Science Europe News New SAC Members • Workshop and Brochure on Exergy 2 Data on Research Activity • Data Management Protocols 3 More SE News 4 European Research News Priorities of the Slovak EU Presidency 4 Commission on Next FP • Avenues for Innovation and Research 5 Personalised Medicine • Research Infrastructure Sustainability 6 More EU News 6–7 Inside The SAC identified several key dimensions of societal impact: its meaning, namely what forms it can take; the tension between science and society when looking at issues such as trust and reciprocal expectations; and the difficulty of assessing the contribution of science to societal changes after many years. One of the issues discussed was how to counterbalance the current emphasis on encouraging the easy use of available scientific data to legitimise policy decisions that have been taken for reasons other than societal ones. This tendency may, in fact, endanger the concept of ‘evidence-based’ policy making. The SAC’s discussion particularly emphasised the question of why there is a need to look at societal impact of science, and why a Scientific Advisory Committee on the Societal Impact of Science At its meeting on 23 June, the SE Governing Board (GB) discussed the first results of the mandate that was given to the new Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC) on the topic ‘societal impact of science’. Members of the SAC were asked to explore this topic based on their own experience of the value of science ‘produced’ across different disciplines and research fields. 46 June 2016 The strategic aim of the mandate is to develop a shared and consolidated narrative for SE to use in the debate on impact and the role and value of research. This issue is increasingly capturing the attention of policy-makers and public authorities, who are under pressure to justify investments and to demonstrate economic returns of research and innovation policies. In a first summary of its discussions, produced for the GB, the SAC stressed the importance of recognising the value of all different forms of societal impact that science is able to originate: from the laser to polymers and plastics, from the internet and smartphones to ‘democratic peace’, and from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the ubiquity of science in the media to science museums as educational tools.
Transcript
Science Europe NewsNew SAC Members • Workshop and Brochure on Exergy 2
Data on Research Activity • Data Management Protocols 3
More SE News 4
European Research NewsPriorities of the Slovak EU Presidency 4
Commission on Next FP • Avenues for Innovation and Research 5
Personalised Medicine • Research Infrastructure Sustainability 6
More EU News 6–7
Inside
The SAC identified several key dimensions of societal impact: its meaning, namely what forms it can take; the tension between science and society when looking at issues such as trust and reciprocal expectations; and the difficulty of assessing the contribution of science to societal changes after many years.
One of the issues discussed was how to counterbalance the current emphasis on encouraging the easy use of available scientific data to legitimise policy decisions that have been taken for reasons other than societal ones. This tendency may, in fact, endanger the concept of ‘evidence-based’ policy making.
The SAC’s discussion particularly emphasised the question of why there is a need to look at societal impact of science, and why a
Scientific Advisory Committee on the Societal Impact of ScienceAt its meeting on 23 June, the SE Governing Board (GB) discussed the first results of the mandate that was given to the new Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC) on the topic ‘societal impact of science’. Members of the SAC were asked to explore this topic based on their own experience of the value of science ‘produced’ across different disciplines and research fields.
46June 2016
The strategic aim of the mandate is to develop a shared and consolidated narrative for SE to use in the debate on impact and the role and value of research. This issue is increasingly capturing the attention of policy-makers and public authorities, who are under pressure to justify investments and to demonstrate economic returns of research and innovation policies.
In a first summary of its discussions, produced for the GB, the SAC stressed the importance of recognising the value of all different forms of societal impact that science is able to originate: from the laser to polymers and plastics, from the internet and smartphones to ‘democratic peace’, and from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the ubiquity of science in the media to science museums as educational tools.
SCIENCE EUROPE Member’s Newsletter | 2
OPEN SC IENCE CONFERENCE
short-term political emphasis limits the understanding of societal values of science in all its respects. Key messages from the SAC included: not to underestimate the value of unexpected impact; the importance of co-creation and knowledge exchange rather than knowledge transfer for various translational processes, from basic research to social/political knowledge and back; the value of ‘trust’ as a pre-condition for societal impact, and the role that funders and performers play in the communication process between science and society to help building such trust; and the timescale of societal impact, which can only be measured ex-post, as well as the intrinsic value of scientific research even if this does not produce immediate, ‘useful’ results’ – for pushing scientific frontiers and anticipating the future by tackling the ‘unknown unknowns’.
