Global Strategic Partnership and NZ-China Strategic Alliance – questions and
answers
Can Global Strategic Partnerships be used to support collaborations between New Zealand
research organisations and foreign companies with research capabilities?
There is no impediment to a private company being involved (either in New Zealand or as an
international partner) in Global Strategic Partnerships, so long as (if a New Zealand company) it fits
the research capability and other relevant criteria, and, if on the international partner side of a bid,
is capable of contributing to strategically useful research outcomes. Please note that only New
Zealand research organisations are eligible to apply.
For Global Strategic Partnerships, are there any requirements for an application to be lodged by
the collaborative international partner?
Global Strategic Partnerships has no international counterparts mechanism and there is no
requirement for the proposed foreign partner to ‘lodge an application’ with MBIE or foreign funding
agencies. Nevertheless, the call is designed to enable New Zealand research teams to develop
enduring science and innovation collaboration partnerships with world-class foreign counterparts on
topics important to New Zealand.
To achieve this, New Zealand applicants are expected to discuss (and agree on) project plans with
suitable overseas collaborators before submitting a proposal. In the “Project Team” section of the
proposal template, both New Zealand and overseas project team members need to be listed,
accompanied with their CVs. Funding sources of prospective overseas partners’ project
involvement - if thought relevant to the project’s success – may be outlined in the Project Plan.
(My research organisation) is currently being funded by MBIE for a research programme in a field
which in we would like to make a Global Strategic Partnerships programme bid. Although this
partnership, if awarded funding, would add considerable value to the MBIE programme, would the
fact that an MBIE programme exists be seen to be ‘double dipping’?
Applicants, if funded by MBIE or from other sources for related work, should clearly identify how the
activities for which funding is sought through Global Strategic Partnerships are clearly in addition to
the activities supported through the other funding. If the activity proposed is demonstrably in
addition to activities funded through other MBIE programmes, then it is eligible, otherwise it will be
deemed ineligible.
Is it helpful for a Catalyst Global Science Partnerships proposal to have alignment to a National
Science Challenge (NSC) or Centre of Research Excellence (CoRE) (given that by default these align
to government thematic priorities and already have inter-institution connections)? Or is the
intention to provide new opportunities by being outside the remit of the NSCs/CoREs? And does
MBIE expect that the NSCs and CoREs should use some of their funding allocations to support
international research collaboration aligned to the relevant theme?
Alignment of a Global Science Partnerships proposal to a NSC or CoRE fits with the strategic
objectives of the scheme. However, alignment of bids with other Government Strategies or major
international initiatives to which New Zealand is committed will also be eligible. Both NSCs and
CoREs are expected, as part of their mandates, to use their Government funds to engage with
international partners to achieve their objectives.
When would successful Global Strategic Partnerships and New Zealand- China Strategic Research
Alliance proposals be able to commence their collaborative research (i.e., start spending the
approved funds)?
As soon as contracting is completed, following MBIE’s assessment process. Contracts are expected
to be operational for Global Strategic Partnerships and China Strategic Research Alliance on 1 March
and 1 May 2016, respectively.
Can Global Strategic Partnerships funds approved be used (in part) to bring overseas collaborators
to New Zealand?
Yes.
The Eligibility Questions on P19 of the Call for Proposals document asks ”Does the New Zealand
project team comprise researchers from more than one New Zealand research organisation or
faculty?” Are different research groups in Crown Research Institutes equal to faculties for this
purpose? And so, would an application from two research groups within a CRI be eligible?
Different teams from within one Crown Research Institute, even if geographically separated, will not
be regarded, for the purposes of Global Strategic Partnerships as comprising “multi-institution
research teams”. Therefore such an application, unless involving a partner from another New
Zealand research organisation, would be deemed ineligible for support.
As background, we have potential for an ICT collaboration with a multinational research company,
that aligns well with the funding criteria and investment priorities. We also have a partner NZ
institution on board.
a) As the company is multinational, it has offices in the UK (ICT is a priority topic area) and
the US (ICT is not a priority area) among other locations, how does this sit in terms of
Global Science Partnerships eligibility?
