FS Fredrik Hamrin. Hej Fredrik Kan du göra ett ärende av detta? /Malin. Malin Larsson

Transcription

1 Fredrik Hamrin FS Från: Malin Larsson Skickat: den 27 januari :18 Till: Fredrik Hamrin Ämne: VB: Sweden Impact Award - Invitation and call for nominees Bifogade filer: Invitation Sweden Impact Award - Umeå University.pdf; Outline Sweden Impact Award.pdf; Nominee form.docx Hej Fredrik Kan du göra ett ärende av detta? /Malin Malin Larsson Rektors samordnare Planeringsenheten Umeå universitet SE UMEÅ Telefon +46 (0) Mobil: Från: Anika Duut van Goor [mailto:a.duutvangoor@aesisnet.com] Skickat: den 27 januari :24 Till: Malin Larsson <malin.larsson@umu.se> Kopia: Katarina Andersson <katarina.andersson@umu.se>; 'Lars Hultman' <Lars.Hultman@stratresearch.se>; 'Koenraad Debackere' <koenraad.debackere@kuleuven.be>; Thiebault Oudendijk <t.oudendijk@aesisnet.com> Ämne: Sweden Impact Award Invitation and call for nominees Dear Mr. Adolfsson, On behalf of Koenraad Debackere (Chair of the AESIS Network) and Lars Hultman (CEO of the Stiftelsen för Strategisk Forskning) it is my pleasure to send you the enclosed invitation and call for nominees for the Sweden Impact Award, to be presented at the international Impact of Science conference on the 12 th of June 2017 in Stockholm. For this award each university in Sweden is invited to nominate one research project per category, with a high level of visible societal impact. The winners will be selected by a jury of Swedish and international experts, and are invited to join the Impact of Science conference where they will be awarded 5,000. each. Additional information on the format of the award, as well as the conditions and important deadlines, can be found in the attached documents. In case of any questions, please feel free to contact me via the information given below. Yours sincerely, Anika S. Duut van Goor General Manager Mauritskade 5, 2514 HC, The Hague, The Netherlands T: +31 (0) E: a.duutvangoor@aesisnet.com Follow us on 1

2 Upcoming events: Spring Course: Evaluating and optimising regional impact of science 9 10 March 2017, Barcelona, Spain Webinar: The Interaction between world class science and societal impact 4 April 2017 Annual conference: The Impact of Science June 2017, Stockholm, Sweden Recent events: Winter course: Integrating societal impact in a research strategy November 2016, Copenhagen, Denmark Annual conference: The Impact of Science 9 10 June 2016, Amsterdam, the Netherlands Seminar: The Impact of EU Funded Research 8 June 2016, Amsterdam, the Netherlands Webinar More effective EU grant applications through societal impact 19 April

3 Umeå University Attn.: Mr. Adolfsson Subject: Invitation for Nominations Sweden Impact Award Dear Mr. Adolfsson, The Hague, 27 January 2017 Advisory board: Koenraad Debackere Luke Georghiou Barend van der Meulen Susan Renoe Toby Smith David Sweeney Pauline Tay Robert Tijssen John Walker It is our honour to hereby invite Umeå University to partake in the Sweden Impact Award, conference organised by the AESIS Network and organised in collaboration with key stakeholders in the Swedish infrastructure of scientific research. You are invited to nominate one research project for each of the four disciplines, to compete for the awards valued at a total of 20,000. The Awards will be handed out on 12 June 2017 by Helen Dannetun at the Impact of Science conference at the Stockholm City Conference Centre. Societal impact is becoming a standard element of the science system in most parts of the world and attempts are being made to demonstrate and advance this impact, not in the least in Sweden. The Sweden Impact Award has the aim to be instrumental in serving the development of standardised and measurable indicators for societal impact of science. In the appendix you may find many familiar names who are representing the Swedish Research Council, the Stiftelsen för Strategisk Forskning, Forte, Formas and the Kungliga Ingenjörsvetenskapsakademien. These organisations are also represented in the jury and are supported by an international group of experts from AESIS. Each university in Sweden is invited to nominate one research project per discipline, with a high level of visible societal impact, and which was conducted in the last twenty years. The disciplines are resp. physical science & engineering, medical & life science, social science, and arts & humanities. The research projects may submit themselves by filling in the attached documents and sending them to a.duutvangoor@aesisnet.com before 15 March All the projects which are selected in the first round will be asked to submit documented proof of their impact. The top 3 research projects per category will be cordially invited to the international Impact of Science conference on 12 June 2017, at which the winners will be announced. Please find a more detailed outline of the Sweden Impact Award attached to this , as well as the documents for submitting the research projects. If you have any questions regarding the award, please contact the general manager of AESIS, Anika S. Duut van Goor, via the address presented above, or phone Yours sincerely, AESIS Network Mauritskade HC The Hague The Netherlands T: info@aesisnet.com Koenraad Debackere Chair of the Advisory Board of AESIS Lars Hultman CEO at Stiftelsen för Strategisk Forskning AESIS Network is an trade name of ScienceWorks BV, Chamber of Commerce: VAT ScienceWorks BV: B01 Bank: ING Bank IBAN: NL81 INGB BIC: INGBNL2A