Another crucial topic which was discussed within the SAC is about the parallel track between impact and innovation, where the need is felt to create the conditions for research-based and radical innovation to be supported, in order to engender fundamental
changes and results for society which derive from such a disruptive approach.
The GB received the SAC’s input with much interest and welcomed their analysis and ideas. It was agreed that this initial work was of great value, and should be explored further, for instance through the development of a longer paper, also containing some impact case studies, that can be used by Science Europe publicly.
Also related to outreach on this topic, one of the next steps the SAC’s work on impact will be the organisation of a Symposium where the topic will be further explored, to be held before the SE General Assembly in November.
The SAC’s input can also be used to complement the work currently being undertaken by the SE Working Group on Research Policy and Programme evaluation, on assessing the societal impact of research. ■
Selection of New Scientific Advisory Committee MembersOn 30 May, the Selection Committee of the Scientific Advisory Committee met to jointly assess the nominations received by the SE Office for the vacant positions on the newly-formed SAC. From a total of 103 nominations made by the SE MOs, 16 new members were identified by the Selection Committee, which will bring the SAC to 30 members.
The Selection Committee based its selection on the following criteria, in order to establish a balanced and diverse group: excellence in the represented research field; a broad overview of other research fields; experience with science policy; geographical
distribution; wide spread of research disciplines, including new emerging fields; gender balance; and representation of a variety of career stages. A fair spread of nominations from various Member Organisations was also taken into account.
The list has been sent to all Member Organisations for formal approval by email, with a deadline of Wednesday 20 July. Pending this approval of the selection by the General Assembly, the full SAC will have an exact 50–50 gender balance, and will have representation from 16 countries. ■
Science Europe Workshop and Brochure on ExergyOn 16 June, Science Europe hosted the workshop ‘In a Resource-constrained World: Think Exergy, Not Energy’ as an Energy Day within the EU Sustainable Energy Week (EUSEW) programme. On this occasion, a new brochure published by Science Europe, with the same title as the workshop, was presented by its contributing authors; the brochure explains to an audience of energy experts, policy makers, stakeholders and citizens how energy and natural resources must be considered on the basis of exergy.
This workshop and brochure are the final outputs of the work started by the former SE Scientific Committee for the Physical, Chemical and Mathematical Sciences, and a follow-up to their 2015 Opinion Paper ‘A Common Scale for Our Common Future: Exergy, a Thermodynamic Metric for Energy’.
At the workshop, the Chair of the European Parliament’s Science and Technology Options Assessment (STOA) Panel, Paul Rübig MEP, gave a keynote address recalling the evolution of EU energy policy; although acknowledging the impact of economic and political factors, he stressed the increasingly indispensable role of scientific evidence guiding policy making.
Thomas Stocker, from the University of Bern and former (2008–2015) co-chair of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Working Group on ‘The Physical Science Basis’, explained
his experience of sharing the science of climate change with stakeholders. In outlining the procedures and formal approval process guiding the IPCC’s work, he emphasised the importance of co-design and shared ownership involving scientists and governments and gave practical advice to the exergy community in furthering their dialogue with diverse stakeholders.
Energy awareness is increasing within Europe through various initiatives, including the European Commission’s adoption of ‘A Framework Strategy for a Resilient Energy Union with a Forward-Looking Climate Change Policy’, a decade of EUSEW programmes and the historic 2015 Paris climate conference (COP21). The workshop and brochure contribute to the current debate by arguing that tackling energy and material use on a scientific rather than an economic basis must be considered as essential next step. The brochure is available at http://scieur.org/brochure-exergy ■
Data on Research Activity: Towards Data Interoperability for Research Funding and Research Performing Organisations
On 15 and 16 June, 30 participants representing 18 different Science Europe Member Organisations, in addition to key external stakeholders and renowned experts in the field, came together in The Hague to discuss the future of data interoperability in the research sector. The workshop brought together stakeholders that rarely interact and lack a common vocabulary.
Data on research activity – meaning data on scientific publications and other outputs, researchers, research budgets and projects, research institutions, research funding applications and success rates – fulfil a key role in enabling the strategic, analytical and management functions of MOs and are the building blocks for indicators that can be used in various contexts.
As outlined in its Roadmap, SE is committed to contributing to the standardisation and interoperability of these data and aims to enable the cross-organisational and cross-country comparability of research activities. The SE Working Group on Research Policy and Programme Evaluation took up this challenge in early 2015, launching a survey on data collection and use among MOs, the results of which served as basis for the June workshop.
