Rowena Sirey Head of External Relations European Southern - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Rowena Sirey

Head of External Relations European Southern Observatory

1

Research Infrastructures: Taking the Long View

COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012

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

The baseline

COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012

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

Keeping a grip on reality

Project Maturity and Governance

Project Maturity

COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012

Two aspects to maturity: Technical/Scientific Maturity Administrative/Political Maturity To succeed, need both

Project maturity

7

COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012

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

Technical/scientific maturity

8

COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012

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

• ther existing and planned projects is understood

Administrative/Political Maturity

9

COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012

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

Mismatch

10

COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012

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

What to look for

Governance Considerations

12

COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012

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

General comments

COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012

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?

Who calls the shots?

COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012

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?

Who pays the bills?

COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012

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?

Rights and Benefits

COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012

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

• rganisation, accountable for the project

Underlying principles should be unambiguous Consider carefully the basic principles and their consequences (e.g. geo-return) Simpler is better

Organisational requirements

17

COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012

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

A word about site selection

COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012

Science never stands still: even a ‘single-project’

• rganisation 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

• f partnership or membership, new projects, etc

Think carefully about the voting rules in this context

Organisational development (1)

19

COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012

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

• f 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!

Organisational development (2)

20

COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012

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

Key components

21

COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012

Passion Realism Ambition Pragmatism Stability Flexibility Key characteristics of a successful Research Infrastructure

Thank you

COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012

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

Inter-governmental vs. Inter- Agency

24

COPORI EoE Workshop: 11-12 June 2012

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

Inter-governmental vs. Inter- Agency

25