A Global Strategic Partnerships application will be eligible for support so long as that application
relates to at least one Priority topic area for each international priority partner country with whose
researchers the applicant is seeking to work. So MBIE would accept as eligible, under the UK
connection, an ICT application which involves US research partners as well.
b) In terms of individual collaborators, does their location (where they operate from) need to
be in the country that aligns with the priority topic area or does the fact that the company
is multinational mitigate this?
The key issue (in terms of priority country alignment) is where the international research partner
capability is based. So, as in the case referred to above, if the research partners are in the UK and
the USA, then the proposed field of collaboration has to match with the Priority topic area for at
least one of these.
c) Our overseas collaborators are offering to provide their portion of the work as an ‘in- kind’
contribution. However, to engage in the opportunity, we require funding at our end. Does
the fund support this?
Yes.
The Global Science Partnerships guidelines state ‘The New Zealand team must consist of
researchers from multiple organisations or faculties to ensure the breadth and depth of the funded
activities.’ Is it important to MBIE, in principle, for bids to involve multiple NZ institutions rather
than multiple faculties within one institution?’ Or will this be looked at strictly in terms of whether
– a long as the multiple faculty criteria is met and breadth and depth can be demonstrated – the
key criteria is benefit to New Zealand and meeting the aims of the fund?
MBIE looks strongly towards multi-institutional bids as a key element of meeting the aims of the
Catalyst Fund. The Ministry has agreed, for this Global Science Partnerships funding round, that
applications from different faculties within a university will be regarded as comprising “multiinstitution research teams” but we are wanting to foster, as do the New Zealand National Science
Challenges, inter-institutional New Zealand collaboration. As per page 27 of the Call for Proposals
document, the three criteria for Global Strategic Partnerships are:

Enduring Collaboration (30% of scoring in assessment of the bid);

Novel Knowledge and Partnership (40%); and

Strategic Benefits (30%)
Does a new Proposal under the China Strategic Research Alliance need to have a partner proposal
lodged with the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) in China for the same-named
project? The Preamble on page 9 of the RfP would suggest yes. But after that there is no further
mention of a parallel Chinese proposal.
Only New Zealand-based applicants that earlier registered their intention to apply for funding
through MBIE’s already-closed Pre-application Registration of Interest process are eligible to submit
applications to this China Strategic Research Alliance investment round. No bid on the Chinese side is
required at the same time as the MBIE bid, but one is likely to be required in due course. MOST has
advised MBIE that there will be an Request for Proposals (RfP)for the Chinese side launched soon,
but the date can still not be confirmed. However the China RfP is expected in “the next few
weeks”. If Chinese counterparts have any urgent questions they are welcome to contact MOST ViceDirector Chen Jiangrui chenjr@most.cn directly.
My Global Strategic Partnerships proposal will be in the “Advanced Technologies” and
“Environmental Protection” categories. I will have collaborators from Korea and Hong Kong.
According to the information given by MBIE, the priority area in Korea is “Advanced Technologies”
and that in Hong Kong (China) is “Environmental Protection”. Hong Kong (China) does not seem to
have “Advanced Technologies” category and my proposal cannot be solely categorised as
“Environmental Protection” to fit the two places. How should we deal with this? Similarly, a
proposed Global Strategic Partnerships project’s overarching topic is renewable energy. It fits with
Research Infrastructure, Environment and Resilient Cities, Sustainable Cities (renewable energy).
The partners are a pre-established team from Iceland (EU-affiliated), France, Germany, UK and the
USA. However, not all topics are listed for every country. Is this an acceptable combination of
countries for an application to the fund?
A Global Strategic Partnerships application will be eligible for support so long as that application
relates to at least one Priority topic area for each international priority partner country with whose
researchers the applicant is seeking to work. So MBIE would accept as eligible, under both China
and South Korea, an application relating to work with those countries on Environmental Protection
Technology. Similarly, a renewable energy project, linked to the USA and European partners, will be
eligible for consideration as Renewable energy is a priority for Germany, resilient cities for EU
member States (and Associated countries) and Environment for both France and the USA.
For the Global Strategic Partnerships investment priorities (call for proposals document, p17) for
the European Union, is a Joint Programming Initiative (JPI) considered to be part of the EU Horizon
2020 programmes?
For the Global Strategic Partnerships investment priorities for the European Union, a Joint
Programming Initiative, as with a Knowledge Innovation Community (KIC) is considered to be part of
the EU Horizon 2020 programmes.