What emerged from the workshop was a complex picture, involving a variety of needs, goals and concerns among stakeholders. The workshop was therefore useful in mapping and understanding the challenges of interoperability faced by Research Funding and Research Performing Organisations.
At the same time, the workshop showed a clear will among MOs to move forward on the issue. A series of small but concrete and feasible steps were scoped, and there was broad agreement by participants on a set of basic principles to guide the development
of research information systems in view of future scenarios such as Open Science.
Based on the outcomes of the workshop, the WG is preparing a draft set of principles on research activity data, to be considered for adoption by MOs. ■
Science Europe Plans to Develop the Concept of Research Data Management Protocols
As reported in the March edition of this Newsletter, the SE Working Group (WG) on Research Data was one of four WGs renewed by the Governing Board in March. However, it was agreed that the WG should have a more focused coverage for its new mandate, with a clear emphasis on the Open Science agenda and what SE can do in this area in line with the Roadmap. The WG has consequently been re-launched as a WG on Research Data Management Protocols (RDMPs).
The objective of the WG is to develop and advocate the concept of RDMPs as the best way to implement Open Science policies that revolve around Data Management Plans (DMPs).
The WG was re-launched on 9 June, following a call for nominations for members. The WG comprises 16 MOs, representing a wide disciplinary spread. Representatives include staff members of research funders involved in the development of DMPs as part of calls for proposals or project reporting procedures, and researchers from research performers with experience in dataset or database management. These will come together to realise the creation of RDMPs.
The group faces a considerable challenge, given that the type, size and significance of data varies widely from field to field, and that implementing data policies means making difficult choices with
regard to what data are preserved and how, as well as concerning access to data. For these reasons, a proper assessment of DMPs requires field-specific expertise.
The goal is to get scientific communities and, where applicable, their research infrastructures to issue standard RDMPs that can be be used by individual researchers to fill in the DMPs that will be required by funders as part of funding applications or project reporting. In this way, the scientific communities will be in the driving seat when it comes to defining what a correct DMP looks like in their field.
The use of RDMPs will reduce the burden on individual researchers and, at the same time, facilitate the task that funders have to ensure policy compliance. The WG plans to deliver the concept as well as two pilot RDMPs by March next year. ■
Participants at the Workshop ‘Data on Research Activity’ on 15 and 16 June in The Hague
SCIENCE EUROPE Member’s Newsletter | 4
SC IENCE EUROPE NE WS
More SE NewsNew Science Europe Survey Report on Research Integrity Practices in Science Europe Member OrganisationsOn 5 July, Science Europe will release its new Survey Report on ‘Research Integrity Practices in Science Europe Member Organisations’. This publication presents an overview of the research integrity practices in place at the European research funding and research performing organisations that make up Science Europe. It also makes a number of recommendations to improve policies, awareness, training and collaboration in this regard.
The SE Roadmap identifies research integrity as an important policy area for the SE MOs. It describes how enhanced research integrity policies can contribute to supporting borderless science, facilitating science, communicating science, and improving the scientific environment.
The publication will be officially launched at an event taking place at the SE Office in Brussels on 5 July from 18.30 to 20:00. This will provide an opportunity to network with members of the SE Working Group on Research Integrity, research integrity experts, and representatives of various Brussels based R&D liaison offices. Should you be interested in
attending this event, please register via http://scieur.org/integrity-launch ■
New SE Office StaffTwo new colleagues have started at the SE Office in June: Isoline Roger-Dalbert complements the Policy Affairs Team, and Lorna Stokes is Science Europe’s new Communications Manager.
Isoline is from France, where she studied humanities before pursuing a Research Masters in contemporary EU history and a Professional Masters in EU projects management. She has had seven years of experience in co-ordinating national funding systems for research, development and innovation, having worked with numerous national and regional funding agencies during that period. At Science Europe, she will mainly work on the topics of Open Access and Horizon 2020.
English-born Lorna Stokes replaces Elena Torta as Communications Manager. Having studied at the University of Bath and HEC Montreal, she is experienced at managing communications and communities surrounding associations, SMEs and the public sector, which she has done for the past eight years in both Europe and South
America. She will now focus on promoting Science Europe’s activities and positions to its audience, both within Brussels and outside. ■
Save the Date: Workshop on Post-doctoral Schemes and Intersectoral Mobility On 5 October, a one-day workshop will be held in Brussels, at which two major outputs of the Science Europe Working Group on Research Careers will be disseminated; both are survey reports which contain clear recommendations.
