4th workshopopenaire 2_phoebekoundouri

Sustainability Model and Business Plan for the

Infrastructure and Organisation of OpenAIRE

Prof. Dr. Phoebe Koundouri

Director RESEES, AUEB.

workshop:

Legal and Sustainability

issues for Open Access

Infrastructures

November 5, 2013, Vilnius, Lithuania

RESEES:

Research tEam on

Socio-Economic & Environmental

Sustainability

AUEB-RESEES Team COORDINATOR:

Phoebe Koundouri

BA, MPhil, MSc, PhD (Cambrige)

Associate Professor in Economic Theory and Policy

Director RSEES, AUEB

ECONOMISTS/ ECONOMETRICIANS:

Anastasios Xepapadeas

BA, MA, PhD (Manchester)

Dean of School of Economics, Professor of

Economic Theory and Policy, AUEB

Nikolaos Kourogenis

BSc, PhD (National Technical University of Athens)

Research Associate, RESEES, AUEB

Assistant Professor, Econometrics / Quantitative

Finance. Department of Banking and Financial

Management, University of Piraeus

Osiel González Dávila

BA, MRes, MSc, PhD (SOAS)


Subject Lecturer in Economics, SOAS, University of

London

Vassilis Skianins

BA, MA, PhD (LSE)


ARCHIVE SPECIALIST:

Oya Y. Rieger

BSc, MPA, MSc, PhD (Cornell)


Digital Scholarship & Preservation Services arXiv

Program Director, Cornell University Library.

ACCOUNTANTS:

Georgios A. Papanastasopoulos

BA, MSc, PhD (Piraeus)


Lecturer in Accounting, Department of Business

Administration , University of Piraeus

John Sorros

BA, PhD (Piraeus)


Associate Professor of Cost Accounting, Department of

Business Administration, University of Piraeus.

LAWYER/INSTITUTIONAL ANALYST:

Lefteris Levantis

BA, MSc, PhD candidate (University of Athens)


2

Concept and objectives

• To provide OpenAIRE with an accurate estimation of

the benefits and costs of its infrastructure.

• To build a sustainable business model for the

continuation of OpenAIRE beyond the life-time of its

funding.

3

Specific objectives

1. Stakeholder definition, stakeholders’ benefits: Identify, prioritise

stakeholder groups and their needs; estimate monetary value of benefits

they derive from OpenAIRE.

2. Cost accounting: how much does the current system setup and operation

& maintenance cost? (technical & human cost of infrastructure

components, operation/maintenance of the system, account keeping and

financial analysis).

3. Cost benefit analysis: how do the system costs respond to the benefits of

the identified stakeholders?

4. Business Model for OpenAIRE: identify revenue channels that can

support the best and most viable way to spread the costs of OpenAIRE

among beneficiaries of its services.

4

DELIVERABLES. Deadline.

5

• METHODOLOGY. July 2013

• STAKEHOLDERS ANALYSIS. November 2013

• COST ANALYSIS. November2013.

• STAKEHOLDERS BENEFITS MONETARY VALUATION:

CHOICE EXPERIMENT. January 2013

• COSTS BENEFIT ANALYSIS. March 2014

• BUSINESS PLAN. July 2014

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF OPENAIRE

6

BENEFITS TO STAKEHOLDERS COSTS OF INFRASTRUCTURE

Investments & Operation & Maintenance

Cost Questionnaire - Which Stakeholders?

Stakeholders Database

Stakeholders Mapping &

Prioritization

Sample Selection Method

- Which Services do they Value?

Stakeholders Questionnaire

- How much & in which way are they WTP?

Choice Experiment Method

Financial Sustainability:

Pricing/Financing Scheme and Business Model

FNPV = R0-C

0( )+R

1-C

1( )1+ i( )

+R

2-C

2( )1+ i( )

2+… +

RN-1

-CN-1( )

1+ i( )N-1

Revenues from providing access to articles to individual users who seek the article.

Revenues from subscriptions (e.g. universities and private entities).

Revenues from contributions – donations, without equity rights or voting rights.

Revenues from discovery services (e.g. library service providers)

Revenues from Research Funders (e.g. welcome trust, national funders)

Revenues from Brokering Services (e.g. copy editing)

Revenues from Providing Statistics

Revenues from other Services, etc.