Could you clarify the exact nature and specific requirement of the commercial end point potential
of the NZ-China Strategic Research Alliance Proposals?
We have a research group that registered earlier this year but at the moment they cannot see a
commercial application of their fundamental research. Are they nevertheless still eligible to
submit an application?
Yes, they are eligible to apply. The relevant criterion for the China SRA is as follows (pg 13 of the
CfP):
Novel Knowledge and Partnership: Will the activity lead to the creation of new knowledge and a
novel research partnership with China? (40%)
You should include information on:
* How the Chinese collaborator will bring world-leading knowledge that complements the New
Zealand project team’s skills and knowledge;
* How the proposed collaboration will support a new partnership or a new research focus for an
established collaboration; and
* How the proposed collaboration intends to enable the eventual commercialisation or end-user
adoption of new knowledge/technologies generated through the proposed collaboration.
The application needs to demonstrate either commercialisation or end user adoption opportunities,
or both.
The Catalyst fund RfP (attached) that has just been released refers to “MBIE’s environmental data
management policy”. Please can you provide a link?
MBIE’s environmental data management policy can be found here http://www.mbie.govt.nz/infoservices/science-innovation/investment-funding/current-funding/funding-for-internationalrelationships/funding-opportunities
MBIE will invest in Global Strategic Partnerships projects with the USA that link to the health and
health innovation topic. I would like to know if a project in the Food Nutrition and Health area
would be part of this topic.
Yes, provided the research is clearly linked to health or health innovation outcomes.
We are required to name a key Government science and innovation initiative, programme, or
bilateral science and technology cooperation agreement with which the project topic is aligned.
1. How specific to the topic area does the Government initiative need to be?
2. If we are putting in a manufacturing proposal with a UK collaborator (on the UK priority
topic list) is it enough to refer to the NSSI that states “R&D in the manufacturing sector is
crucial to driving export growth and diversification”?
3. For the same example, is alignment to the NSC – Science for technological innovation
specific enough?
4. How much detail on any alignment is required?
1. We would expect to see close alignment between the Government initiative and the proposed
research topic area.
2. Alignment with the NSSI fits with the strategic objectives of the Global Strategic Partnerships call.
However, we would expect to see applications demonstrate a contribution to a more active
government initiative as well.
3. Alignment of a Global Science Partnerships application with a NSC fits with the strategic objectives
of the scheme.
4. Applicants will need to determine how much information is appropriate. The CfP provides word
limits to guide applicants.
When the CfP describes a Faculty (page 24) does that mean intra disciplinary e.g. College of
Engineering and Science, or would it also include Departmental Faculty e.g. Mechanical
Engineering and Chemical Engineering?
MBIE would consider multi-faculty as being at the level of a University ‘School’ or ‘College’. MBIE
looks strongly towards multi-institutional bids as a key element of meeting the aims of the Catalyst
Fund. The Ministry has agreed, for this Global Science Partnerships funding round that applications
from different faculties within a university will be regarded as comprising “multi-institution research
teams” but we are wanting to foster, as do the New Zealand National Science Challenges, interinstitutional New Zealand collaboration.
As per page 27 of the Call for Proposals document, the three criteria for Global Strategic
Partnerships are:
• Enduring Collaboration (30% of scoring in assessment of the bid);
• Novel Knowledge and Partnership (40%); and
• Strategic Benefits (30%)
When will there be a call for Catalyst: Seeding?
Catalyst: Seeding will be administered by the Royal Society of New Zealand. We expect they will
release the first call for proposals at the end of January. Please watch out for updates on the Royal
Society’s website.
Can the overseas partner be supported by Catalyst: Strategic funding?
Yes, some funding can be used to support participation by an overseas partner. However, we would
expect most of the funding to be used to support New Zealand’s participation in the collaboration.
Would MBIE be interested in investing in more Dairy Goat programmes considering they have
already invested heavily in this area?
The priority topic areas and partner countries for the Global Strategic Partnerships call are provided
on page 17 of the CfP.
On page 17 of the Call for Proposal it says ‘health’ for South Korea. Does this include pet health?