4 OUTLINE Sweden Impact Award to be presented at Impact of Science June 2017 Stockholm, Sweden Organised by Partners

5 AESIS Network Anika S. Duut van Goor, General Manager Thiebault Oudendijk, Project Manager Mauritskade HC The Hague Tel: a.duutvangoor@aesisnet.com t.oudendijk@aesisnet.com

6 OUTLINE FOR THE SWEDEN IMPACT AWARD BACKGROUND Since societal impact has become a standard task in most of the scientific world, a great deal of attention has been focused on how to demonstrate this impact. Accountability has led to the need of measurable indicators and preferably international standards. An award, organised by an international, independent organisation outside the science policy areas, can contribute to and support the development of such standardised and measurable indicators, by organising an award which rewards the synergy between world class research and societal impact. WHY SWEDEN The Impact of Science conference and Impact Award will be held in Sweden, because there is a political momentum in which impact evaluation is a main point of discussion. Many stakeholders are looking for methods to structure the landscape of impact of science. This context provides the perfect opportunity to organise the first Impact Award in Sweden by an international expert network: AESIS. ScienceWorks, the bureau that manages the AESIS Network, has experience with awarding science based manifestations in society on a national level in the United States, United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Sweden (see picture). Most entrepreneurial scientist of Sweden: winner Mathias Uhlen in 2009 (in the picture is Stefan Ståhl receiving the price in his stead) SWEDEN IMPACT AWARD AESIS started organising the Sweden Impact Award in The winner will be announced on 12 June 2017 in Stockholm, during the AESIS annual conference Impact of Science. There will be four categories and for every category the university can nominate one project: Physical sciences and Engineering Medical and Life sciences Social sciences Arts & Humanities In each of these categories a winner will be selected by a jury of Swedish and international experts in the field of societal impact of science. The winner will receive 5.000,- in prize money. The competition will allow projects conducted in the last 20 years (1996 to 2016). NOMINATION PROCEDURE The central management of all the main public research organisations in Sweden will be asked to nominate world class research projects with the highest impact, in each of the four categories for the Sweden Impact Award. Projects which have started in the past 20 years can be nominated. After all nominations have been received by AESIS (deadline 15 March), top 5 s will be selected based on a quantitative analysis of the submitted information. The projects in this shortlist will be asked to submit evidence of the impact they claimed on their form. Based on the submitted information and the evidence put forward the jury will select a winner.

7 INDICATORS The Research Excellence Framework (REF) process in the UK has set a new international standard on measuring societal impact. Therefore the AESIS award selection procedure will include the combination of qualitative and quantitative criteria conceptualised by the REF to evaluate impact. Research projects will be awarded, not researchers or institutes. There will be a clear partition between quantitative and qualitative indicators, which will determine the winner in each of the four categories of the award. In order to become influential, the winner should not only have great impact on society, but should also have a good scientific reputation. Please see the Appendices for the criteria per discipline. JURY MEMBERS Chairs per category Category Medical & Life Sciences Social Sciences Chair : Peter Allebeck, Secretary General at Forte : Erik Roos, Senior Analyst at Formas Physical Sciences & Engineering : Christina Ullenius, Chair Education & Research Policy at IVA Arts & Humanities : To be decided in consultation with the Swedish research council General members of the jury Name David Sweeney Susan Renoe Lars Hultman Koenraad Debackere Sven Stafström / Kerstin Sahlin (tbc) Organisation : Director (Research, Education and Knowledge Exchange) at the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) and Advisory Board member of the AESIS network : Director of the Broader Impacts Network, USA of the University of Missouri and Advisory Board member of the AESIS network : Chief Executive Officer at Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research (SSF) : General Manager K.U. Leuven, Belgium and Chair of the Advisory Board of the AESIS network : Director General of the Swedish Research Council / Secretary General of Humanities and Social Sciences at the Swedish Research Council