WTPsh, services = Price sh, services

REVENUES EU Grants & Institutional Contributions

Work Progress reported on:

• Project wiki; [User: PhoebeKoundouri & Pass: openairetender]

• Bibliography on the Economics of Open Access publishing.

• Project Methodology.

• Stakeholders’ Database: Stakeholders database

• Stakeholders Mapping & Prioritization: Stakeholder description

• Stakeholders’ Questionnaire and e-survey: part 1 and part 2

• Cost Questionnaire and e-survey:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/R37SB28

• Sampling Method for the implementation of e-surveys.

• Implementation of e-surveys starts this week!

7

http://wiki.openaire.eu/xwiki/bin/loginsubmit/XWiki/XWikiLogin

Stakeholders database.xlsx



Stakeholder description chart.xlsx



https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/X7G32SC



https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/X9KV9X8













Task 1

Estimating OpenAIRE benefits

Stakeholder Mapping: 4 phases

1. Identifying: listing relevant groups, organizations, and

people. Create stakeholder database. (completed: see

Stakeholders database).

2. Analysing: understanding stakeholder perspectives &

interests (see Stakeholder description and the

stakeholder questionnaire part 1 and part 2).

3. Visual Mapping: visualizing relationships to

objectives and other stakeholders.

4. Prioritizing: ranking stakeholder relevance and

identifying issues. [Use these weights in Sample

Selection for questionnaires implementation)

9





Criteria in stakeholders’ mapping

• Contribution: Does the stakeholder have information,

counsel, or expertise on the issue that could be helpful to the

project?

• Legitimacy: How legitimate is the stakeholder’s claim for

engagement?

• Willingness to engage: How willing is the stakeholder to

engage?

• Influence: How much influence does the stakeholder have?

• Necessity of involvement: Is this someone who could derail

or delegitimize the process if they were not included in the

engagement?

10

Exper

tise

Willingness to engage

Low

Low High

High

SH 1

SH 2 SH 3

SH

4OA

SH 6 SH

7

SH

8

SH

9

SH

10

SH

11

SH

12

SH

13

SH

14

SH 4

NEU

SH 4

RES

SH 1 Scientists and Researchers SH 2 Researcher Funders SH 3 Research Centres and Labs SH 4 Publishers SH 5 Scholarly & Learned Societies SH 6 Research Communities SH 7 Libraries and Library Organizations SH 8 Repository Service Providers & Standards Groups SH 9 National Open Access Desks SH 10 University Administration & University Organizations SH 11 Open Access Organizations SH 12 Preservation Services SH 13 Other Repositories SH 14 Primary and Secondary Education Instructors and Students SH 15 Patent, Trademark, and Technology Transfer, Commercialization Offices

Contribution Legitimacy Willingness to

Engage Influence

Necessity of

Involvement

High: They

produce and

consult the

scientific outputs

stored by

OpenAIRE

High: Directly

affected by

OpenAIRE's

activity

High: There is

evidence that this

community is

willing to engage

High: This

community

produce and

consult the

scientific outputs

stored by

OpenAIRE

High: This

community

produce and

consult the

scientific outputs

stored by

OpenAIRE


Engage Influence

Necessity of

Involvement

High: They

provide the

facilities to

produce and

consult the

scientific outputs

stored by

OpenAIRE

High: Directly

affected by

OpenAIRE's

activity

High: Research

has found that this

community is

willing to engage

High: They

provide the

facilities to

produce and

consult the

scientific outputs

stored by

OpenAIRE

High: They

facilitate the

production and

consultation of the

scientific outputs

stored by

OpenAIRE


Engage Influence

Necessity of

Involvement

High: They fund

the scientific

outputs stored by

OpenAIRE

High: Directly

affected by

OpenAIRE's

activity

High: Proactive

groups that are

already engaging

High: They fund

the scientific

outputs stored by

OpenAIRE

High: They

provide the funding

for producing

scientific outputs

and may fund

OpenAIRE's

activity


Engage Influence

Necessity of

Involvement

High: They (may)