No.
a. Do the EU topics include primary production, environment or agriculture?
b. Can I work with Ireland or the Netherlands outside of EU processes?
a. Yes, the ‘bio-economy’ topic captures these areas.
b. No, other than for the UK, Germany and France, collaborations with the EU must involve teams
from European Union Member States and associated member states for the purposes of the Horizon
2020 programme, working on or planning to apply to EU Horizon 2020 programmes.
Do I need a partner researcher from outside my own CRI?
Yes. Different teams from within one Crown Research Institute, even if geographically separated,
will not be regarded, for the purposes of Global Strategic Partnerships as comprising “multiinstitution research teams”. Therefore, such an application, unless involving a partner from another
New Zealand research organisation, would be deemed ineligible for support.
Is ‘sustainable control of pasture root diseases’ in scope? Might it fall into food security – i.e.
sustainable and resilient farming systems?
The priority topic areas and partner countries for the Global Strategic Partnerships call are provided
on page 17 of the CfP. The priority topic areas for the China SRA closed call are provided on page 10
of the CfP.
In regards to investment priorities, is a Joint Programme Initiative Member state funded standalone programme considered to be part of the EU Horizon 2020 programme?
For the Global Strategic Partnerships investment priorities for the European Union, a Joint
Programming Initiative, as with a Knowledge Innovation Community (KIC), is considered to be part of
the EU Horizon 2020 programmes.
Why does MBIE require multi-institutional or multi-faculty teams?
MBIE looks strongly towards multi-institutional bids as a key element of meeting the aims of the
Catalyst Fund. The Ministry wants to foster, as do the New Zealand National Science Challenges,
inter-institutional New Zealand collaboration as a means of ensuring the international partnership
brings maximum strategic benefit to New Zealand.
As per page 27 of the Call for Proposals document, the three criteria for Global Strategic
Partnerships are:
• Enduring Collaboration (30% of scoring in assessment of the bid);
• Novel Knowledge and Partnership (40%); and
• Strategic Benefits (30%)
a. Is there a requirement for the Science Leader / Project Team leader to be a permanent staff
member of the host research organisation? Can fixed-term staff be Science Leaders, provided the
staff member's employment contract lasts for the duration of the project term?
b. Can the same Science Leader submit applications for more than one project, provided the
projects are substantively different?
c. Is it allowable to include salary expenses for overseas researchers? Or are personnel costs only
allowed for the NZ project team members?
d. The guidelines state that Key Researchers and Key Individuals "are people who are critical to the
success of the project; their departure would constitute a change event. These people are typically
fewer in number, and at a level above others listed". Does this mean that MBIE only expect
relatively few Key Researchers / Key Individuals per project team? If so, what role(s) do MBIE
expect to make up the bulk of the team? Or is the expectation that the teams will be quite small?
a. Fixed term staff members can be Science Leaders provided the staff members’ employment
contracts allow them to deliver the project as specified in the project application.
b. Yes, provided the Science Leader has capacity to deliver multiple projects according to the
specifications outlined in their applications.
c. Yes, some funding can be used to support participation by an overseas partner. However, we
would expect most of the funding to be used to support New Zealand’s participation in the
collaboration.
d. MBIE does not have specific expectations as to the team composition other than that they be
appropriate to the proposed project and meet the requirements specified in the Project Team
sections of the CfP (pg 15 and 22-23).
Is there a restriction of one country per research centre applying?
There is no restriction on number of countries involved per proposal. Should the same New Zealand
project team decide to submit more than one application they must demonstrate significant
differences between those applications.
Will there be an annual call for the Global Strategic Partnership Funding and if so is the timing
each year likely to be the same?
MBIE anticipates running two funding calls per year for Catalyst: Strategic. We expect these rounds
to open each year around February and August. We anticipate releasing further information about
next year’s rounds by the end of December.
When does MBIE expect successful research teams to commence activity – what is the latest
possible date for commencement?
Soon after contracting is completed, following MBIE’s assessment process. Contracts are expected to
be operational for Global Strategic Partnerships and China Strategic Research Alliance on 1 March
and 1 May 2016, respectively.
We have a potential collaborator in Israel and would like to know if Israel fits the criteria? They
are a participant of the EU Horizon 2020.
