Trust Researchers A declaration to the attention of the | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HomeDeclarationBackgroundSign upWho has signed?Media CornerWho we areLogin | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Signatures including commentsRefine your search Show all comments (sorted by date) Show all comments (sorted by length) Show regional comments: Comments from Switzerland156 comments. (Note: Some comments are not made public accessible.) 16 Feb 16:49 Switzerland ABCD Technology Sarl Giacomo Benvenuti It is quite a task for a small company to keep up with all this burocracy stuff. 4 Mar 20:59 Switzerland AGRIDEA Dominique Barjolle As participant and coordinator of several EU-projects, I convince that participating in a EU- project is always a great experience, but also that financing and reporting have been always more complicated with the time. With the time, participating in EU-projects becomes an increasing must, esp. in terms of funding possibilities, but at the other hand, we are less motivated due to the increasing time we have to devote to administrative burdens like time reports or financial issues (to understand the differences between the costs models, to recrute a LEAR, and so on). As a matter of fact, new actors have appeared (private consultants) who offer researchers to manage the EU-programme. Does it make sense to spend more money to manage project than to do research ? 9 Mar 18:20 Switzerland Agroscope ACW Lukas Bertschinger Administrative burdons are far to heavy for small SMEs to participate. The reporting procedures are not focused and standardised enough and require to much unfocused paper. The planning and reporting procedures are based on too many ifs and whens causing extensive wording and justifications. 11 Mar 08:57 Switzerland Agroscope Changins-Waedenswil Research Station ACW Juerg E. Frey The administrative requirements of EU projects (and others!) have now reached a level where expert monitoring in administration is a prerequisite. This complicates the process to a degree where many qualified researchers shy away from leading such a project. 5 Mar 03:53 Switzerland Albert Einstein Center for fundamental physics, ITP, University of Bern Peter Minkowski My wish and hope is, that the main criterion in evaluating a research project be scientific merit of those proposing it. No burocratic unnecessary burdens , upon acceptation of funding support in such projects, should be avoided or limited to what is strictly indispensible. 27 Feb 12:16 Switzerland Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Dept. of Informatics, University of Zurich Rolf Pfeifer The EU is a fantastic funding source and has great visionary programs. However, administrative efforts have increased dramatically in recent years. Rather than being able to spend their time on what they can do best, research and development, researchers are forced to perform time-consuming and tedious tasks that have no relation to their talents and skills. 17 Feb 15:24 Switzerland Bern University of Applied Sciences Michael Kaschesky We receive advertising from obscure consultancies on how to improve chances in FP7. If form wins over substance, than research in Europe is doomed. The United States of America will continue to attract the highest caliber of excellence in research. For Europe to become competitive, substance must win over form. 4 Mar 07:55 Switzerland BG Consulting Engineers Pierre Krummenacher Excellent undertaking ! At present, being compliant with complex rules and procedures seems to be more important than the R&D&D actual results. The administrative burden being so high, opportunities of reorienting a R&D&D activity in the course of a project to improve its efficiency are overlooked, 3 Mar 13:03 Switzerland Biozentrum Stephan Grzesiek There are good examples of science funding with lean bureaucracy such as the the Swiss National Science Foundation and the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft. It escapes me why European science funding cannot be tailored according to such proven models. 3 Mar 16:29 Switzerland Biozentrum Yves Barde I am shocked by the development of an industry based on the idea of helping researchers to cope with the often unnecessary bureaucracy linked with EU grants –what a waste of money! Too bad because otherwise I have become a strong adept of EU grants not least because they help exposing our students to different cultures and ways of doing science. 5 Mar 12:36 Switzerland Biozentrum of the University of Basel Michael Hall The so far relatively streamlined and new ERC system should not suffer the same fate as the Framework Program. Administration should be kept under control. 4 Mar 17:34 Switzerland Biozentrum, University of Basel Ueli Aebi Promote innovative research by minimizing burocrathy 4 Mar 10:43 Switzerland BUDLIGER-Consultant Jean-Pierre BUDLIGER FP-7 became hopelessly complicated, particularly for SME and independent Researchers. The huge programs with some 20, or even 50 participating companies ask for lobbying actions, tailored to the desires of large companies. The substantial budgets allocated e.g. for CCS (carbon capture and storage), hydrogen economy, fuel cells are appealing these large groups, but disproportionate to the possible gain which may be expected for long from these technologies and outside of the primary goal of finding means for reducing our (fossil fuel) energy consumption. 