cesab_ijscm_day 1

The CEntre for the SynthesisThe CEntre for the Synthesisand Analysis of Biodiversityand Analysis of Biodiversity

International Joint Synthesis Center meetingInternational Joint Synthesis Center meetingAix-en-Provence, 9-11October 2013Aix-en-Provence, 9-11October 2013

A place and timeless time……to foster research on biodiversity

Outline of the talk

• The approach taken• Strengths, weaknesses and legacy• Role of CESAB in fostering new science and

discoveries• Summary: CESAB in a few figures• Expectations from the meeting

Why the approach : promote synthesis and data (re)analysis activities

Advancing knowledge on biodiversityrequires to integrate scattered data

from different disciplines

Analysis and synthesisbased on combination and

reuse of scattered data

Many data are underused because :• obtained during short term (3/4 years) projects

• not made available (many sociological and technical reasons)

« Big data » and globaldata bases

Syntheses and theoretical development of ideas and concepts

Why the approach : promote synthesis and data (re)analysis activities

Many data are underused because :• obtained during short term (3/4 years) projects

• not made available (many sociological and technical reasons)

Advancing knowledge on biodiversityrequires to integrate scattered data

from different disciplines

Advancing knowledge on biodiversityrequires to integrate scattered data

from different disciplines

Advancing knowledge on biodiversityrequires to integrate scattered data

from different disciplines

Why the approach : promote synthesis and data (re)analysis activities

Analysis and synthesisbased on combination and

reuse of scattered data

Many data are underused because :• obtained during short term (3/4 years) projects

• not made available (many sociological and technical reasons)

Advancing knowledge on biodiversityrequires to integrate scattered data

from different disciplines

Advancing knowledge on biodiversityrequires to integrate scattered data

from different disciplines

Why the approach : promote synthesis and data (re)analysis activities

Analysis and synthesisbased on combination and

reuse of scattered data

Many data are underused because :• obtained during short term (3/4 years) projects

• not made available (many sociological and technical reasons)

Syntheses and theoretical development of ideas and concepts

Advancing knowledge on biodiversityrequires to integrate scattered data

from different disciplines

Why the approach : promote synthesis and data (re)analysis activities

Advancing knowledge on biodiversityrequires to integrate scattered data

from different disciplines

Analysis and synthesisbased on combination and

reuse of scattered data

Many data are underused because :• obtained during short term (3/4 years) projects

• not made available (many sociological and technical reasons)

Syntheses and theoretical development of ideas and concepts

Why the approach : promote synthesis and data (re)analysis activities

Advancing knowledge on biodiversityrequires to integrate scattered data

from different disciplines

Analysis and synthesisbased on combination and

reuse of scattered data

Many data are underused because :• obtained during short term (3/4 years) projects

• not made available (many sociological and technical reasons)

« Big data » and globaldata bases

Syntheses and theoretical development of ideas and concepts

The approach in practice:basic ideas

• Offer a place to interact face to faceOffer a place to interact face to face: key for exchanges (ideas, data, analysis) and finalization of work (cf. Menzies & Newson 2007, Time & Society 16: 83)

The approach in practice:basic ideas

• Offer a place to interact face to faceOffer a place to interact face to face: key for exchanges (ideas, data, analysis) and finalization of work (cf. Menzies & Newson 2007, Time & Society 16: 83)

• Offer periods of « timeless time »:Offer periods of « timeless time »:i.e. internally motivated use of time in which clock time loses its significance. In this sense timeless time involves transcending time and one’s self and becoming entirely immersed in the task at hand (as opposed to scheduled time imposed by external necessities)(cf. Ylijoki & Mäntylä 2003, Time & Society 12: 55)

The approach in practice: working groups

• 3 to 4 working groups selected every year since 2010 in response to the 3 to 4 working groups selected every year since 2010 in response to the yearly call for proposals: funded for 3 yearsyearly call for proposals: funded for 3 years

• Principal investigator should belong to a French research organisation or Principal investigator should belong to a French research organisation or university (possibility of co-PI); one post-doc for each groupuniversity (possibility of co-PI); one post-doc for each group

• 10 - 12 groups (10-14 people each) work simultaneously : constant flux of 10 - 12 groups (10-14 people each) work simultaneously : constant flux of approximately 200 people approximately 200 people per per year at the Centeryear at the Center

• Groups meet 2 to 3 times Groups meet 2 to 3 times perper year during intensive working sessions (5 to year during intensive working sessions (5 to 8 days) in CESAB premises8 days) in CESAB premises

=> work – i.e. share, analyze, discuss, write… - collectively (with minimum interruption and external disturbances…)

key role of post-doc between sessions (development of BD, statistical analyses, links among participants, etc)

The approach in practice: working groups

• 3 to 4 working groups selected every year since 2010 in response to the 3 to 4 working groups selected every year since 2010 in response to the yearly call for proposals: funded for 3 yearsyearly call for proposals: funded for 3 years