8 TIMELINE October and November 2016 Criteria AESIS together with experts in the Swedish research community will develop the criteria with which the projects will be evaluated. Approaching and confirming jury members In order to form a high quality jury, international and Swedish experts in the field of policy and science will be approached by AESIS to be a member of the jury. December 2016 Finalising the format and indicators AESIS, together with the members of the Jury, will decide on the final format and indicators of the award January 2017 Nomination procedure AESIS, together with the Chairs of the Jury and conference, will address the central management for nominations from all main public research organisations in Sweden. March 15, 2017 Nomination deadline March-April 2017 Making a shortlist Nominations are processed by AESIS and analysed put forward a preliminary ranking of projects. April 15, 2017 The shortlist (top 5) will be announced Proof of impact will be asked from the projects that made it to the shortlist. May 1, 2017 Proof of Impact deadline May 2017 Selecting the winners Based on the filled out form and submitted evidence the jury will announce a top 3 from the shortlist. June 12, 2017 Award ceremony AESIS will organise a festive award ceremony during the conference Impact of Science 2017, representatives from the top 3 research projects per discipline are cordially invited to the ceremony and conference

9 Impact Criteria for Physical sciences & Engineering Max. points Research quality 200 Number of citations in scientific publications H-index Scientific awards received Internal reviews Funding 200 Funding from users of the research project; government Funding from users of the research project; semi-government Funding from users of the research project; private Quantitative This is an exemplary list, the list is neither exhaustive nor exclusive. Other ways of impact may be described. Activity created leading to new jobs Generated a new company or NGO turnover created Income from intellectual property rights Impact awards received Public engaged with research and expertise; number of people engaged Operations of a business or public service changed to achieve green objectives; Project enhanced performance of business; production increase or waste decrease Policy or policy debate been influenced; governmental level, citations in legislative documents or parliamentary documents Influenced school or HEI curriculum or syllabus other than where the project was conducted Citations in popular and professional literature Joint publications with experts in the field, excluding scientific publications New drug, treatment, diagnostic or medical technology developed or existing one lowered in cost; number of patients life s improved and by how much or money saved Other quantitative proofs of impact on society Qualitative This is an exemplary list, the list is neither exhaustive nor exclusive. Other ways of impact may be described. Design of new products and services New sector or activity created or planned Public awareness, attitude or understanding of risks improved Business sector adopts new technology Support for development 'small scale' technologies improved Quality or productivity of professional or public service improved Public health or quality of life improved NGO or charitable organisation influenced Project lowered risks to the security of nation states Decisions of health services informed User experience has improved Changes to professional or technology standards, guidelines or training informed Professional bodies and learned societies used research Expert and legal work or forensic methods were informed Project has improved the (natural) environment Management or conservation of natural resources influenced Management of environmental risk or hazard changed Changes in environmental or architectural design standards or general practice Influence of professional practice or codes Other qualitative proofs of impact on society

10 Impact Criteria for Medical & Life Sciences Max. points Research quality 200 Number of citations in scientific publications H-index Scientific awards received Internal reviews Funding 200 Funding from users of the research project; government Funding from users of the research project; semi-government Funding from users of the research project; private Quantitative This is an exemplary list, the list is neither exhaustive nor exclusive. Other ways of impact may be described. Activity created leading to new jobs Generated a new company or NGO turnover created Income from intellectual property rights Public engaged with research and expertise; number of people engaged Impact awards received Operations of a business or public service changed to achieve green objectives; Project enhanced performance of business; production increase or waste decrease Policy or policy debate been influenced; governmental level, citations in legislative documents or parliamentary documents Influenced school or HEI curriculum or syllabus other than where the project was conducted Citations in popular and professional literature Joint publications with experts in the field, excluding scientific publications New drug, treatment, diagnostic or medical technology developed or existing one lowered in cost; number of patients life s improved and by how much or money saved Other quantitative proofs of impact on society Qualitative This is an exemplary list, the list is neither exhaustive nor exclusive. Other ways of impact may be described. Design of new products and services New sector or activity created or planned Business sector adopts new technology Support for development 'small scale' technologies improved Public awareness, attitude or understanding of risks improved Quality or productivity of professional or public service improved Public health or quality of life improved Control of the disease was changed (medically) Animal health and welfare enhanced Decisions of health services informed User experience has improved Changes to professional or medical standards, guidelines or training informed Professional bodies and learned societies used research Professional research capabilities improved Project has improved the (natural) environment Management or conservation of natural resources influenced Management of environmental risk or hazard changed Changes in environmental or architectural design standards or general practice Influence of professional practice or codes Other qualitative proofs of impact on society