4 Mar 08:40 Switzerland Centre for Palliative Care, Cantonal Hospital Steffen Eychmueller Grant writing as it is now is only possible with professional grant writers which risks to dilute the scientific intentions of our international research group. In addition it is time consuming. 31 Mar 13:25 Switzerland Collegium Basilea Graham Holt Terser language and more emphasis on research objectives rather than impact and programme details would help. 4 Mar 11:32 Switzerland Department of Biochemistry University of Lausanne Jean-Pierre MACH The FP7 research calls are definitely too narrowly defined to fit and impose very restricted research projects. I suspect that the calls are written by potential candidates for answering these calls. Thus, this represents a possible conflict of interest. 6 Aug 11:48 Switzerland Department of Paediatrics, Division of Paediatric Pulmonology, University of Bern Oliver Fuchs Thank you very much for this initiative. I totally agree. Good luck to us all. 8 Mar 14:57 Switzerland Department of Urology and Department of Clinical Research, University of Bern Marco Cecchini The budget for administration should not exceed the budget for research ... ! 15 Mar 10:47 Switzerland Dept. of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, University of Zurich Susanne Walitza Dear Madam, dear Sir, I agree that the administrative works at the time now are too complicated and take a lot of time. Sincerely yours, Prof. Dr. Susanne Walitza 3 Mar 12:34 Switzerland Eawag Marc Suter streamlining administrative requirements in favor of time to actually do the research has to be high priority! 5 Mar 06:51 Switzerland EAWAG Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology jukka jokela It is very timely to simplify the administration related to EU research funding. I warmly welcome this initiative. 11 Feb 16:05 Switzerland Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne Jacques Lemaitre The main selection criteria of European projects should be the scientific quality of the proposals and the competence of the partners. 2 Apr 17:11 Switzerland Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne Theo Lasser Its really time to return to research and awayfrom administrative burdens. I hope it becomes true with a mutual trustworthiness amond the acaemic partners and beyond. 30 Apr 09:45 Switzerland Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne Jean-Michel Giovannoni To collaborate at the European scale is certainly complexe. However some simplifications might be possible 21 May 09:54 Switzerland Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne Pénélope Leyland Whereas the forms A3 etc are relatively simple to perform, understand and undertake, the auditing process of at least FP6 relatively straightforward also , the constraints of management of proposals (now become a necessary prerequisite to obtain success in a proposal), especially when this is undertaken by a specific management partner, leads to tedious and conflicting with science research and technology advancements, leaving less and less time to do the actual work. Also the multiplication of meetings such as management meetings, steering committee meetings which are conflicting with the scientific interest of just getting on to do the job as defined in the Part B DoW, to do research and to do technological advancements that are the main goal (or should be) of EC projects. Too much time, effort and manpower is taken to just do management, of which 90 % is not in the context of the work programme as submitted originally to the commission. This is greatly due to this multiplication of meetings and paperwork that these management and non scientific activities engender. The experience that I have encountered in EC projects is that when the management is performed by the SCIENTIFIC co-ordinator, especially in the case of Industrially orientated projects with large budgets, the whole process is transparent simple and smooth. Management issues are discussed internally and the conclusions and questions proposed periodically to the partners at the end of one of the main technical meetings. The partners hence have to all do their own bookeeping and are responsabilised in this way, the co-ordinator has to encounter for internal man-power to deal with this, but usually the process is smooth and efficient without hindering the scientific interest of the projects. Also in research projects, the presence of a purely management partner can even be nuisable to the advancement of research - partners may find better things that are not in the DoW - there are delays and advances etc..the management partner does not comply with such flexibility and clashes can occur. There are also experiences that can be negative in Research projects when the co.ordinator is the manager and does not hold the partners to a common line and has management difficulties, in these cases a management partner can be very useful. A just equilibrium is to be found between the necessity of a management team and the relative weight of management activities in EC projects which should be lightened and simplified . This could