One output looks at post-doctoral schemes in Europe and contains a unique mapping of how research organisations deal with this crucial stage of researchers’ careers, with good practices and recommendations on how to provide the best possible support to researchers.
The other report focuses on measures that facilitate the mobility of researchers across different sectors of employment, and looks at a series of traditional and more innovative ways through which researchers are enabled to contribute to society outside academia. More details on the event will follow in due course. ■
Priorities of the Slovak EU PresidencyStarting on 1 July, Slovakia will assume the Presidency of the European Council for the first time. The Slovak Presidency will have five priorities: jobs, growth and competitiveness; opportunities for citizens; energy and climate policy; freedom, security and justice; and the global action of the Union. Slovakia will also present a proposal for the mid-term review of the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014–2020 (MFF), which will set the budget and structure for the rest of Horizon 2020.
The improvement of the framework conditions for research and innovation is one of the priorities for the Presidency. The aim will be to enhance the competitiveness of high-tech industry and the digital economy, while also concentrating on major societal challenges. Another priority is to widen participation in H2020, an important task to improve the success of H2020.
There will be a proposed Council Conclusion improving conditions for young researchers, which is a strong commitment of the Slovak
Presidency, and a declaration will be made on this topic on 18 July at an informal meeting of Ministers, following a consultation that has taken place with around 20 hand-picked young researchers.
Other important research-related events include a conference on widening participation in Brussels 18 October, a EURAXESS Careers conference on 9 November in Bratislava, and a conference on the role of social sciences and humanities in addressing global challenges on 15 and 16 November, also in Bratislava ■
Commission Reflections on the Next Framework Programme Shared at Amsterdam Seminar
On 8 June, at a seminar in Amsterdam entitled ‘Impact of EU-funded Research’, organised by the Network for Advancing and Evaluating the Societal Impact of Science (AESIS), Kurt Vandenberghe, Director for Policy Development and Co-ordination at the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Research and Innovation (R&I), shared his reflections on the development of the successor programme to Horizon 2020 .
Mr Vandenberghe highlighted that the design of H2020 was based on the EU’s Europe 2020 strategy, while the political context for the next EU Framework Programme (FP) for research and innovation will be influenced by Commission President Jean-Paul Juncker’s political priorities, the first one of which is ‘Jobs, Growth and Investment’. He argued that the main challenge for the EU relates to productivity and that R&I plays a key role in stimulating this. As a result, he noted that showing the impact of EU R&I funding on growth will be central to convincing the EU institutions to allocate resources to the next FP.
In addition, Mr Vandenberghe noted that in past FP negotiations, the Council of the European Union was convinced to agree on substantial funding by the inclusion one big novelty: the European Research Council (ERC) in FP7 and the Societal Challenges in H2020. He argued that a similar novelty will be needed in the run-up to the next FP.
In this context, Mr Vandenberghe held that in future FPs – outside of the ERC and the Future Emerging Technology (FET) initiatives –
scientific curiosity should not be deemed a sufficient condition to fund research; rather, the potential for providing solutions for society should always be the necessary condition. In past FPs and in H2020, it was noted, too many specific topics are covered, and too many of them are purely curiosity-driven.
Mr Vandenberghe noted that there is a great challenge in switching from a model that “makes many people happy” by providing many funding streams, to one that is not designed around existing research communities; he asked stakeholders for support in reflecting on how to address this transition.
Finally, Mr Vandenberghe called for a shift in rhetoric from ‘research funding’ to ‘research investment’, highlighting the importance of societal expectations of getting value for money.
Professor Sven Strafström, Director-General of the Swedish Research Council (VR), an SE MO, who was a panellist on the same session, pleaded for the Commission to not underestimate the importance of curiosity-driven funding in providing societal value. ■
New Avenues for Innovation and Research PoliciesFrom theoretical perspectives on innovation policies to case studies and findings about effective interactions between researchers and policy makers: various aspects of the interplay between research and innovation were discussed at the 2016 Annual Conference of the European Forum for Studies of Policies for Research and Innovation (EU-SPRI) organised by CIRCLE, from Lund University in Sweden, from 7 to 10 June.
