European Research Infrastructures
in a time of crisis
by
Costas Fotakis
FORTH, Heraklion, Crete, Greece
(e-mail: [email protected])
HORIZON 2020
Three priorities:
1.
Excellent science
2.
Industrial leadership
3.
Societal challenges
C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH ([email protected])
Priority 1: Excellent Science
RIs is a key tool for capacity building for:
• Europe to stay at the forefront of scientific and technological
research in all fields.
• forming poles of attraction for talented young researchers and
prominent scientists (reversing the brain drain!).
• providing high level of scientific and technical training
• Europe to be a protagonist in tackling current global challenges (e.g.
environmental and climatic issues, natural disasters etc.)
• contributing to the competitiveness of European regions.
C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH ([email protected])
However,
 what
are the options for RIs sustainability in the present
economic environment?
 the prime mission of RIs is serving scientific excellence. How can
socio-economic benefits in different Member States be enhanced
without compromising this mission?
 How
RIs?
to enhance the regional and global impact of European
 What
should be the future initiatives of the Commission in
supporting RIs towards the Innovation Union and “Horizon 2020”
 What
synergies should be established for the optimal use of
European resources in developing and using RIs ?
C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH ([email protected])
European Research Infrastructures:
A story over 20 years old

Although the need for RIs in Europe was recognized early,
attempts to establish RIs by European countries in various
fields failed, primarily due to lack of coherence and
coordination.

The concept of “Transnational Access” to national RIs is
established for the first time in FP2 with the “Large
Installations Plan”.

With the advent of ERA, the need for world-class RIs in Europe
becomes a key issue and the ESFRI is established for
promoting a coherent and strategy led approach.

Nowadays RIs are at the center of the “Knowledge Triangle”.
C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH ([email protected])
Evolution of RIs from FP2 to FP7
 in FP7 the coverage of scientific domains is balanced.
C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH ([email protected])
The current state
Two approaches:
 FP6 and FP7 have supported Integrated Actions (I3) of networks of
existing RIs covering all fields of science through a bottom up approach

To date, more than 300 Ris provide TA within 60 networks which are expected
to reach 100 by 2020

Transnational Access is in the core of the RIs programe

The ESFRI Roadmap has been established on the basis of a top-down
approach.

To date 48 RI are included in the ESFRI roadmap (including also e-RIs) and 20
more are expected by 2020.
C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH ([email protected])
Impact of Transnational Access
Both quantitative and qualitative issues should be considered:
 Relatively
projects.
small number of researchers but high profile
 Differences in operational features: TA in the form of “Services”
(e.g. Synchrotrons) or as “Collaborative Projects” (e.g. Lasers)
serving the high end of the field.
 There

