Rowena Sirey Head of External Relations European Southern Observatory 1
Research Infrastructures: Taking the Long View
The baseline The ideal � Science case � Design � Costing The bottom line � “Killer applications” � Distinguishing scientific performance from intermediate specifications � Avoiding specification creep; know when to stop � Know when to make trade-offs and what the consequences are COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012
Keeping a grip on reality Always be conscious of your ideals, but be prepared for compromise Keep monitoring, and get help to do so � Structured sequence of internal reviews and milestones � External reviews with independent members � Critical analysis � Areas of weakness identified and measures taken to address them � Validate development steps for yourself � Bring an external perspective � Enhance credibility and reassure funding bodies COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012
Project Maturity and Governance
Project Maturity
Project maturity Two aspects to maturity: Technical/Scientific Maturity Administrative/Political Maturity To succeed, need both 7 COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012
Technical/scientific maturity The Work Breakdown structure is known: essentially, you know what you will build You do not need any research to meet Level 1 requirements Your detailed costs have been validated by industry The key scientific objectives and their complementarity to those of other projects are known 8 COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012
Administrative/Political Maturity The basic governance and funding models are agreed, and the founding participants are ready to seek the necessary authorisations and commitments The place of the project in relation to the reality of other existing and planned projects is understood 9 COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012
Mismatch Project can be technically mature, but the administrative/political climate is not right Project can be administratively/politically mature but technically immature The latter is far more dangerous : it can result in uncertainty over specification, cost overruns, and mismatch between expectation and delivery 10 COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012
What to look for Key indicators of maturity � Strong foundation for the science case � Community acceptance and support � Well-developed Work Breakdown Structure, with strong industrial involvement in Phase B � Credible basis for instrumentation programme � Sequence of internal reviews, milestones and external review � Planned governance (at top level) understood � Proposal ready for ‘governing body’/funding agency decision to make substantial investment in Phase B � Funding agencies preparing the ground to seek funding COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012
Governance Considerations 12
General comments Look at the options – there are many successful examples � Try not to reinvent the wheel � Learn from the experience of others Assess what will meet your needs � Depends on the nature of your infrastructure � Also on how your user community works � And on the needs of your founding members Don’t be shy: � Think long-term and big picture � Try to leave your options open COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012
Who calls the shots? Who can join? � Countries or organisations? � Who decides on new members? Voting rights � One member one vote or proportional representation? � Rules on majority voting • Where do you need unanimity? • Where do you need a qualified majority? • Do you need any double majorities? • Are majorities of all members or those present and voting? COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012
Who pays the bills? Contribution basis � Related to some measure of national wealth? (NNI, GDP, etc) or optional ‘share’? � Simple membership or à la carte, or some combination? � New members? Contribution modality � Construction: cash or in-kind? � Operations: same proportion as construction? Duration of commitment � Minimum membership period? � Conditions of withdrawal? COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012
Rights and Benefits Access to the facility � Competitive on scientific merit? � Guaranteed access? � Access for non-members? Access to data � Competitive on scientific merit? � Guaranteed access? � Access for non-members? Access to contracts? � Procurement policy � Geo-return? COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012
Organisational requirements Governance and decision-making should be transparent and open Decision-making structures, chain of command and lines of accountability need to be clear ESO believes that there needs to be a single individual with authority within a single organisation, accountable for the project Underlying principles should be unambiguous Consider carefully the basic principles and their consequences (e.g. geo-return) Simpler is better 17 COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012
A word about site selection Whether for a physical infrastructure or a headquarters Try to set out objective requirements � Physical � Legal (e.g. Status, land ownership, etc) � Other? (e.g. scientific, environmental) Try and avoid premature political engagement Compromise is OK ! � Know what you are giving up � Know what you get in return � Know why you make the decision COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012
Organisational development (1) Science never stands still: even a ‘single-project’ organisation often evolves into something bigger “Infrastructure” should therefore be considered to be the evolving family of facilities – not the initial project – so structure your founding agreements with this in mind Most organisations eventually need to find fresh sources of funding to allow such development Try to leave flexibility to accommodate new modes of partnership or membership, new projects, etc Think carefully about the voting rules in this context 19 COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012
Organisational development (2) Consider whether an opt-out clause for follow-on projects will help Have a clear process for resolving disputes Don’t duck difficult ‘political’ issues (such as choice of working language) Be pragmatic – recognise that every partner or Member State has their own funders and scientific communities to satisfy Be prepared to compromise Learn from the experiences of others! 20 COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012
Key components Strong framework – with a clear mechanism for choosing to deviate Transparency Accountability Flexibility – ensure there is a process to add new members, new projects, etc Base the founding document/charter on principles – with provision for details in a way that makes amendment viable Plan long-term and allow for evolution 21 COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012
Key characteristics of a successful Research Infrastructure Passion Realism Ambition Pragmatism Stability Flexibility COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012
Thank you
Inter-governmental vs. Inter- Agency Inter-governmental carries certain benefits - status, independence, rights and privileges – that can benefit an organisation working with multiple partners across a number of countries Commitment at treaty level through national governments brings long-term stability and protection 24 COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012
Inter-governmental vs. Inter- Agency BUT: • Inter-governmental means the founding charter is processed by Parliament in each Member State CONSEQUENCE: • any changes have to be processed by Parliament too – can be advantageous (disincentive to adjust) but can inhibit structural evolution 25 COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012
Recommend
More recommend