The conference provided a platform for the analysis of R&I activities and the way public authorities and semi-public organisations influence the innovation debate and orient their actions based on both theoretical and empirical evidence. One of the main assumptions of the conference was the need to investigate innovation as an increasingly independent policy area, where new instruments and initiatives are being undertaken which push for a new understanding of, and approach towards, innovation-related challenges and expectations at local, regional, national and international levels.
Themes explored at the conference included knowledge foundations for research and innovation policies; the historical and empirical development of innovation as an independent policy area and its interactions with other crucial public policies; the research methods used to analyse and assess innovation; the governance of innovation as an ecosystem; innovation to address societal challenges through the angle of emerging topics; and the tension between a linear view of innovation and a systemic approach to it.
A few political messages came out of the three-day exchange: pressure on the need to look at innovation as a policy area in itself; innovation to be considered primarily as a socio-economic phenomenon, and not only a technological one; a need for the systemic approach to innovation to replace the linear one; the importance of all dimensions including governance, skills, talents, social engagement and social innovation; research as one of the key components to take into account in designing innovation policies; and the idea that econometrics should no longer be the leading approach to support evidence-based policy making, and that politicians need to broaden their view on innovation by relying on more interdisciplinarity. For more information on the conference, see http://www.euspri-circle2016.org/ ■
New European Commission Consortium and Conference on Personalised Medicine
At the European Commission’s Personalised Medicine Conference on 1 and 2 June, Commissioner Carlos Moedas announced a new initiative involving funding and policy making organisations from Europe and beyond, called the International Consortium for Personalised Medicine (IC PerMed), which is to be officially launched in late 2016.
EUROPE A N RESE A RCH NE WS
Personalised Medicine promises prevention and prediction of diseases, and earlier and safer treatment, and will change the approach to public health in the future. Together, the member organisations of IC PerMed will work to establish Europe as a global leader in personalised medicine research and to support its science base through a co-ordinated approach to research, providing evidence to demonstrate its benefit to citizens and healthcare systems.
Attracting over 600 participants, the conference covered the current challenges and state of the art in the area, in sessions dealing with empowerment, data, translational medicine, innovation, and shaping sustainable healthcare. Expert speakers highlighted how early dialogue between all players involved in the innovation ecosystem can help to get new treatments to the market faster. More information can be found at http://bit.ly/294cIXN ■
Commission Report on ‘Long-term Sustainability of Research Infrastructures’
In December 2015, the European Commission (EC) launched a targeted consultation on the long-term sustainability of Research Infrastructures (RIs). The objective was to gather views of stakeholders (ESFRI projects and delegations, ERA partners, and so on) on the aspects which need to be addressed to ensure the long-term sustainability of facilities.
Based on the EC analysis, some of the salient points that require further attention include the need to: increase the visibility of RIs and expand their services; tap into the innovation potential of RIs; increase the awareness of the importance of measuring socio-economic impact within the RI community; and increase operators’ and funders’ awareness of the importance of RIs being profitable.
These findings have now been published in an EC report, which can be found at http://bit.ly/293cWPs
In the coming months, the EC intends to develop, with ESFRI and relevant stakeholders, including Science Europe, an action plan to tackle some of the issues identified in the report. ■
More EU NewsHorizon 2020 Interim EvaluationScience Europe is preparing to give input to the Interim Evaluation of Horizon 2020, which will be carried out by the European Commission between the end of 2016 and the end of 2017. For SE, this evaluation has strategic significance, given that its outcomes will have a role in preparing the next Framework Programme.
The key steps of this evaluation will be a public consultation, which will open in October 2016 and run for three months, the establishment of a high-level group in December 2016, which will operate for seven months, a stakeholders’ conference in June 2017, and a Communication to the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union at the end of 2017. See also the Evaluation Roadmap at http://bit.ly/2927QSn
To prepare its input to the Interim Evaluation, SE launched an internal consultation about
key aspects of H2020, which was open between 20 May and 17 June. Based on the outcomes of this consultation, a draft consolidated position will be prepared and submitted to MOs for approval after the summer. The consolidated position will be used to respond to the public consultation, and for advocacy purposes in the run-up to the launch of the next Framework Programme. ■
Access and Benefit Sharing Guidance for the Animal Breeding Sector On June 14, the European Commission Directorate-General for Environment circulated a draft of the Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) guidance document for the animal breeding sector to EU Member States, the ABS Consultation Forum (of which Science Europe is a member), and sector-specific experts.