publish the

scientific outputs

stored by

OpenAIRE

High: Directly

affected by

OpenAIRE's

activity

High: OA

publishers

Medium: Neutral

Publishers

Low: Resistant

publishers

High: OA

publishers

Medium: Neutral

Publishers

Low: Resistant

publishers

High: OA

publishers

Medium: Neutral

Publishers

Low: Resistant

publishers


Engage Influence

Necessity of

Involvement

Medium: They

promote academic

disciplines

Medium: Not

Directly affected

by OpenAIRE's

activity

Medium: Some

societies may fund

OA outputs from

its members

Medium: Some

societies may fund

OA outputs from

its members

Medium: Some

societies may fund

OA outputs from

its members

SH 5


Engage Influence

Necessity of

Involvement

Medium: They

promote academic

disciplines and

collaboration

High: Directly

affected by

OpenAIRE's

activity

Medium: Some

communities may

fund OA outputs

from its members

Medium: Some

communities may

fund OA outputs

from its members

Medium: Some

communities may

fund OA outputs

from its members


Engage Influence

Necessity of

Involvement

High: They

facilitate the

distribution of the

scientific outputs

stored by

OpenAIRE

High: Directly

affected by

OpenAIRE's

activity

High: There is

evidence that this

community is

willing to engage

High: This

community

facilitates the

distribution of OA

products

High: This

community

facilitates the

distribution of OA

products


Engage Influence

Necessity of

Involvement

High: They

facilitate the

distribution of the

scientific outputs

stored by

OpenAIRE

High: Directly

affected by

OpenAIRE's

activity

High: There is

evidence that this

community is

willing to engage

High: This

community

facilitates the

distribution of OA

products

High: This

community

facilitates the

distribution of OA

products


Engage Influence

Necessity of

Involvement

High: They

facilitate Open

Access at Nation

Level

High: Directly

affected by

OpenAIRE's

activity

High: Proactive

groups that are

already engaging

High: This

community

facilitates the

distribution of OA

products

High: This

community

facilitates the

distribution of OA

products


Engage Influence

Necessity of

Involvement

High: They

facilitate the

distribution of the

scientific outputs

stored by

OpenAIRE

High: Directly

affected by

OpenAIRE's

activity

High: Proactive

groups that are

already engaging

High: They

provide the

facilities to

produce and

consult the

scientific outputs

stored by

OpenAIRE

High: They

facilitate the

production and

consultation of the

scientific outputs

stored by

OpenAIRE


Engage Influence

Necessity of

Involvement

High: They

promote Open

Access

High: Directly

affected by

OpenAIRE's

activity

High: Proactive

groups that are

already engaging

High: This

community

facilitates the

distribution of OA

products

High: This

community

facilitates the

distribution of OA

products


Engage Influence

Necessity of

Involvement

Low: Not directly

involved in the

production/distribu

tion of scientific

outputs stored by

OpenAIRE

Medium:

Somehow affected

by OpenAIRE's

activity

Medium: Some

communities may

be interested in

preserving OA

outputs

Low: Not directly

involved in the

production/distribu

tion of scientific

outputs stored by

OpenAIRE

Medium: Some

communities may

be interested in

preserving OA

outputs


Engage Influence

Necessity of

Involvement

High: They

facilitate the

distribution of OA

outputs

High: Directly

affected by

OpenAIRE's

activity

High: Proactive

groups that are

already engaging

High: This

community

facilitates the

distribution of OA

products

High: This

community

facilitates the

distribution of OA

products


Engage Influence

Necessity of

Involvement

Low: Not directly

involved in the

production of

scientific outputs

stored by

OpenAIRE

Low: Not directly

affected by

OpenAIRE's

activity

Medium: Some

communities may

be interested in

consulting OA

outputs stored by

OpenAIRE

Low: Not directly

involved in the

production/distribu

tion of scientific

outputs stored by

OpenAIRE

Low: Not directly

involved in the

production/distribu

tion of scientific

outputs stored by

OpenAIRE


Engage Influence

Necessity of

Involvement

Medium: May use

OA research. Not

directly involved in

the

production/distribu

tion of scientific

outputs stored by

OpenAIRE

Medium:

Somehow affected

by OpenAIRE's

activity

Medium: Some

communities may

be interested in

consulting OA

outputs stored by

OpenAIRE

Medium: Some

communities may

be interested in

consulting OA

outputs stored by

OpenAIRE

Medium: Some

communities may

be interested in

consulting OA

outputs stored by

OpenAIRE SH

15

11

Task 2

Estimating OpenAIRE costs

Project Costing & Cost Questionnaire:

Main Cost Categories:

• Repository Annual Costs

• Coordination and National Open Access Desk (NOAD) Annual Costs

• Cost of Infrastructure and Services

Distinguish between:

• Investment costs: establishing the infrastructure required for the operation

of OpenAIRE and any extraordinary maintenance or expansion costs.