• Principal investigator should belong to a French research organisation or Principal investigator should belong to a French research organisation or university (possibility of co-PI); one post-doc for each groupuniversity (possibility of co-PI); one post-doc for each group

• 10 - 12 groups (10-14 people each) work simultaneously : constant flux of 10 - 12 groups (10-14 people each) work simultaneously : constant flux of approximately 200 people approximately 200 people per per year at the Centeryear at the Center

• Groups meet 2 to 3 times Groups meet 2 to 3 times perper year during intensive working sessions (5 to year during intensive working sessions (5 to 8 days) in CESAB premises8 days) in CESAB premises

=> work – i.e. share, analyze, discuss, write… - collectively (with minimum interruption and external disturbances…)

The approach in practice: working groups

• 3 to 4 working groups selected every year since 2010 in response to the 3 to 4 working groups selected every year since 2010 in response to the yearly call for proposals: funded for 3 yearsyearly call for proposals: funded for 3 years

• Principal investigator should belong to a French research organisation or Principal investigator should belong to a French research organisation or university (possibility of co-PI); one post-doc for each groupuniversity (possibility of co-PI); one post-doc for each group

• 10 - 12 groups (10-14 people each) work simultaneously : constant flux of 10 - 12 groups (10-14 people each) work simultaneously : constant flux of approximately 200 people approximately 200 people per per year at the Centeryear at the Center

• Groups meet 2 to 3 times Groups meet 2 to 3 times perper year during intensive working sessions (5 to year during intensive working sessions (5 to 8 days) in CESAB premises8 days) in CESAB premises

=> work – i.e. share, analyze, discuss, write… - collectively (with minimum interruption and external disturbances…)

key role of post-doc between sessions (development of BD, statistical analyses, links among participants, etc)

Working groups selectedin response to calls

Up to now, calls are openopen: « The members of CESAB groupsshare expertise and available data to address a limited numberof specific questions relevant to a wide range of biodiversityissues at any scale, spatial and temporal. »

Year

2010 2011 2012

Nu

mb

er o

f pro

ject

s

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Projects resubmittedNew projects

Working groups selectedin response to calls

Up to now, calls are openopen: « The members of CESAB groupsshare expertise and available data to address a limited numberof specific questions relevant to a wide range of biodiversityissues at any scale, spatial and temporal. »

Year

2010 2011 2012

Nu

mb

er o

f pro

ject

s

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Projects resubmittedNew projects

4 (23%)4 (23%) 4 (17%)4 (17%) 3 (10%)3 (10%)

Working groups selectedin response to calls

Up to now, calls are openopen: « The members of CESAB groupsshare expertise and available data to address a limited numberof specific questions relevant to a wide range of biodiversityissues at any scale, spatial and temporal. »

Year

2010 2011 2012

Nu

mb

er o

f pro

ject

s

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Projects resubmittedNew projects

4 (23%)4 (23%) 4 (17%)4 (17%) 3 (10%)3 (10%)

Working groups selectedin response to calls

Approximately halfof the participatingteams are basedoutside France

Up to now, calls are openopen: « The members of CESAB groupsshare expertise and available data to address a limited numberof specific questions relevant to a wide range of biodiversityissues at any scale, spatial and temporal. »

Evaluation: CS&Oand referees

• CESAB Scientific and CESAB Scientific and Orientation Committee Orientation Committee (20 scientists):(20 scientists):– establishes and revises establishes and revises

the text of the callthe text of the call– takes in charge the takes in charge the

reviewing processreviewing process

• External reviewersExternal reviewers

Evaluation: CS&Oand referees

• CESAB Scientific and CESAB Scientific and Orientation Committee Orientation Committee (20 scientists):(20 scientists):– establishes and revises establishes and revises

the text of the callthe text of the call– takes in charge the takes in charge the

reviewing processreviewing process

• External reviewersExternal reviewers

2.8/proj 2.1/proj 2.8/proj

32%

68%

73%

27%

84%

16%

The approach in practice: logisticsand support by the CESAB team

• dedicated premises• travel, accomodation, conventions…• local trips (CESAB cars), agreements with hotels,

restaurants (city and Campus de l’Arbois)• technical facilities: servers – FTP, DB -, wiki,

visioconference• communication: leaflets, web page on CESAB site,

announcements … • organization of scientific conferences when on

site

Strengths

• A motivated, dedicated team

A motivated team

Eric GarnierEric GarnierDirectorDirector

Claire SalomonClaire SalomonAssociate-directorAssociate-director

Bruno FadyBruno FadyScientific officerScientific officer

Magali GranaMagali GranaLogisticsLogistics

Baptiste LaporteBaptiste LaporteIT/Data basesIT/Data bases

Elisabeth PaymalElisabeth PaymalCommunicationCommunication

Strengths

• A motivated, dedicated team • A strong impulse and support from FRB: budget,

communication, visibility, networking…• A strong support from the Founding Members of FRB (major

French research organizations) and Ministry for Research• Significant support from local and regional political authorities• Relatively high funding of projects (private funds on some of

the projects)

Strengths

• A motivated, dedicated team • A strong impulse and support from FRB: budget,

communication, visibility, networking…• A strong support from the Founding Members of FRB (major

French research organizations) and Ministry for Research• Significant support from local and regional political authorities• Relatively high funding of projects (private funds on some of

the projects)• A permanent and attractive infrastructure : premises, support

to working groups, IT facilities, interactions with local academic partners, etc.