are RIs serving only a small number of users but in
critical fields for European competitiveness (e.g. aerospace
industry).
There are RIs, as the “e-Infrastructures”, serving broader
scientific communities worldwide (e.g. GEANT).
 RIs are environments which promote scientific excellence.
C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH ([email protected])
Research Infrastructures and
scientific excellence
In only one RI cluster:
15 Advanced and 10 Early Stage ERC Grants
RIs, Industry and Innovation
 FP
supported RIs link to the needs of Industry and
Society, even if this link can not be as yet quantified.
• Industry as supplier, user and as an RI itself.
 RIs
also enable advanced knowledge creation and
dissemination enhancing the probability of innovation.
 Altogether
the scientific culture prevailing in the RIs
environments is conducive for serving industrial needs at
high level and creating innovation as a result of forefront
research.
• RIs may support both demand-driven innovation for
current
needs and scientific curiosity-driven innovation
for future applications.
C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH ([email protected])
ESFRI roadmap
Identifies 44 new (or major upgrade of) Research Infrastructures of pan-European interest
The EC funds 3 additional projects from the CERN Council strategic roadmap for particle physics*
Social Sc. &
Hum.
(5)
Life Sciences
( 10 )
Environmental Sciences
( 10 )
Material
and
Analytical
Facilities
(6)
Physics and Astronomy
( 11 )
Energy
(4)
e-Infrastructures (1)
PRACE
SHARE
BBMRI
ELIXIR
ICOS
EUROARGO
EUROFEL
ELI
TIARA *
ECCSEL
European
Social
Survey
ECRIN
INFRA
FRONTIER
LIFEWATC
H
IAGOS
EMFL
PRINS
CTA
JHR
CESSDA
INSTRUCT
EATRIS
EMSO
EPOS
European
XFEL
SPIRAL2
SKA
IFMIF
CLARIN
EUOPENSCRE
EN
EMBRC
SIAEOS
EISCAT_3D
ESRF
Upgrade
E-ELT
FAIR
HiPER
DARIAH
Euro
BioImaging
ERINHA
BSL4 Lab
COPAL
AURORA
BOREALIS
NEUTRON
ESS
KM3NeT
ILCHIGRADE
ILL20/20
Upgrade
SLHC-PP *
Distributed research infrastructures
Single sited research infrastructures
*
FP7 new concepts!
 Targeted
calls for I3 proposals aiming to interface existing
RIs to those pursued by ESFRI.
 The
“Risk Sharing Finance Facility” (RSFF) for joint
funding through EC and EIB.
 The
“European Research Infrastructure Consortium”
(ERIC) increasing flexibility by facilitating the cooperation of
RIs as legal entities and creating several privileges (e.g. VAT
exemption).
 The
“Regional Partner Infrastructures” for enhancing the
impact of RIs and encountering socio-economic disparities.
C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH ([email protected])
European Added Value through the RIs
Programme
The Integrated (I3) Activities:
•
provide an effective frame for approaching the scientific
frontiers in different fields and addressing scenarios for their
long term development and their potential European role.
The ESFRI Roadmap:
•
attracted Member State’s attention to the importance of RIs and
to the projects of the ESFRI roadmap
•
stimulated the development of national roadmaps and the
setting-up of priorities in relation to the ESFRI roadmap
•
mobilised many countries to host an ESFRI project or
participate in others
C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH ([email protected])
Member States participation in e- RI projects
A real challenge : the sustainability of European RIs
1. A question of sustainability: 48 ESFRI projects, including eRIs, are discussed in the context of a major economic crisis

requiring major financial investment (~20 b€)