• Operating costs: mainly labor and maintenance costs.

• A questionnaire was developed by accountants, which will be sent to

relevant stakeholders identified in Task 1.

• The questionnaire is available at:


13


Sampling methodology

The selection of the stakeholders is based on a stratified

sampling strategy, using the Stakeholder database

spreadsheet. Two main stakeholder clusters are identified:

1. Individuals: The sample is separated into groups with

respect to the academic/research orientation of each

individual.

2. Organizations:

- organizations financially affected by an OA in a direct way

- all remaining organizations, which are also affected by an

OA initiative, but mainly on operational issues.

14

Task 3

Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA)

15

CBA is crucial for the creation of a

sustainable financing model: 1. Allows determination of the value of the services provided by

OpenAire activities to a number of users: individual researchers,

libraries, research institutions, etc.

…but also more general values stemming from the positive

knowledge externality which is generated by the accumulated

information in the repositories and which can be accessed freely.

2. Allows determination of the cost required for establishing and

operating OpenAire.

3. By combining A and B, allows determination of the financing

schemes that will ensure the long term sustainability of the project

in financial terms and thus the continuous provision of quality

services to the stakeholders.

16

Sustainability concepts

• Economic Performance: Design financing schemes that will result

in a positive financial net present value (FNPV) or an acceptable

financial internal rate of return (FIRR) for the time horizon in which

OpenAire activities will take place.

Determining a financing scheme according to this objective will

ensure that the performance of the project is acceptable in the sense

that the discounted financial costs of the project (outflows) are less

than the discounted financial revenues (inflows).

• Financial Sustainability: Design financing schemes that ensure

that the project will not run out of cash during its operating life

(enough cash to cover the projects cost without running the risk of

incurring cash shortages).

17

CBA: Costs

• To design these financing schemes we need information on the structure

and the cash flows of future costs and benefits.

COSTS: Let C0, C1,…CN-1 denote the cash flow of costs for a time

horizon of N years (t=0,1,…N-1) during which the OpenAire activity will

be operational. These costs will include the cost categories characterized in

the cost questionnaire, that is:

• Repository Annual Costs

• Coordination and National Open Access Desk (NOAD) Annual Costs

• Cost of Infrastructure and Services

• So Ct ≥ 0 is the sum of all the above costs incurred in year t.

18

Benefits – Revenues

• Total benefits obtained by the stakeholders’ Choice

Experiment will reflect willingness to pay for the

OpenAIRE services.

• The willingness to pay estimates can then be mapped,

at least partially, to a pricing scheme that will provide

revenues from different sources, as described in the

revenue part of the cost questionnaire.

19

Estimation of the total economic

benefits for identified stakeholders.

• One theoretical approach of capturing and describing the

benefits derived from the different services provided by the

OpenAIRE platform is the Total Economic Value (TEV)

framework.

• It provides a systematic tool for considering the full range of

impacts a service has on human welfare.

• The way to derive TEV is from preferences of individuals.

Preferences can be studied by stated preference methods and

revealed preference methods.

20

Choice Experiment Method (CEM)

• CEM is a state of the art, survey based, hypothetical method, to estimate

economic values for virtually any public good and service, and can be used

to estimate non-use as well as use values.

• CE is grounded in Lancaster’s characteristics theory of value (1966), which

states that any good/service can be described in terms of its attributes and

the levels these attributes take, and consumers purchase the attributes rather

than the good/service itself.

• In a CE survey the respondent is presented with two or more alternatives of

the non-marketed service with different levels of its attributes at different

prices and asked to choose their most preferred alternative in each set of

alternatives.

• As long as one of the attributes of the good is price, it is possible to derive

the WTP for changes in the levels of the service's other attributes.

• CEM can estimate the TEV of a good or service and the value of its

attributes as well as the value of more complex changes in several attributes.