Strengths

• A motivated, dedicated team • A strong impulse and support from FRB: budget,

communication, visibility, networking…• A strong support from the Founding Members of FRB (major

French research organizations) and Ministry for Research• Significant support from local and regional political authorities• Relatively high funding of projects (private funds on some of

the projects)• A permanent and attractive infrastructure : premises, support

to working groups, IT facilities, interactions with local academic partners, etc.

• A clear interest from the French scientific community for this (relatively) new way of doing research

• Networking in the biodiversity/data French and international communities

Weaknesses

• Strongly dependent on the functioning and budget of FRB: the launch of each call is submitted to the FRB Management Board (might not be launched each year)

• Constraints on the lower limit for external sources of funding (ideally: 1/3 external funding): impacts the final selection of funded projects

Weaknesses

• Strongly dependent on the functioning and budget of FRB: the launch of each call is submitted to the FRB Management Board (might not be launched each year)

• Constraints on the lower limit for external sources of funding (ideally: 1/3 external funding): impacts the final selection of funded projects

• Reduced staff (one of each! and e.g. lack of statistical support to groups; logistical aspects)

Weaknesses

• Strongly dependent on the functioning and budget of FRB: the launch of each call is submitted to the FRB Management Board (might not be launched each year)

• Constraints on the lower limit for external sources of funding (ideally: 1/3 external funding): impacts the final selection of funded projects

• Reduced staff (one of each! and e.g. lack of statistical support to groups; logistical aspects)

• Only one program: funds only groups (no sabbatical, no post-docs outside the groups) => intermittent scientific presence at the Centre

Expected legacy(young centre!)

• Advance significantly knowledge in the field of biodiversity

• Promote science as:– a cooperative rather than a competitive process– a process of knowledge creation rather than knowledge

production (quality over quantity): relates to « timeless time »

• Promote synthesis as a perennial means of conducting research

• Capacity building and networking in the French scientific community working on biodiversity issues

• Contribute to the establishment of long term relationships between the French scientific community and international partners in the field of biodiversity

Fostering new scienceand discoveries

• Working groups:– Creation of knowledge– Stimulate discussions and thinking among groups

Fostering new scienceand discoveries

• Working groups:– Creation of knowledge– Stimulate discussions and thinking among groups

• CESAB team to catalyse scientific advances in biodiversity by :– Improving and diffuse (mostly data) standards (metadata,

thesaurii, ontologies) for research– Promoting interoperability of data (interactions and synergies

with other organizations: GBIF, Ecoscope, EU-BON…)

Fostering new scienceand discoveries

• Working groups:– Creation of knowledge– Stimulate discussions and thinking among groups

• CESAB team to catalyse scientific advances in biodiversity by :– Improving and diffuse (mostly data) standards (metadata,

thesaurii, ontologies) for research– Promoting interoperability of data (interactions and synergies

with other organizations: GBIF, Ecoscope, EU-BON…)

• Diffusion of knowledge (workshops, working groups):– Data management (January 2014), meta-analyses (May 2014),

interoperability (French DB network: first meeting in December 2013)

CESAB in a few figuresFigure Item

2010 Launching by the Foundation for Research on Biodiversity

3.6 FTE FRB: 2.8; CNRS: 0.5; INRA: 0.3

440 m2 Surface area of CESAB premises (7 meeting rooms)

43°29’30’’N, 5°20’10’’ E

Mediterranean France, Aix-Marseille urban network (> 1.5 million people), cultural and biodiversity hotspot

1 Call for proposal each year: 2010, 2011 and 2012

10 Projects funded since 2010

3 years Duration of funded projects

1 Post doctoral researcher for each project

180 to 200 k€ Direct cost of a project (excluding salaries of WG members and functioning of FRB)

330 to 350 k€ Full cost of a project (excluding salaries of WG members)

1 350 k€ Contribution of external partners since launching of CESAB (investment, functioning of CESAB, project funding)

Expectations from the meeting

• Better overview of the functioning of synthesis centers over the world

• Successes and failures• Ideas for future directions• Collaboration among centres: avoid

duplications and identify synergies• For European-based centres: discuss the

possibility to implement a European infrastructure (Horizon 2020)

Thank you for your attention

ANY QUESTIONS ?