EU partners are those European Union Member States and associated member states for the
purposes of the Horizon 2020 programme, working on or planning to apply to EU Horizon 2020
programmes. Israel is an associated member state for the purposes of Horizon 2020.
a. How much funding is likely to be available for Catalyst: Strategic in future rounds?
b. For Global Strategic Partnerships, how is the funding available in this round likely to be
apportioned across projects and years?
a. MBIE anticipates running two funding calls per year for Catalyst: Strategic. We expect these
rounds to open each year around February and August. MBIE is currently working on determining
the priorities and funding allocations for future rounds. We anticipate releasing further information
about next year’s rounds by the end of December.
b. MBIE intends to allocate a total of $5 million GST exclusive through this Global Strategic
Partnerships funding call, spread over three years. Of that $5 million, a total of $3 million GST
exclusive is available for 2 and 3 year projects; and a total of $2 million GST exclusive is available for
1 year projects.
Does MBIE have a view with regard to protection of IP?
MBIE expects New Zealand institutions to have appropriate IP policies in place and to apply these as
appropriate to applications to this call for proposals.
For key researchers and key individuals, is there a minimum FTE allocation per annum? If there is,
does this need to be for all key individuals/ researchers (e.g. if there are several to represent the
different institutions), or is just one key researcher and one key individual required to have a
minimum FTE allocation?
MBIE does not have a minimum FTE allocation for key researchers and key individuals. MBIE does
not have specific expectations as to the team composition other than that they be appropriate to
the proposed project and meet the requirements specified in the Project Team sections of the CfP
(pg 15 and 22-23).
1. Can you clarify how much of the $80K - $150K per annum is acceptable as expenses on
experiments, personnel and overheads?
2. Is it an absolute requirement that the PI on the Chinese Organisation is indeed a Chinese
national? We have a PI in a Chinese Research Group/University that is American National, though
a member of the University staff. Can you clarify the nationality requirements of the PI in China
please?
1. The applicants should put forward a budget that is suitable for the effective delivery of the project
proposed in the application. MBIE does not have a view as to the proportion of expenditure that
should be attributed to each budget item.
2. The requirements for the China based team are determined by China’s Ministry of Science and
Technology. The China RFP is expected in the next few weeks. China-based collaborators should
contact MOST Vice-Director Chen Jiangrui chenjr@most.cn directly to determine eligibility
requirements.
One of my targeted partner institutions is in Taiwan. The other partners are in countries listed on
Page 17 of the CfP. Taiwan is not among the listed countries on Page 17 of the CfP. Can I include
the Taiwanese partners in my application?
Applicants can include collaborations with institutions in countries that are not specified in the list
on Page 17 of the CfP for Global Strategic Partnerships if they are essential to delivering a successful
project and the project also includes countries that are on the list. We expect the majority of the
project to involve collaboration with those countries listed on page 17.
Do the word limits specified in the CfP include references or are references in addition to the word
limits?
References are in addition to the word limits.
My project is in the area of micro algae for biofuel production and nutritional food extraction with
a US partner. Since micro algae is a marine organism, can it be regarded as a marine science
project?
Given the project outcomes centre on biofuels and nutritional food extraction, we would not
consider the project as meeting outcomes for the marine environment. If the focus is on nutrition
for health outcomes, it is possible the project could be captured under the health and health
innovation topic.
I saw within the guidelines that the NZ team should comprise two NZ institutions. I am an
international researcher and have a partner at a NZ university. Would we have to find one
additional NZ partner to form a collaboration for the Global Strategic Partnerships CfP?
Applicants must be New Zealand based research organisations.
MBIE looks strongly towards multi-institutional bids as a key element of meeting the aims of the
Catalyst Fund. The Ministry has agreed, for this Global Science Partnerships funding round that
applications from different faculties (‘Schools’ or ‘Colleges’) within a university will be regarded as
comprising “multi-institution research teams” but we are wanting to foster, as do the New Zealand
National Science Challenges, inter-institutional New Zealand collaboration.
How do I identify the government’s key strategic initiatives as described on page 20 of the CfP?
The application must clearly demonstrate that the chosen topic of collaboration reflects and
supports relevant Government strategies and initiatives, to which science and innovation can make a
major contribution. Such strategies include, but are not limited to, the NSSI, National Science
Challenges, the work programme of Centres of Research Excellence, agreed priorities arising from
bilateral Science and Technology Cooperation Agreements, and other strategies issued by local or
national government entities.