be done by defining a common management action plan that is common to all projects, with standard forms for all. This would allow the co-ordinator to have more control on a mangement partner who would have a more bookkeeping scientific secretary role. 15 Feb 23:55 Switzerland Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL) Thomas Maeder More time in the lab and less in the office cannot hurt... 30 Mar 23:17 Switzerland Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL) Andrzej Kulik i) strictly limit number of pages - let start with ONE page A4 ii) financial support - not stiff contract iii) instructions and rules - as well one page A4 iv) experts should come to the lab and discuss each project at least one hour. It may eliminate pseudo-experts of EU. 4 Mar 15:26 Switzerland EMPA Andreas Züttel EU research funding should be spent mainly for research with as little administration as possible in order to maximise the benefit for the society. 5 Mar 09:16 Switzerland Empa, Hydrogen & Energy Andreas Borgschulte The typical success rate of a European research grant is below 10%, however the corresponding proposal preparation takes several months. This is by no means justified. The in case of success following bureaucrasy is not motivating either. 24 Feb 15:52 Switzerland EPFL Pierre Magistretti Less administrative details and more science in the grants 24 Feb 16:56 Switzerland EPFL Nicolas Grandjean I has been involved in FP5/FP6/FP7 projects and experienced for each novel FP more buraucraty 27 Feb 19:23 Switzerland EPFL Dario Floreano European projects are great because they enable scientists to join forces to tackle great challenges and allow young researchers to experience different cultures and approaches. However, preparing and running a European project has become an administrative nightmare that requires professional help, which results in money diverted from science to bureaucracy. It is also a complete waste of time for scientists who must negotiate projects, read hundreds of pages of terms and conditions, prepare complicated activity reports, and compile thousands of pages in deliverables that not even reviewers have time to read. 1 Mar 16:25 Switzerland EPFL Paul BOWEN I fully agree with the sentiments of a clearer and simpler structure - both financially, reporting and in particular reviewing. If we wnat to compete with the likes of the USA and Japan we need a much better screening method - too many mediocre projects get through and many excellent projects - albeit with a certain risk - get very poor, biased and what seem like sinlge reviewer rejections 3 Mar 11:36 Switzerland EPFL Danick Briand Not only financial, but also evaluation aspects should be reviewed. 3 Mar 11:47 Switzerland EPFL Dimitris Kiritsis An action in that direction will save money for research and make it more efficient. 5 Mar 08:32 Switzerland EPFL Anja Skrivervik the current situation is a night mare for researchers. Moreover, all this administrative burden, systematic checking and cross checking of every smallest detail is exceedingly costly. Financial control is important, but should be in relation to the sums involved. 6 Apr 14:11 Switzerland EPFL Simon Granville Dozens of pages of rules, objectives and qualifications must be read and digested before attempting to apply for EU research funding with the current system. This becomes a fulltime occupation in itself, and woe betide the unsuccessful applicant, who spends far too many hours working on such forms, hours that should have been spent on the objective of the application - doing research! 11 Apr 17:06 Switzerland EPFL Anne Grapin-Botton Comparing my participation in European (6FP-7FP) and American (Beta Cell Biology Consortium-NIDDK-NIH) networks with largely overlapping teams of people, I realized how much more efficient the NIH network was. Some reporting is obviously needed while spending citizens money but administrative burden was much lighter, the network was more evolvable, more dynamic (1/3rd of the money set aside for idea-based-competitive teamwork during project time). 9 May 18:17 Switzerland EPFL Marie Sudki We are all concerned with climate change, changing our habits in terms of paper, might induce a reduction of the worlds deforestation rate.... its of concern to everyone and it starts with litlle actions and grow to be a great thing! 25 May 12:58 Switzerland EPFL Eli Kapon A significant part of the proposals currently consists of information that is marginally related to the proposed work and, worse, can be simply copied and pasted from other proposals. 3 Mar 09:26 Switzerland ETH Max Schmidt Apart from the complicated administration, late payments of yearly installments are a heavy problem. Late installments cause huge deficits on EU-accounts from which salaries have to be paid factually independent of their (non-)arrival. 3 Mar 13:24 Switzerland ETH Zuerich Luc Van Gool We have been promised simpler procedures and more transparent processing for years now. With every framework program the situation only gets worse. Research money has been handled much more effectively at the national levels. One of my American postdocs recently came into my office, refusing to be involved in EC projects any further, because the administrative overload was keeping him from doing research. The tax payers money earmarked for research should be used for... research, not for running a paper mill or financing expensive auditors. 