MAX IV, carboncapture research infrastructure).

  15. Conference conclusions, cont’d Organisation Higher ambitions for Nordic infrastructures – increasedcoordination. Scientific and economicimpacts of research infrastructures and the technically and politicallycomplexprocessesinvolved, call for a Nordic coordinationstructure: • Bottom-upprocesses to ensurescientificinterest are fundamental • Bettercoordination at the policy level(ESFRI) • Betterunderstanding of differences in national priorities and national decision-makingprocesses and R&D systems. (ESFRI) • Acceptance of asymmetry in involvement (variable geometry) (EC, ESFRI) • Enhancedfacilitatorrole for NordForsk, includingcoordination, evaluation, fundingetc(ESFRI) A NoriaNet on research infrastructureaddressessome of theseissues: • Evaluation of European infrastructures (cf ESFRI) • Wheredopriorities match, e.g biobanks, biodiversity, climate, computing, materials

  16. Challenges • When to go for Nordic coordination ? How? Role for Nordforsk • Coordination for new ESFRI or international research infrastructures ? Cooperation and prioritisationneeded for hosting and influence. • Nordic Influence on existing international infrastructures ? Priorities ? Evaluation of impact of participation in Internatonal Ris. • How to make best use of RI for excellent research ? Nordic cooperation ? • - How to work outschemes for reallyexploring the knowledgetriangle ? Largeopportunities for RI. • - How to address the Grand challenges ? • Nordic roadmap ?

More Related