Can you tell me if we are required to provide CVs for all members of the international
collaboration for GSP, even if they are Advisory Group members?
CVs should be provided for international collaborators as per page 23 of the CfP.
International collaborators should be more engaged in the collaboration than being on an advisory
committee would suggest.
Would you like all of the budget details specified under each main category, or should the costs be
itemised by each individual involved in the project, or itemised by each organisation involved in
the project?
MBIE does not have specific requirements or a preference as to how the budget is arranged,
providing the applicant uses the template provided and the budget can be clearly understood by the
reader.
We have found a company who is very interested in our proposal. Do you accept this company as
a research organisation?
There is no impediment to a private company being involved (either in New Zealand or as an
international partner) in Global Strategic Partnerships, so long as (if a New Zealand company) it fits
the research capability and other relevant criteria, and, if on the international partner side of a bid,
is capable of contributing to strategically useful research outcomes. Please note that only New
Zealand research organisations are eligible to apply.
For the purpose of Eligibility Criteria, “research organisation” means an organisation that has
internal capability to carry out substantive research, science, technology, or related activities. Public
service departments as listed in Schedule 1 of the State Sector Act 1988 are not eligible to apply
under the Catalyst Fund.
Could you please advise the title of the Chinese government fund that our Chinese counterpart
researcher team should apply for, if there is one the Chinese counterpart need to apply in parallel
to our application procedure?
The requirements for the China based team are determined by China’s Ministry of Science and
Technology. The China RFP is expected in the next few weeks. China-based collaborators should
contact MOST Vice-Director Chen Jiangrui chenjr@most.cn directly to determine requirements.
What is meant by the mandatory ‘Key Individual’ please? Would this be a project management
role or such like?
These are people who are critical to the success of the project; their departure would constitute a
change event. These people are typically fewer in number, and at a level above others listed.
- Key researchers involved in the scientific research.
- Key individuals not directly involved in the research but involved in implementation activities.
A project manager might fit the category of a key individual if they are critical to the success of the
project.
Can you please confirm if Regional Councils qualify as New-Zealand based research organisations?
Only New Zealand research organisations are eligible to apply. For the purpose of Eligibility Criteria,
“research organisation” means an organisation that has internal capability to carry out substantive
research, science, technology, or related activities. Public service departments as listed in Schedule 1
of the State Sector Act 1988 are not eligible to apply under the Catalyst Fund.
There is no impediment to types of other entities being involved as collaborators in Global Strategic
Partnerships applications, so long as they contribute meaningfully to research outcomes.
Regarding the NZ-China Strategic alliance proposals, during pre-registration a number of
researcher who would be involved in the programme were identified. We are now aware that
there will be some additional people involved. Does increasing the number of researchers
involved present any problem for the application?
No, as long as the science leaders specified during pre-registration remain the same.
We understand the requirements for a multi institutional research partners on the New Zealand
side of these applications however we are wondering if a commercial company who brings
background IP and scientific mentoring to a programme but is not actively doing research
themselves could fit the criteria of a NZ research organisation?
Only New Zealand research organisations are eligible to apply. For the purpose of Eligibility Criteria,
“research organisation” means an organisation that has internal capability to carry out substantive
research, science, technology, or related activities. Public service departments as listed in Schedule 1
of the State Sector Act 1988 are not eligible to apply under the Catalyst Fund. Therefore, a
commercial partner that is not actively involved in research cannot apply for funding.
However, there is no impediment to types of other entities, including commercial, being involved as
collaborators in Global Strategic Partnerships applications, so long as they contribute meaningfully
to research outcomes and are not the applicant.
What is the name of the NZ-Singapore bilateral science and technology agreement, and its date?
The name of the arrangement is “Memorandum of Arrangement between Agency for Science,
Technology and Research, Singapore and The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment,
New Zealand”
It was signed in 2013, and the joint programme that sits underneath this memorandum is the “New
Zealand-Singapore Foods for Health Collaboration”.
We don’t quite understand the role of the key individual. Is it OK to be a key researchers as well as
key individual where it is the research staff who will be involved in the implementation activities
as well as the research. If not what sort of person do you envisage being a key individual?
