1 / 17

Report to the GPC meeting 2014.05.19 GPC WG on Alignment

Report to the GPC meeting 2014.05.19 GPC WG on Alignment. How did the WG approach this task ? From where have we sampled information to the report ? The Structure of the Report Main Topics from the Report The Road Map to the final Report The Outcome of the work of the WG .

starr
Télécharger la présentation

Report to the GPC meeting 2014.05.19 GPC WG on Alignment

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. Report to the GPC meeting 2014.05.19GPC WG on Alignment • How did the WG approach thistask? • From where have wesampled information to the report ? • The Structure of the Report • Main Topics from the Report • The Road Map to the final Report • The Outcome of the work of the WG

  2. The Mandate of the WG on AlignmentWorkingmethods • Explore the ways alignment is perceived by the existing Joint Programming Initiatives • Investigate how the differences in the scope of the various JPIs might influence the way Alignment with national research programmes might be turned into practice. • Look into the potential for alignment given that at the national levels research funding system include many different actions . • Emphasis on developing practical recommendations for achieving alignment within the European Research Area considering the barriers mentioned above.

  3. Alignment in the Context of Joint Programming InitiativesA Report by the GPC:WG on Alignment , 2014 1. Introduction and  Summary 2. In search for a definition of “Alignment” in the context of Joint Programming 3.  The findings of the GPC WG on Alignment 4. Recommendations for Actions to enhance Alignment For JPIs to implement For MSs to implement For ERA partners (EC ,GPC) to implement For Monitoring of Progress 5. On the Working Group: Members, working methods, meetings, etc

  4. 2. In search for a definition of “Alignment” in the context of Joint Programming • 2.1. 4 Key Documents on the concept of “Alignment” The Expert Group EC :Review of the Joint Programming Process 2012 Communication from the Commission to the EUParliamentand The Council 2012 Biennial Report by GPC 2012/13 Report on the JPI Conference, Dublin 2013 • 2.2. An update on the need for a definition and characterization of “Alignment” by members of the WG: September 2013 and May 2014 Three phases of Joint Programming JPIs has the potential for anchoring with international partners Improved Efficiency of Resources for Research in Europe The GPC: WG defines the framework for “Alignment in the context of JPIs ”

  5. Definitions and Principles of Alignment2012 Expert Group Review • The Expert Group sees this new concept of Joint Programming as having three distinct phases. 1) There is the current suite of JPIs identified and guided by the GPC and approved by the EU Council. 2) A second phase involves the alignment of national research programmes around a common focus or societal challenge. 3) The final phase which involves “true” Joint Programming involves Member States working together in a systematic and strategic way to identify the next societal challenge (or core research question) and then implementing the full policy cycle (including developing roadmaps, funding research, undertaking ex-post and ex-ante evaluations).

  6. Definitions and Principles of AlignmentCommisionerGeoghegan-Quinn,DublinConf February 2013 “By aligning and co-ordinatingthe institutional and competitive funding committed under national research programmes, which accounts for 88% of the public research in Europe, we can better exploit our resources for maximal societal impact”

  7. 2. In search for a definition of “Alignment” in the context of Joint Programming • 2.3. A proposal for a Definition • General: ‘The strategic approach taken by Member States’ programming authorities to modify their national programmes, priorities or activities as a consequence of the adoption of joint priorities in EU level Public-public partnerships’ • Operational: Identification and implementation of best practices of Alignment by JPIs and MS s and improved efficiency of investment in research at the level of MS s and ERA

  8. JPIs and AlignmentOn the SRA of the JPIs • Eight out of ten have a final SRA- twoare in the process-expect to have the final before end of 2014 • All ten JPIs have introduced the SRA/SRA in process to MS of the JPI,some at a ”Launch Event” • 6 have introduced the SRA MS outside the JPI –and some have introducedglobally-nationsororganizations

  9. JPIsonAlignmentStrategies and policies for implementation • 3-5 JPIs have a strategy for alignment of the SRA and national strategies –although not alwayssuccessfull • 3-5 JPIs –not the same as above-have a strategy for alignment of national activities and infrastructuree.gthrough JPI actions and calls

  10. JPIsonAlignmentSuccesfullalignment • Mapping of current research and gaps in MS • Joint transnational calls • Knowledge Hubs – networking and capacitybuilding • Catalysingdevelopment of national strategies • Calibration and standardization of methodologies • Development of transnational procedures for prioritizing, evaluation and decisions on funding

  11. JPIsonAlignmentBarriers for Alignment • The lack of national priorities of research within the field of the SRA of the JPI • Bottom-up approach to research fundingmakes it difficult to identifyareas for alignment • More thanonefundingagency in one MS and non-synchronized timing of funding transnational • Lack of capacitybuildingonJP/Alignment in MS- leads to lack of trust and confidence –and building of experience • Excellence as THE ultimateprioritydoes not alwayslead to alignment

  12. Outcome of the EC and GPC:WG Workshop on AlignmentMarch 2014 • How the ten JPIs have applied and should develop and apply different types of Alignment as a framework for Joint Programming in the future • The roles and engagement of Member States in aligning national programmes to JPIs currently and for the future • Expectations for the contribution of Alignment of national programmes to JPIs to the position and role of JPIs in the European Research Area in the future

  13. 4.1. Recommendations for the roles and actions of JPIs The spectrum of Alignment Alignment covers actions spanning all the programming cycle: from joint foresight, development of strategic research agenda to joint processes of research practices, funding, implementation and ex-post evaluation • Alignment is a long term development All examples for types of alignment should be considered, applied, evaluated and finally given the state of “best practices for alignment”. Such best practices are to be shared among JPIs and supported by the member states • Best practices of Alignment 16 proposals covering from mapping, networking, capacity building standardization , joint calls to development of national strategies • Barriers for Alignment to be observed by JPIs and reduced – mainly by MS

  14. 4.2. Recommendations for the role and engagement of Member States in the “Alignment “of  national research programmes and JPIs 1. National engagement in the JPI domain Member States should develop National Action plans, Roadmaps, Strategies to mirror their commitment to the SRA of JPIs. MS do not necessarily need thematic programmes that fit into a JPI’s SRA but they do need a national strategic approach towards the respective challenge. 2. Barriers for Alignment to be observed and reduced by MS Bottom-up approach to research funding makes it difficult to identify areas for alignment. More than one national funding agency in the JP domain and lack of coordination at national level on strategic research agenda and funding 3. Political commitment for the JPIs Communication from all levels (EU, GPC and JPI level) on how alignment can enhance JPIs has to be improved and become more political.

  15. GPC:WG on AlignmentRoad Mapfrom May 2014 • May 19 : GPC meeting : Draft Report and Main Findings • May 19 : WG Report edit : Recommendations and Structure • May- June 10th :Full Draftreport for to GPC and JPI chairs for comments • End June :Final Report to GPC for approval • In parallel: WG Chair participate in the editing of the GPC biennualreportaccording to time schedule by vicechair GPC

  16. Outcome of WG on Alignment • It is the hope of the WG that the report will become a milestone in the understanding of the concept of alignment in the context of Joint Programming Initiatives within ERA • Practical recommendations and implement actions that leads to alignment • Proposals for measurable targets to help monitoring the progress of alignment

  17. The Mandate of the WG on AlignmentObjectives of the WG • to explore the concept of alignment and to develop a common understanding of the ways of alignment in the context of Joint Programming • to produce practical recommendations and implement actions that leads to alignment • to make proposals for establishing measurable targets to help monitoring the progress of alignment • to identify the possibilities for implementing alignment in parallel with Horizon 2020

More Related