A document was previously developed (see the January 2016 SE Newsletter), to provide
general guidance on the provisions and implementation of EU Regulation 511/2014 on compliance measures for users of the Nagoya Protocol on ‘Access to Genetic Resources and Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization’.
The latest guidance document comprises: a description of the animal breeding sector; a description of the use of genetic resources in the sector, including other relevant legislation impacting the transfer of genetic resources; and examples of activities. Its main purpose is to arrive at a shared interpretation of the terms ‘utilisation’ and ‘research and development’ in relation to animal breeding. The draft can can be found at http://scieur.org/abs-draft and is available for comment until 7 July. Any MOs interested in commenting should contact the SE Office before that date.
For further information on this topic, see http://bit.ly/294GiRf ■
Calendar of MeetingsGeneral Assembly and Governing Board
29/09/16 Governing Board, in Brussels
18/11/16 General Assembly, in Brussels
Working Groups Meetings
05–06/07/16 WG Research Integrity,
in Brussels
06/06/07 WG Horizon 2020, in Brussels
Adapting to the Changing World through Science, Technology and InnovationOn 4 May, the European Parliament’s Science and Technology Options Assessment (STOA) Panel, chaired by MEP Paul Rübig, hosted a high-level conference ‘Adapting to the Changing World through Science, Technology and Innovation’. The conference brought together political, industrial, and academic leaders to strengthen co-operation between the Science and Technology in Society (STS) forum (http://www.stsforum.org/) and the EU.
The STS forum was launched in 2003 and aims to provide a new mechanism for open discussions on an informal basis, to build a network that explores the opportunities arising from science and technology, and to address how to remove barriers to using science and technology to solve the problems facing humankind.
Speakers, including Professor Michael Matlosz, SE President and President and CEO of the French National Research Agency (ANR), and Matthias Kleiner, President of the Leibniz Association, focused the i r contr ibut ions on strengthening co-operation in the face of common challenges confronting society and the capacity of science, technology, and innovation to provide resources and instruments for successfully tackling them. This was echoed in the conclusions of
the conference, which recognised the necessity for collaboration as a result of the complexity of today’s challenges. ■
Open Science Policy Platform High-level Advisory Group AnnouncedDuring the Competitiveness Council meeting on 27 May, the European Commissioner for Research Science and Innovation, Carlos Moedas announced the names of the new Open Science Policy Platform (OSPP) High-level Advisory Group (http://bit.ly/2975JCX). This Group comprises 25 high-level representatives from a broad constituency of European (open) science stakeholders. This includes Science Europe, which will be represented by Professor Matthias Kleiner, President of the Leibniz Association (Germany) and a member of the SE Governing Board.
Following its meeting, the Council issued a set of conclusions on Open Science (http://bit.ly/294GeRq). These were welcomed by Science Europe in a press release (http://bit.ly/294Gsb0), which also supported the Council’s caution regarding the expansion of loan-based financing. Among other things, the Council noted that the role of the OSPP is to support the “further development of European Open Science policy” and to promote “the uptake by stakeholders of best practices” on issues ranging from open access publishing and data reuse, to altmetrics and reward and evaluation systems. ■
TAFTIE Webinar on Gender Equality in Research FundingThe TAFTIE (the European Network of Innovation Agencies) Academy held a webinar on ’Gender Equality in Research Funding’ on 18 May. It featured contributions from Judith Raffelseder from the Austrian Federal Ministry of Science, Research and Economy; Stephanie Rammel, who is a gender expert in Horizon 2020; and Sabine Haubenwallner, Chair of the SE Working Group on Gender and Diversity Issues.
The first topic was the importance for the ERA of gender equality in research funding, including examples of how this priority is addressed in the Austrian ERA Roadmap, as well as which indicators were chosen to monitor changes. The implementation of gender equality in Horizon 2020 at different stages of the research and innovation cycle was another topic, and the presentation on this included a detailed description of where, how, and why it is necessary to integrate sex and gender analysis into research proposals, as well as an evaluation of the programme.
The way Science Europe deals with challenges related to gender issues in science and academia was also presented, with a description of the SE Working Group, its members, and the tasks of the group. More information is available at http://bit.ly/294iMPU, and a recording of the webinar at http://bit.ly/29eS1NP ■