22

Example: Valuing the Environment Choice Experiment 1.1

Which of the following three wetland management scenarios do you favour? Option A and option B would have a cost to your

household. No payment would be required for option C, but the conditions at the wetland would continue to de teriorate.

Option A

Option B Option C

Biodiversity

OWSA

Education and Research

Extraction

Number of locals re-trained

One-off payment

Improve

Increase

Maintain current level

150

€ 40

Maintain current level

Increase

Increase

75

€ 40

Decline

Decline

Decline

0

€ 0

(Please tick as appropriate)

I would choose: Option A Option B Option C

23

Next steps for CE benefit valuation.

1. Design the instrument for data collection (survey)

The results from stakeholders’ and cost questionnaires will be inputs in the

construction of the Choice Experiment Questionnaire (service-specific

benefits, attributes and price vehicle).

2. Implement the survey using sample selection method.

3. Econometric Analysis of the data.

4. Estimation of WTP per OpenAIRE service, per stakeholder group.

24

For the CE we will use Stakeholders’

Analysis Questionnaire on:

• Exactly what is the service or services that OpenAIRE will

provide to potential interviewees stakeholders (see next slide).

• What benefits (marketed and non marketed) a user will obtain

from OpenAIRE

• Who should pay for the service? How can the user pay

(methods of payment)? How much will the user pay?

• Keep in mind that different users may require different

instruments.

25

OpenAIRE current & potential services

• Hosts a catalogue of over 6 million publications from over 400 data

sources, 40.000 of them linked to EC/FP7 projects.

• Measures research output and monitor funders’ open access policies.

• Hosts research results from other European funders.

• Informs scientists about the funding agencies requirements and how

they can conform;

• Enables EC, funders, member states to monitor the impact of their

policies easing reporting from coordinators to funders;

• Provides statistics for funders to measure research impact and

resources to help researchers publish in open access;

• Offers services for project coordinators to generate lists of

publications for reporting purposes.

26

Main Financial Resources

1. EU Grant and Contributions

EU grant

Institutional Contributions

2. Revenues from posting articles.

Revenues from providing access to articles to individual

users who seek the article.

Revenues from subscriptions (e.g. universities and

private entities).

Revenues from contributions – donations, without

equity rights or voting rights.

3. Possible Additional Financial Resources

Revenues from discovery services (e.g. library service

providers)

Revenues from Research Funders (e.g. welcome trust,

national funders)

Revenues from Brokering Services (e.g. copy editing)

Revenues from Providing Statistics

Revenues from other Services

• Let’s denote the cash flow of

annual expected potential

revenues from sources 2 and 3.

• Grants and contributions are

expected to cover investment

(infrastructure) costs. If they are

designated to cover operating

costs they should be included in

categories 2 and 3.

27

Financial Performance

• The financial net present value for the project (FNPV) will be:

• In this formulation investment costs are expected to occur in

the first year of the project’s life and i is the discount rate that

reflects the opportunity cost of capital used to finance the

project’s investment costs.

FNPV = R0-C

0( )+R

1-C

1( )1+ i( )

+R

2-C

2( )1+ i( )

2+… +

RN-1

-CN-1( )

1+ i( )N-1

…

28

The opportunity cost of capital is

defined as

• “the expected return forgone by bypassing other potential

investment activities for a given capital” (European Commission

(EC) Working document No 4: Guidance on the methodology for

carrying out Cost-Benefit Analysis).

• The reference rate to use for the discounting of the financial analysis

can be estimated in a number of ways.

• The EC considers helpful the use of a benchmark value. For the

programming period 2007-2013, the European Commission

recommends that a 5% real rate is considered as the reference

parameter for the opportunity cost of capital in the long term. Values

differing from the 5% benchmark may, however, be justified on the

grounds of the Member State’s specific macroeconomic

conditions, the nature of the investor and the sector concerned

29

The financial internal rate of return

(FIRR) is defined as

• the discount rate r such that the FNPV=0, or

FIRR isthediscountrater : R0-C

0( )+R

1-C

1( )1+r( )

+R

2-C

2( )1+r( )

2+… +

RN-1

-CN-1( )

1+ r( )N-1

= 0…

30

Financial profitability and financing

schemes

• The project will be considered financially profitable if:

FNPV > 0 or r > i

Therefore given:

• The operating cost cash flow, and the grants and contributions

that will finance investment cost: C0, C1,…CN-1.