16 Feb 07:58 Switzerland ETH Zurich Erik Reimhult It is my belief as scientific and administrative coordinator of the 14-member FP7 project ASMENA that an undue focus on slavish adherance to legalized formulations of deliverables and detailed reporting hampers the creativity and innovative potential of FP7 projects. Additionally, the complexity of obtaining, coordinating and reporting an FP7 project is such that it is impossible for a researcher to be successful in these tasks without the professional help from supporting organizations like the Swiss EUresearch. The result is that too much resources are devoted to the bureaucratization of FP7 research projects. As an example I spend more than twice as much time on coordinating a single EU project which gives me 1.5 postdocs as for the entire rest of projects supporting my research group of 5 PhD students and 2.5 postdocs. This jeopardizes the attractiveness of European research funding and reduces the number of European level research projects. A minimum rule is that EU funding should be possible to obtain and use with the level of effort and the administrative tools and skills available to a normal researcher. Research output, not form-based input should be at the center of European research! 16 Feb 09:35 Switzerland ETH Zurich Christophe Dessimoz The large administrative burden associated with EU grants comes at the expense of scientific output, and is turning our best scientists into bureaucrats. 16 Feb 10:21 Switzerland ETH Zurich Jo Helmuth You decide: Select creative scientists or clever politicians? 22 Feb 15:57 Switzerland ETH Zurich Dirk Helbing This is an excellent initiative, which was long overdue. Note that we are currently developing recommendations regarding the acceleration of innovation in Europe and also regarding a more efficient organization of science. Some of these recommendations are generated within the scope of the EU project Visioneer, see www.visioneer.ethz.ch . Contributions to the Project Wiki are very welcome. 3 Mar 11:29 Switzerland ETH Zurich Philip Zimmermann A more unified format of reporting would be appreciated. The version control over time is very difficult, and a good informatics system with simple reporting forms and version control would help a lot. Too much time is spent for reporting (and thereby too little for research). 3 Mar 11:50 Switzerland ETH Zurich Joachim Buhmann European grant administration is far more complicated than the administration for grants from the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) or the German Science Foundation (DFG). I am not convinced that this administrative overhead improves scientific quality nor does it lower the danger of fraud. 3 Mar 12:20 Switzerland ETH Zürich Richard R. Ernst Europe shall be first in scientific creativity but not in the complexity of science administration 3 Mar 14:40 Switzerland ETH Zurich Jerome Faist The key issues is that the cost of controlling should be commensurate with the cost controlled, i.e. a simple rule is the maximisation of the overall system efficiency. Same for the cost of evaluating proposals. 4 Mar 10:14 Switzerland ETH Zurich Barbara Widmer Research money should be used for research. The administrative burden has increased with every new frame work. Wheres the added value for the quality of the research if more and more research time goes to setting up lists and reports? 9 Mar 10:07 Switzerland ETH Zurich Marc Pollefeys Time-sheets for full-time project employees makes no sense. 11 Mar 14:28 Switzerland ETH Zürich Christina Krueger Super idea, and I hope it will change things back again to a more bearable life. 3 Mar 12:25 Switzerland ETHZ Willem Koppenol After participation in a Framework collaboration I have to conclude that the EU has established a bureaucracy to re-invent the wheel. No wonder it is square. 16 Mar 22:06 Switzerland ETHZ Sean Walsh At one stage we were writing EU reports every 3 months for one project. Complete overkill and it reduces research productivity. 3 Feb 07:57 Switzerland Euresearch Olivier Küttel European research funding should get back to its origin: Fund excellent research ideas and persons for the benefit of society while keeping the administration as simple as possible. Lets remember Confucius: Life is really simple, but we insist on making it complicated. 3 Mar 11:04 Switzerland Euresearch Langenberger Christiane It ist essentiel for the success of research and innovation that administrative work related to the european Framework has to be reduced. So many searchers refuse to engage their time in filling papers. 30 Apr 22:33 Switzerland Euresearch Nancy-Lara Millan So true, and FP7 seems to be even more bureaucratic than ever... 18 Mar 10:27 Switzerland European Broadcasting Union Laura Longobardi more money would go into research and dissemination if there were less paper work and if the projects were judged on their results and not only on their financial statements please simplify 3 Mar 12:00 Switzerland Faculty of Medicine Marisa Jaconi I agree that the administrative efforts, time sheets etc. are too heavy 3 Mar 17:46 Switzerland Federal Institute of Technology, Lausanne (EPFL) Nicolas Morel The less administrative tasks, the more we can do research, the activity for which we are employed ! 