Status briefing to NuPECC

Jean-Claude WORMSFirenze, 8 June 2013

2

3

ESF situation

• The old ESF will most probably be gone by end 2015– Instruments and annual MO fees will stop– Our classic role towards the scientific community

(networking) will come to a halt– Risk to lose expertise (Science Officers & Administrators)– Can the trend be reversed still and how will support to

scientists’ networks be organised?

• If things come from Member Organisations in the future it can probaby only be as a bonus

• Science services organisation?• Expert Boards and Committees to remain!

4

Our challenge: bridging the Valley of Death…

5

2011

2016

don’t look down…

Need for change

• Current activity/workload is dictated by contributions (subsidies) instead of opportunities

• This approach should evolve towards a dynamic, service-based, contract-oriented, science services organisation

• To cross that valley of death and survive beyond 2015, we need to change our approach and work method, going from secured funding to securing funding

6

7

EBCs (and SRGs) – an underpinning resource

A habit of finding resources

• Some EBCs exist since almost 40 years and have always found their own resources

• Some of them can be considered as SMEs, securing the funds they need to fulfill their mission by stabilising the budgets for operation of their secretariats

• They took the spearhead approach in winning and managing professionally EC and other contracts

• Success rate (CSA) reaches 83% in some cases!• Turnover example: 3.4 M€ over 7 years

8

Role models for “ESF 2.0”

• à la carte MO and other funders representation• Strong policy role in ERA and with institutional

stakeholders (ministerial level)• Access to and recognition by science community, EC

and EP, in addition to other agencies• Know-how in consensus building, ex-post and ex-ante

programmatic evaluation, priority setting and roadmapping, peer review

• Best practice benchmarking and performance indicators for these activities

9

Process to establish a new structure

• Outcome of Frankfurt meeting (18/12/2012)– ESF takes the spearhead approach for a joint entity– Individual Boards/Committees explore independent solutions– Two possible models were identified for a joint entity

• Main principles– Individuals or organisations constituting the EBCs become members– Various governances to be respected– EBCs stay as they are and become sections of the legal structure or remain

outside the structure– Small assembly and light executive (is it needed?)

• Next Steps– Develop legal and financial details for the preferred model (on going)– If agreed by EBCs and ESF governance, new association could be created

by the end of 2013 to allow new commitments (e.g. EC contracts)

10

11

Model 2

title

12

Model 3

Institutional visibility

• The “umbrella” of ESF MOs will most likely disappear after 2015, hence the visibility of EBCs on the European landscape (beyond their own disciplinary arena)

• It might be an asset to get Science Europe to take over that role from ESF

• Hosting to be carried out independently of Science Europe, but possibilities to establish institutional partnerships

• Invite SE to NuPECC meetings?

13

ESF is committed to support EBCs until 2015 and identify with them the preferred hosting solution, and set up a sustainable basis after 2015

14