1 / 17

Presentation for the EXTR@Web Sub-contractors’ Kick-off Meeting 7 April 2003

Presentation for the EXTR@Web Sub-contractors’ Kick-off Meeting 7 April 2003. Andrew Winder ISIS. Role of the Benchmark Group and Sub-contractors. Similarities and differences. 1. Context of national programme and project level reporting

evan
Télécharger la présentation

Presentation for the EXTR@Web Sub-contractors’ Kick-off Meeting 7 April 2003

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. Presentation for the EXTR@WebSub-contractors’ Kick-off Meeting 7 April 2003 Andrew Winder ISIS

  2. Role of the Benchmark Group and Sub-contractors Similarities and differences

  3. 1. Context of national programme and project level reporting 2. Scope of reporting by EXTR@Web partners and sub-contractors 3. Role of the High Level Advisory Group 4. Role of the Benchmark Group (BG) 5. Interfaces between EXTR@Web partners, sub-contractors and the BG

  4. Context EXTR@Web Work-Package 2 “Monitoring, analysis and information preparation” • Sub-WPs: • WP2.1 - Completion of Fourth Framework RTD Programme activities • WP2.2 - Transport RTD reporting system • WP2.3 - Monitoring of national transport RTD activities (programme level) • WP2.4 - Analysis of national RTD activities (project level) • WP2.5 - Analysis of EU transport RTD • WP2.6 - Intermodal transport and telematics

  5. Context EXTR@Web Work-Package 4 “Management of Knowledge Transfer” • Sub-WPs: • WP4.1 - Dissemination strategy • WP4.2 - Contact database and e-mail enquiry service • WP4.3 - Awareness raising activities • WP4.4 - Evaluation

  6. Scope of Reporting Programme level • National governmental programmes and sub-programmes • National research funding mechanisms (major state-sponsored research not part of a formal programme) • Major regional programmes • Bilateral and multilateral programmes between countries • Major national non-governmental research programmes Project level • Selected national projects of European interest within any of the above programmes

  7. Scope of Reporting • European Research Area countries covered (1) • 30 countries in total • EXTR@Web partners in bold underlined • Austria FGM-AMOR • Belgium GOPA-Cartermill International • Bulgaria CTC Engineer • Cyprus Systema • Czech Republic Dorsch Consult • Denmark COWI • Estonia VTT • Finland VTT • France ISIS

  8. Scope of Reporting European Research Area countries covered (2) • Germany IABG(Industrieanlagen-Betriebsgesellschaft) • Greece Systema • Hungary Transman • Iceland TØI (Transport Economics Institute) • Ireland FaberMaunsell • Italy University of Rome - DITS (Dipartimento Idraulica, Trasporti e Strade) • Latvia VTT Tech. Research Centre of Finland • Lithuania VTT Tech. Research Centre of Finland • Luxembourg GOPA-Cartermill International • Malta Dorsch Consult

  9. Scope of Reporting European Research Area countries covered (3) • Netherlands University of Delft • Norway TØI (Transport Economics Institute) • Poland Dorsch Consult • Portugal TIS • Romania GIE (Group of Independent Experts) • Slovakia Dorsch Consult • Slovenia Dorsch Consult • Spain ETRA Investigación y Desarrollo • Sweden TFK Institutet för transportforskning • Switzerland INFRAS • United Kingdom University of Leeds ITS (Institute for Transport Studies)

  10. Scope of Reporting • Reporting of Programmes and Projects on standard forms, to be completed in English • part of the Common European Transport Research Reporting Scheme (see Wolfgang Helmreich’s presentation) • html version on-line or Word format off-line • Programme Profiles • Project Profiles • Progress Summaries • Results Summaries

  11. Scope of Reporting • Procedure (1) • Research relevant national programmes or other important funding streams (WP2.3) • Identify key national projects which could be of European interest (WP2.4) • Validate with Benchmark Group member • Fill in forms as far as possible with information available • programme and project websites • brochures, reports, etc • information or contact persons supplied by BG member • existing personal contacts in national programmes/projects

  12. Scope of Reporting • Procedure (2) • Provide textual overview of national research programmes • 1 page summary for TRKC Website country introduction • Validate outputs from subcontracting partner (for consistency) and BG member (for accuracy and advice on completing any missing information if possible) • Update forms periodically, following: • establishment of new programmes or significant changes in existing programmes • new projects of interest • evolution of existing projects (interim and final results) • mid-term and end of project update/review in any case

  13. The High Level Advisory Group • The political link between the TRKC to the national administrations • Role is to support EXTR@Web activities on a generic and policy level • overall direction of the project • feeding the views and needs from the ERA countries • supporting the feedback and enforcement of agreed standards and structures at national level • Should facilitate access to national information, by appointing and overseeing a Benchmark Group (BG) member who will work with the project partners and sub-contractors • One senior level representative from each ERA country • Approx. 2 meetings per year to be convened by DG TREN

  14. The Benchmark Group • Appointed by the Advisory Group member (or may be the same person) • Role is to support EXTR@Web activities on a practical level • inform on national programme and project activities • “open doors” to project team and national subcontractors, providing access to information sources/contacts as far as possible • encourage filling in of forms by national programme and project leaders themselves • check and validate work provided by EXTR@Web and others • assist in project dissemination and national feedback • One or more representatives from each ERA country • Approx. 2 meetings per year to be convened by DG TREN

  15. Interfaces between EXTR@Web partners, sub-contractors and the BG • Sub-contractors are responsible to their sub-contracting partner, not to the Benchmark Group • BG members are responsible to their national AG member • A certain overlapping of tasks between the BG and the sub- contractors, but in general: • the sub-contractors fill in the forms and produce output • the BG facilitates, advises and validates • some BG tasks may be delegated to sub-contractors (especially where a country has no BG member) • sub-contractors’ output is checked by their contracting partner and then by the WP2.3 or 2.4 leader (ISIS / DITS)

  16. Conclusions • Limited budget for national activities: need to prioritise where there is a large number of projects and programmes • BG is there to help the sub-contractors and advise on prioritisation • Advice also from the PAG (Programme Analysis Group) and the WP leader, via sub-contractors’ contracting partner • Small tasks, e.g. publicising the EXTR@Web TRKC to existing professional contacts, may be carried out in conjunction with the BG member

  17. Thank-you for listening

More Related