31 Mar 10:38 Switzerland FELA Management AG Thomas Kallweit We have participated in several EU projects since 1997. With the latests project, administrative burden is simply gone mad. On top of that, the payment delays of more than a year are simply unacceptable and an affront against anybody delivering excellent work, even more so for SMEs. 3 Mar 14:24 Switzerland FiBL-Research institute for Organic Agriculture Andreas Thommen A lot of administrational effort which burdens the honest ones, but cannot prevent from abuse of research funding by criminals! 20 Mar 09:14 Switzerland FMI for Biomedical Research barbara Hohn I agree that the application formalities for European funding are too time-consuming; they take a lot or time from the scientists which they better invest in research. 3 Mar 14:54 Switzerland Friedrich Miescher Institute for Biomedical Research susan Gasser The bureaucracy of the EU stifles researchers - and fuels a grant writing spinoff business which is counterproductive. 21 Mar 22:44 Switzerland Friedrich Miescher Institute for Biomedical Research Dirk Schuebeler The high administrative burden involved with applying and administrating EU grants keeps many from competing for these grants. Reducing the red tape seems a necessity. While scientists ask for more trust they need however acknowledge that part of the problem is that EU citizens do not trust Bruxelles that it can manage money efficiently. In turn the EU provides heavy oversight aiming to avoid that money is misused. This applies to farmer subsidies as well as research funding. 9 May 14:28 Switzerland Geneva University of Art and Design Lysianne Léchot Hirt Everything that can be done in order to grant more freedom of thought to researchers has to be a political and administrative priority! 16 Feb 13:56 Switzerland HEIG-VD Etienne MESSERLI Director of REDS Institute 10 May 10:30 Switzerland Inserm-EPFL Joint Laboratory Christian Doerig Having coordinated three EU-funded consortia in FP5, FP6 and FP7, and being involved in several others, I saw no simplification over the years. Streamlining is urgently needed, notably with respect to time sheets and reporting. 3 Mar 12:07 Switzerland Insitute of Medical Microbiology Erik Boettger THE ADMINSITRATIVE PROCEDURES ASSOCIATED WITH EU GRANTS, E.G. APPLICATION, FINANCIAL REPORTING ETC., SIMPLY ARE A NIGHTMARE TO ALL INVOLVED. I WAS LUCKY TO HAVE A VERY HELPFUL SCIENTIFIC OFFICER AT THE EU RESPONSBLE FOR MY PROJECT, BUT THERE IS NOT TOO MUCH THEY CAN DO TO PROVIDE RELIEF FROM THIS BURDEN. 7 May 16:31 Switzerland Institute of Neuroinformatics Albert Cardona I commend Europe-wide grant agencies to read Peter Lawrences paper Real Lives and White Lies in the Funding of Scientific Research. The granting system turns young scientists into bureaucrats and then betrays them.: http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000197 7 May 22:29 Switzerland Institute of Neuroinformatics Matthew Cook Researchers should focus on research, not bureaucracy. 3 Mar 11:44 Switzerland Institute of Veterinary Virology, University of Bern Giuseppe Bertoni A funding system based on mutual trust favors honesty and productivity, while a cumbersome bureaucracy is expensive, counterproductive and totally ineffective in controlling the tiny minority of dishonest researchers in the community. 14 Mar 23:51 Switzerland Institute of Virology and Immunoprophylaxis Artur Summerfield The excessive bureaucracy and controlling mechanism are costing much more resources in both adminstration and science then benefits! To have more innovation, lobbying must be reduced and free research promoted 3 Mar 11:35 Switzerland Kantonsspital St. Gallen Burkhard Ludewig I completely agree with this aims of this initiative. The current procedures do not strengthen, but weaken European Research. 6 Mar 15:56 Switzerland Koldsteril AG Willi Glettig European Research has reached a phase of self destruction! As Entrepreneurs we participated in EU research since 2001 with an believe to find and met highly competent researcher and to bring new technologies to the market. We perceive Research as a most important machine to advance our societies with new and better products, processes and services and creation of new wealth. The first step in this value creation chain is the creation of high quality knowledge. High quality knowledge has to address real problems and has to be reproducible. High quality knowledge has to be developed into advanced products, processes and services as the basis for new sustainable jobs and industries. Under Framework 4 and 5 the EU perceived investments in research as the motor for creating new industries and supported participation of SMEs. Today we experience EU research as follows: 1. Administrative effort for research project application has become unrealistically high und has become high risk for SMEs 2. Contracts signed by the research participants are not honoured by the bureaucrats and payments are delayed by a number of years (SMEs are no banks and can’t wait two and more years for payment) 3. Applied research and development has been put on very low priority. 