Key researchers and key individuals are people who are critical to the success of the project; their
departure would constitute a change event. Typically, Key researchers are involved in the scientific
research; and key individuals are not directly involved in the research but involved in
implementation activities. A project manager might fit the category of a key individual if they are
critical to the success of the project. However, a key researcher can also be involved in
implementation activities. It is okay to classify them as ‘key researchers’ rather than ‘key
individuals’.
It is unclear whether our Chinese partners need to apply separately to MOST for (Chinese) funding,
or whether funding for their contribution will come from our application to MBIE? Do we include
time and funding allocation for Chinese researchers, plus their travel expenses, etc in our budget
spreadsheet?
The requirements for the China based team are determined by China’s Ministry of Science and
Technology (MOST). The China RFP can be found at this link:
http://www.most.gov.cn/mostinfo/xinxifenlei/fgzc/gfxwj/gfxwj2015/201510/t20151028_122185.ht
m
This link has been provided to pre-registered NZ applicants for their reference.
As per page 9 of the CfP, MBIE and MOST are jointly responsible for the funding decisions. MBIE’s
funding will support the successful New Zealand project teams, and MOST’s funding will support the
Chinese project teams in the same collaboration. Although this is a bilateral initiative, MBIE and
MOST use separate assessment processes, using non-identical selection criteria and key application
dates. This CfP applies only to New Zealand applications, and Chinese researchers must consult with
MOST regarding their application requirements and process.
How do we represent the FTE of any one individual over the life of the project. Should we split it
by year (e.g. 0.1 FTE per year, or 0.3 FTE over the life of a project)?
MBIE does not have a view on how the FTEs should be represented. Applicants should choose what
makes the most sense for any one project and ensure their approach is clear to the reader.
For our organisation’s people we list personnel costs and overheads separately. For our NZ
partners we look upon this as a subcontract to us and put the total cost to the project of their
people under pro-rata salary. However what this does is mask the overhead component of those
NZ salaries, would MBIE prefer for the overheads component of these NZ salaries being paid to
research organisations which are not the lead organisation to be separated out and lumped in
with the overheads which will be reported for our organisation as the lead organisation?
It would seem to make sense to split the pro-rated salaries from overheads for each project.
However, MBIE does not a firm view on how this is done. Applicants should ensure whatever
approach is taken is clear to the reader.
The guidelines on China’s Ministry of Science and Technology’s (MoST) website require both
parties to submit identical proposals including title and content. Is this correct?
Both countries’ applications must have identical titles and be for the same project. The Chinese
partner should follow the form provided on MoST’s website. The China RFP can be found at this link:
http://www.most.gov.cn/mostinfo/xinxifenlei/fgzc/gfxwj/gfxwj2015/201510/t20151028_122185.ht
m
My Chinese partner has questions about the Chinese RfP. Who should they contact about this?
The Chinese partner should consult with MoST for anything that is not clear to them. MoST contact
information is included in its RfP, Tel: 010-58881333、58881330, contact people: Zheng Di, Chen
Jiangrui, chenjr@most.cn
MoST requires the Chinese partner to have a large corporate sponsor. Can you please clarify this?
MoST encourages industry participation in research projects and will give priority to those projects
with industry participation and funding. However, it is a preference, not a mandatory requirement.
Could you please indicate if the China NZ strategic Research Alliance fund has one round or two
rounds per annum and if pre-registration is always required?
China SRA runs once per year. The process for future rounds is yet to be determined between
China’s Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) and MBIE. Any announcement on future funding
opportunities and processes will be made known on MBIE’s webpage (Catalyst Fund area) and
through MBIE’s funding email alert.
Our NZ partner invited us to join a collaboration to apply for the Global Strategic Partnerships.
May I have your help to get the details of your counterpart in my country? Which funding agency
in my country have you worked with to support this collaboration?
Global Strategic Partnerships has no international counterpart funding mechanism.
The call is designed to enable New Zealand research teams to develop enduring science and
innovation collaboration partnerships with world-class foreign counterparts on topics important to
New Zealand.
To achieve this, New Zealand applicants are expected to discuss (and agree on) project plans with
suitable overseas collaborators before submitting a proposal. In the “Project Team” section of the
proposal template, both New Zealand and overseas project team members need to be listed,
accompanied with their CVs. Funding sources of prospective overseas partners’ project involvement
- if thought relevant to the project’s success – may be outlined in the Project Plan.