long term commitment for operation (~2 b€/year)
Note: The total amount for RTD activities under Structural Funds is
currently ~50b€, from which 9.8 b€, (i.e. 1.4 b€ per year) is allocated
for “RTD infrastructures and centers of competence”
However: The impact in FP7 was rather limited!
2. Inherent complexity of the process of developing major
projects in partnerships between several countries
 many delays associated with international negotiations
and discrepancies in national decision-making
C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH ([email protected])
A clear need for financial synergies
EC
MS
SF
FP
EIB
PS
Costs (M€)
Code
MS: Member States
SF: Structural Funds
EC: European Commission
FP: Framework Programme
EIB: European Investment Bank
PS: Private Sector
National RIs in Greece
 Astroparticle Physics (NESTOR)
 Astronomy (observatory with remote controlled telescope)
 Marine Sciences (research vessels, submersibles, etc.)
 Natural Disasters (Earthquakes)
 Information Technology
 Life Sciences, Biomedicine
 Laser Technology
 Social Sciences & Humanities
 Other….
ESFRI: Participation of Greece
Scientific Area
(ESFRI)
Greek participation in
ESFRI RIs
Biological & Medical
Sciences
BBMRI, EATRIS, ELIXIR, Infrafrontier,
EMBRC, EURO-Biolmaging, ERINHA,
ISBE
Energy
HiPER, ECCSEL, EU-SOLARIS,
WindSCANNER
Phsical Sciences &
Engineering
ELI, KM3NeT
Material, Analytical
Facilities
European XFEL
Environmental Sciences
COPAL, EMSO, EPOS, EURO-ARGO,
LIFEWATCH
Social Sciences &
Humanities
CESSDA, SHARE, CLARIN, DARIAH
e-infrastructures
PRACE
in bold: supported by SF
RIs in Greece
•
Participation in the Preparatory Phase of 24 ESFRI projects
•
Funding of 13 national networks of RIs connected to ESFRI
RIs: 31 M€
•
e-Infrastructures: budget 20 M€
•
2 National Road Maps (2007, 2009)
C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH ([email protected])
From FP7 to Horizon 2020
• An increased budget, from around €1.7 billion (FP7) to
€2.5 billion (Horizon 2020 – 2011 constant prices)
• New activities to support the implementation and
operation of world-class infrastructures such as ESFRI
infrastructures
• Continuation of the successful FP7 Integrating
Activities (I3)
• Reinforcement of the support to e-infrastructures
• New objective of better exploiting the innovation potential
and human capital of infrastructures
• Synergies with Structural Funds through the concept of
“Smart Specialization”
Linking HORIZON 2020 to Regional policies
through “smart specialization”
Smart Specialization
as a damp
Today: “Competitiveness” has replaced “Cohesion” which in
cases may lead to undesirable side-effects
Some comments
 “Smart specialization” relies on “prioritization” for a better
use of resources. In a region with 30% unemployment
what is the priority?
 an exit strategy and a mechanism for adaptation should
be forseen together with the commitment for
“specialization”.
 Need for openness: There is danger for the most
innovative and groundbreaking research to be set aside!
C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH ([email protected])
Socio-economic impact of RIs
 TA alone is not adequate in establishing coherence (or
competitiveness) at regional level: The formation of regional
RI hubs, which provide good science, technology, talent and
entrepreneurial challenges are important for having regional
impact.
 Activities within European RIs may accelerate processes which
enhance the scientific and entrepreneurial culture in European
regions.
 The development and operation of RIs benefit primarily local
and regional companies and provide new jobs at many levels.
Overall European RIs form dynamic “eco-systems” which may
provide prospects and opportunities to the most valuable asset of
European regions: People!
C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH ([email protected])
Example 1: the SPIRAL 2 ion accelerator
Example 2: The Laser Facility at FORTH in Crete
(a member of the LASERLAB-Europe Network)
Access provided during1990-2012
SK CH
A
DK
P
NL
IL
E
BG
FI
D
UK
I
HU
RO
F
IE
CZ
EE
D
UK
EE
CZ
IE
F
RO
HU
I
IL
NL
E
P
DK
SK
CH
A
BG
FI
270 projects, 440 researchers from 19 European countries in
3043days of access
Socio - economic impact of IESL - FORTH
The Laser RI at FORTH has been the nucleus for the development of IESL-FORTH which
has:
•
led to the creation of 240 jobs of mostly highly skilled personnel (administrative,
technical, scientific)
 the cost of salaries for these jobs is ~ 6.5 M €/year while the Regular Budget received
from the State is ca. 2 M €/year!
 apart from salaries, contributes directly to the local economy ~ 4 M €/year
(consumables, services, scientific tourism etc)
•
a multiplier effect on local business and the establishment of 4 spinoff companies
•
become the pole of attraction of talented young researchers and prominent scientists
in the region of Crete
•
contributed to the development of the University of Crete
•
created a “scientific school” with alumni and networks worldwide
•
a cultural, social and educational impact on the local community including outreach
activities
C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH ([email protected])
RIs and Regional Policy Issues
The “smart growth for Europe 2020” in a time of crisis should place
emphasis on capacity building through:
a) supporting RIs based on regional scientific excellence and talent
thus optimizing the use of European resources and
complementing the impact of major RIs.
b) establishing networks of RIs for less research-intensive countries.
c) supporting “Regional Partner Facilities” (RPFs)” for
enhancing the impact of scientific talent and expertise in the
Regions and the global impact of European RIs.
Example: Greek researchers in 2012 (i.e. in a year of deep crisis) produced 9281 scientific
papers with 1.13% of them at the top 1% of most cited papers worldwide (Nature, v.492,
324 (2012)). – A performance comparable to that of highly research active countries!
 RPFs may be an effective way towards enhancing scientific and
technological excellence and simultaneously countering societal,
cultural and economic challenges at regional level.
C. Fotakis, IESL-FORTH ([email protected])
Priorities and Vision
• Consolidate RIs as multi-disciplinary
platforms for regional/global
collaborations
• Pool and reinforce regional capacities
• Support international collaborations that
are strategic for European scientific
partnerships
• Adopt adequate organizational and
governance models
Future EU research: Which path to follow?
• From thematic priorities to problem
oriented Challenges?
• Increased coordination of national
budgets or strengthening of European
institutions (EIT, ERC…)?
• Balance between:
– National versus European level?
– Frontier research versus problem oriented
research?
– Collaboration versus competition?
• Governance of ERA?
Download

European Research Infrastructures

get an essay or any other
homework writing help
for a fair price!
check it here!