4. With Framework 7 Europe invests € 50 Billions in expanding research (knowledge creation) and almost nothing into converting knowledge into tangible products, processes and sustainable job opportunities. Europe has no clear goal that spells out why they invest 50 Billion into research and no strategy that shows how to achieve the goal. Public research is high risk and is depending on continuous supply of taxpayer funds. If the knowledge produced would have value it could be sold and turned into an industry. Under the current constellation this is unrealistic. Knowledge gains value only if it can be converted in products, processes and services for which there is a buyer or market. New market can be made by force through introducing new regulation or by developing knowledge into market oriented products. At this moment the EC assumes that “industry” will take on product development(0.1% of Research result is converted into tangible products and from that about 1% is commercialised). Large industrial companies have their internal research and development organisation that do not develop public research data. 90% of EU industry comprises micro and mini enterprises that have an interest but not the financial capacity to develop new technology based industries. Europe has no capital markets which are essential for developing new technology based industries. Venture Capital provided by the EC is channelled through financial investors who don’t understand and have no interest in industrial development. 5. Thousands of administrative people in the EC have the authority to fragment EU research structure and to create new administrative rulings and requirements but nobody is responsible for this growing chaos. We as SMEs have decided to abandon EU Research and to revert back to import finished technologies from the global markets.(looking through the list of signed up research we don’t see many SMEs – maybe many have also decided to abandon EU Research?) We have put the idea of creating new technology based export industries on hold until EC has sorted out its problems and become more SME friendly. (PS We have in Europe and Overseas created a number of new technology based ventures - unfortunately EC doesnt know its research driven entrepreneur,- only Entrepreneurs invest their own risk capital to create value and new industries) 16 Feb 15:00 Switzerland Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts Andrew Polaine The FP7 framework, administration and web site are a complete disaster of usability and user experience. Without a drastic re-think, there will be very little in the way of innovation, especially from younger researchers. 16 Feb 07:13 Switzerland Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research Victor Jongeneel Research is not about delivering specific outcomes, it is about advancing knowledge. Bean counting and micro-management are not effective monitoring tools. Expectations should be re-focussed on excellence and demonstrable impact. 3 Mar 11:38 Switzerland Medical Faculty Daniel Bertrand I agree that the EEC projects are excellent but that administrative efforts, time sheets etc. are becoming too much 16 Feb 12:33 Switzerland METAIR AG Bruno Neininger We even left (did not continue from FP6 to FP7) a running I3 (EUFAR) because the administrative burden was not only prohibitive, but, also caused many debates with the coordinator. We still miss a considerable amount of money from 2008, and do not know why. The administration is very intransparent, and far away from any common sense, or normal business (offer - negotiation - order - work - invoice). I therefore appreciate your initiative! 16 Feb 09:42 Switzerland Paul Scherrer Institut Stefan Müller The scientific outcome of a project should be the predominant evaluation criteria. Financial controlling should always be related to the deliverables and not to the accounting system of the company/institute involved in a EC project. 14 Apr 08:30 Switzerland Paul Scherrer Institute Thomas Jung Make EU research more attractive by making the guidelines simpler, the reviewing more transparent AND INTERACTIVE, and by faster decision with no more than 2/3 of a rejection ratio at any single stage. 7 May 17:02 Switzerland PSI (Paul Scherrer Institute) Michel J. ROSSI We will all benefit from simplification, thus it is a win-win situation. The policy changes with every change of the relevant commissioner was disheartening and counterproductive. I sign this petition in the perspective of having a longer-term sustainable effort. Of course, the scientific community has to police itself and show professional and responsible behavior if the rules are relaxed. 3 Mar 17:04 Switzerland Sika Technology Norman Blank we should focus on R&D not administration 3 Mar 11:52 Switzerland SMARTEC SA Daniele Inaudi Simplifying access for PMEs requires reducing the burden associated with being project coordinator or proponent. 4 Mar 11:15 Switzerland SNI Swiss Nano Institute University Basel Christoph Gerber I fully agree. if Europe does not find a way to simply the procedure for applying for grants it never will fill the scientific or technologial gap to other nations. 