• A discount rate i = 5%

OpenAIRE will be financially viable if a revenue policy and a

policy for attracting other financial resources generate a

revenue cash flow R0, R1,…RN-1 such that: FNPV > 0 or r > i

31

Financial sustainability and financing

schemes

• Financial sustainability means there is enough cash to cover the annual

project’s costs without running the risk of incurring cash shortages.

Given:

a) The cash flow of operating costs, the time profile of any interest

payments, loan reimbursements, or taxes paid which are related to the

project.

b) The sources of financing investment costs (EU grants or contributions).

• The project will be financially sustainable if a revenue policy and a policy

for attracting other financial resources generates a revenue cash flow R0,

R1,…RN-1 such that the cumulated cash flow of the project is greater or

equal to zero during the projects life time.

32

Financial Sustainability

(Example millions of Euros)

• In this example the

project of case 1 is

financially

sustainable while

the project of case

2 is not because it

runs out of cash in

year 3.

CASE 1 (YEARS) CASE 2 (YEARS) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

EU grant etc.

5 5

Operating Revenues

3 3 4 3 2 1

Total Inflows

5 3 3 4 5 3 2 1

Investment costs

-5 -5

Operating costs

0 -2 -2 -2 0 -2 -2 -2

Interest -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 Loans -1 -1 -1 -1 Taxes - - - - Total

Outflows -5 -2 -3.1 -3.1 -5 -2 -3.1 -3.1

Total Cash Flow

0 1 -0.1 0.9 0 1 -1.1 -2.1

Cumulated Cash Flow

0 1 0.9 1.8 0 0 -0.1 -2.2

33

Task 4

Identify a sustainable and

socio-economically acceptable

Business plan for OpenAIRE

34

Back to tasks list

The pricing policy

• Will determine the pricing rules for providing the following services

• at levels which are: (i) consistent with the willingness to pay

estimates and (ii) sufficient to ensure the financial performance and

the financial sustainability of the project.

• Even if the desirable pricing scheme is not implementable and gaps

appear either in the financial performance or the financial

sustainability, the cost benefit analysis will provide directions for

the extra financial assistance required in order to close these gaps.

Revenues from providing access to articles to individual users who seek the article. Revenues from subscriptions (e.g. universities and private entities). Revenues from contributions – donations, without equity rights or voting rights. Revenues from discovery services (e.g. library service providers) Revenues from Research Funders (e.g. welcome trust, national funders) Revenues from Brokering Services (e.g. copy editing) Revenues from Providing Statistics Revenues from other Services

35

If economic analysis reveals that

• the project generates additional benefits that cannot be

quantified or realized through the pricing scheme, and this

results in poor financial performance, or problems in terms of

financial sustainability, the CBA will also suggest the extra

financial assistance required in order to make the project

financially sustainable.

• Sensitivity analysis and Monte Carlo simulation will be

applied in order to account for the risk/uncertainty associated

with the costs estimates and the expected revenues from the

pricing schemes.

36

Business Models for Repository Services Source: Friend, F. (2011). Open access business models for research funders and universities.

Knowledge Exchange

• Institutionally-supported: appropriate for digitization, repository

provision, preservation at some levels and overlay journal production.

• Publicly-funded (e.g. from top-sliced money allocated by the JISC):

appropriate for all advisory services for interim ‘catch-all’ repositories,

metadata creation and enhancement, resource discovery, technology

transfer and bridging services.

• Community-supported: appropriate for subject- and media-specific

repository provision, usage, assessment, and meta-analysis services and

publishing services.

• Subscription-supported: appropriate for access and authentication,

preservation and resource discovery services.

• Fully-commercial models (including advertising-supported, merchant and

utility models): appropriate for digitization, repository provision and

hosting, technical advisory services, metadata creation and enhancement,

technology transfer, and all output-level services

37

Contact details

Prof. Dr. Phoebe Koundouri

Email: [email protected]

Webpage:

http://www.aueb.gr/users/koundouri/resees/

38

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.aueb.gr/users/koundouri/resees/

4th workshopopenaire 2_phoebekoundouri

Technology

Transcript of 4th workshopopenaire 2_phoebekoundouri