11 Impact Criteria for Social sciences Max. points Research quality 200 Number of citations in scientific publications H-index Scientific awards received Internal reviews Funding 200 Funding from users of the research project; government Funding from users of the research project; semi-government Funding from users of the research project; private Quantitative This is an exemplary list, the list is neither exhaustive nor exclusive. Other ways of impact may be described. Activity created leading to new jobs and turnover Generated a new company or NGO turnover created Income from intellectual property rights Impact awards received Public engaged with research and expertise; number of people engaged Operations of a business or public service changed to achieve green objectives; Project enhanced performance of business; production increase or waste decrease Policy or policy debate been influenced; governmental level, citations in legislative documents or parliamentary documents Influenced school or HEI curriculum or syllabus other than where the project was conducted Citations in popular and professional literature Joint publications with experts in the field, excluding scientific publications Other quantitative proofs of impact on society Qualitative This is an exemplary list, the list is neither exhaustive nor exclusive. Other ways of impact may be described. Design of new products and services or new ways of thinking New sector or activity created or planned Public awareness, attitude or understanding of risks improved Impact on democratic participation Improved social, cultural and environmental sustainability Understanding, developing and adopting alternative economic models NGO, charitable or commercial organisation influenced Production of cultural artefacts Improved access to justice and other opportunities Improved access to public services Social welfare, equality or social inclusion improved Improvements to legal frameworks, regulatory environment or governance of business entities Influential contributions to campaigns for social, economic, political or legal change Research into minorities helping governments, NGOs etc. to respond to their needs Helping professionals and organisations adapt to changing cultural values Project lowered risks to the security of nation states Legislative change, development of legal principle or effect on legal practice Health services were improved Development of ethical standards Changes to professional standards, guidelines or training informed Professional bodies and learned societies used research Professional research capabilities improved Influence on professional practice or codes Practitioner debate informed or stimulated Project challenged conventional wisdom, stimulating debate among stakeholders Project has improved the (natural) environment Management or conservation of natural resources influenced Management of environmental risk or hazard changed Other qualitative proofs of impact on society

12 Impact Criteria for Arts & Humanities Max. points Research quality 200 Number of citations in scientific publications H-index Scientific awards received Internal reviews Funding 200 Funding from users of the research project; government Funding from users of the research project; semi-government Funding from users of the research project; private Quantitative This is an exemplary list, the list is neither exhaustive nor exclusive. Other ways of impact may be described. Activity created leading to new jobs Generated a new company or NGO turnover created Income from intellectual property rights Impact awards received Public engaged with research and expertise; number of people engaged Project enhanced performance of business; production increase or waste decrease Policy or policy debate been influenced; governmental level, citations in legislative documents or parliamentary documents Influenced school or HEI curriculum or syllabus other than where the project was conducted Citations in popular and professional literature Joint publications with experts in the field, excluding scientific publications Other quantitative proofs of impact on society Qualitative This is an exemplary list, the list is neither exhaustive nor exclusive. Other ways of impact may be described. Design of new products and services or new ways of thinking New sector or activity created or planned Public awareness, attitude or understanding of risks improved Impact on democratic participation Quality or productivity of professional service improved Improved social, cultural and environmental sustainability Understanding, developing and adopting alternative economic models NGO, charitable or commercial organisation influenced Informing or influencing the development of export systems Heritage preservation, conservation and presentation enhanced Developing stimuli to tourism and contributing to the quality of tourism Contributing to processes of commemoration, memorialisation and reconciliation Production of cultural artefacts Creating, inspiring or supporting new forms of expression (like artistic, literary etc.) Contributing to continuing personal and professional development Improved access to justice, health services and other opportunities Social welfare, equality or social inclusion improved Improvements to legal frameworks, regulatory environment or governance of business entities Influential contributions to campaigns for social, economic, political or legal change Research into minorities helping governments, NGOs etc. to respond to their needs Influencing the methods, ideas or ethics of a profession Legislative change, development of legal principle or effect on legal practice Development of ethical standards Changes to professional standards, guidelines or training informed Professional bodies and learned societies used research Professional research capabilities improved Influence on professional practice or codes Practitioner debate informed or stimulated Project challenged conventional wisdom, stimulating debate among stakeholders Project has improved the (natural) environment Other qualitative proofs of impact on society

13 Award application form Sweden Impact Award 2017 Nomination category (Check one): Physical sciences & Engineering Medical & Life sciences Social sciences Arts & Humanities Nominee Application form Discipline: Project title: Description (Max. 200 words): University:

14 Award application form Sweden Impact Award 2017 Representative(s) project: Name: Tel nr: Research Quality (20%): H-Index (Project manager of the nominated research project): Scientific awards received (name of the award and the awarding organisation):

15 Award application form Sweden Impact Award 2017 Internal reviews of the research group: Funding (20%): Please indicate if external parties outside the science funding system have contributed to the funding of your project. Please indicate the amount and the percentage this amount covered of the total project costs. Government Amount: Percentage: Semi-government Amount: Percentage: Private Amount: Percentage:

16 Award application form Sweden Impact Award 2017 Quantitative (30%): (Please check the exemplary list in the outline for the Sweden Impact Award for examples.)

17 Award application form Sweden Impact Award 2017 Qualitative (30%): (Please check the exemplary list in the outline for the Sweden Impact Award for examples.) Thank you for your application! If there are questions or difficulties filling in this form, please contact: Anika S. Duut van Goor +31 (0)