4 Mar 07:15 Switzerland SUSS MicroOptics SA Reinhard Voelkel It is a tremendous waste of resources that highly qualified researchers spend 10-15% of their work time in writing proposals for EU funding. The administrative burden is much too high. 5 Feb 08:19 Switzerland Swiss Academy of Engineering Sciences SATW Rene Dandliker Administration time is money. Simplier rules and forms help both the researchers and the experts. 19 Feb 14:03 Switzerland Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research (WSL) Patrick Schleppi A research contract of some 130 pages (like in our EU project) may be good for lawers, but certainly not for us scientists. Too much administrative burden kills the sense of responsability. 16 Mar 12:00 Switzerland Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Ingo Potrykus GE-regulation prevents use of the technology for public good; there is no scientific justification for specific GE-regulation; GE-regulation carries enormous social and economic costs. 19 Mar 10:23 Switzerland Swiss Federal Institute of technology Folker Helfrid Wittmann Handling of research proposals has to be facilitated substantially. The peer review has to be made more efficient and transparent. 25 Feb 11:45 Switzerland Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich Emmanuel Baltsavias I send my comments based on my quite extensive experiences since EU FP4. Honestly, I dont believe that the EU bosses will do something, at least fast enough. But as most of you, I also had enough, and this bottom-up approach is one of our efficient tools to convey our opinion. Internet democracy! Regarding the declaration, which is too vague (I partly understand why) and on quite some points misses important problems: I do not like the title Trust Researchers. It does not represent the essence of the problems, it mentions only researchers, while increasingly other persons participate in EU projects. And I trust only some researchers, there are also crooks among them (researchers are not per definition better people within humans, so why should we trust especially them?). I trust someone based on long-time experience of his/her character, and no etiquette, profession or whatever. Most importantly, the declaration text does not summarise well-enough the problems (see various comments below). Some remarks below about EU-funded project flaws and possible improvements (not hierarchically listed ; some of the proposals below may be already implemented, at least partly, but given the chaos in finding info on EU projects, please accept my apologies in advance): - easy-to-use, simple, fast WEB tools to contribute to a project proposal online. Only to register at various sites, get passwords etc. is a pain, even for presumably top researchers. - WEB site with a transparent, easy-to-overview and well-structured description of EU research policy, and existing tools for financing of activities (including financial sources of at least, related institutions, e.g. ESF) - WEB site where one can search about useful and detailed enough information regarding a possible project partner (NOT JUST A SHORT PROFILE INFO PROVIDED BY THE PARTNER, eventually even with evidence against the partner), including a search of partners based on various query topics: country, disciplines, keywords, type of institution, size of directly involved group etc. Generally, search facilities allowing complex queries with accurate results should be provided. - reduction of the size (pages) and number, avoidance of repetitions and of irrelevant information and better structuring of documents to be downloaded and read for a certain call. - structured information for possibilities to apply according to categories apart from EU members, e.g. from EU associated members, from a continent or group of nations or even individual countries. - Participation in projects from poorer countries should be eased more, although an improvement over the years exists. Thereby, the main criteria should be output quality and benefit for all (particularly these non-EU countries) and not the nationality. Also consistency is missing, sometimes countries, e.g. S. Africa or Russia or China, are mentioned, others not, and that changes continuously, there is not a consistency based on principles, but rather on political speculations of the given time and prevailing EU politics. - development and free provision of a good and not too bureaucratic and tailorable WEB tool for management of internal and public project WEB pages. Only this would have saved millions of wasted hours and much frustration. - clear and consistent policies. Sometimes we hear, inofficially and much less officially, that consortia with new EU members are preferred, or from some countries, or SMEs, or big companies, without any relation to research or output quality but just decisions of some people or institutions at EU. - reduction of time and bureaucracy involved from a project approval to project start (i.e. negotiation period). - The evaluation procedure has many flaws. Most importantly the EU in the 21st century has still not learned that there are cross-disciplinary projects (named also with other terms (intra-, Inter- etc. disciplinary) , and lately in EU calls ultra-disciplinary, wow I). But when you submit a proposal for evaluation you have to select a review committee that has a limited scope and of course a nice integrated proposal gets rejected, because the review committee members feel their disciplines are represented too little. - Evaluation: Also, the evaluation criteria weights change from FP to FP, while some are over-weighted and require quite some blabla and phantasy (like impact). - When project proposals involve much effort, always a quick and non-bureaucratic 1st phase evaluation should be involved, followed by a 2nd evaluation phase. - regarding IPR, pre-existing knowledge, software, data etc. rights, applicants need more clear (hopefully short, involve, but not too much, lawyers!) guidelines and early enough within the project (actually better before the project starts, at least as information on what needs to be decided within the project and what are the rights of each partner) - cut-down of lobbying and and non-transparent relations in deciding which group gets financing, which not. - regarding financing, the auditing up to 5 years project end in FP7 (financial multiple check) that EC responsibles for a project demand, others not (so, also inconsistency in EU policies) - Pay more attention to young researchers at MSc. and PhD level, mobility, international exchange and cultural exchanges (espec. on learning the local language), - Distribution of funds among project partners: Typically an entity initialising a project decides about the distribution of requested funds among the project partners. Usually giving more money to themselves and their friends. And this financial support proportion is almost always adopted, if a project is approved. Can EU devise some (not bureaucratic) procedures to reduce this injustice? If I had more time, I would continue with many more topics, but I have to work (luckily a bit on research, i.e. writing a project proposal) I dont know who decided on this initiiative for this badly needed action, but thanks to the person(s), who started this. Based, on my very limited, personal experience I would not suggest that we have many hopes for improvement (you know EU, dont you?). But I am happy that some people started this, and Internet offers some wonderful possibilities for networking and have the voice of the simple people heard. 3 Mar 12:44 Switzerland Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, ETH Cesare Gessler Currently, it is very difficult to find a volunteer accepting to be the coordinator of a EU-project. 28 Feb 18:14 Switzerland Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Testing and Research Lorenz Hilty I stopped being personally involved in EU research projects because success depends primarily on the ability to handle relationships to Brussels (50%), to do administrative work (40%) and only to 10% on having a research vision, using adacemic methodology and building meaningful consortia. The fact that there are professional consultants and seminars on writing successful proposals and additional national bureaucracies for motivating and helping to apply for funding in Brussels tells everything. A radical change is needed. 5 Mar 07:57 Switzerland Swiss Federal Office of Topography swisstopo Elmar Brockmann The high administrative burden was already twice a reason for not participating to a well suited Framework Program. 16 Feb 07:05 Switzerland Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute Nino Künzli The rigidity of administrative rules hinders collaborations across disciplines, institutions, countries - thus hinders scientific progress 3 Mar 12:04 Switzerland Telscom Sathya Rao Financial rules should be simplified, particularly for SMEs who do not have their legal expertise to understand the specifics. The funding should be based on the work defined and not how it is achieved. The accepted funding based on the normal levels of salaries in the countries should be the basis for budget calculation, against the work to be done. The technical approval of the project results and partners contribution should be the yardstick for financing. The SMEs cannot follow two different accounting systems, when they participate in EU projects. 3 Mar 12:22 Switzerland Tissue Biology Research Unit Ernst Reichmann Instead of investing energy amd time into our research, I do have to invest far too much energy and time into filling in forms and reading complicatied legal forms and contracts. Websites of EU Research Programmes (eg. within FP7) are mostly clumpsy, user-unfriendly and time-consuming. 8 Mar 09:35 Switzerland UBERN Martin Braunschweig I believe that a simplification of the administrative burden of EU funded projects will set free a huge amount of time and financial resources for research and its dissemination. 20 Apr 18:18 Switzerland Universität Basel Kurt Kamber With the variety of rules of ERA-NETs, Joint Technology Initiatives, PPPs etc. FP7 becomes an increasingly challenging undertaking. 11 Mar 09:08 Switzerland Universität Bern Klaus Mezger The major drawback of all EU grants is the complicated legal texts that come with the grant and that require external help to understand. The EU seems to be much too creative with new words whose meaning are not clear and can only understood by insiders, mostly administrators. Due to these administrative hurdles and complications I am very hesitant to apply again for an EU grant will prefer to use local sources 4 Mar 12:25 Switzerland Université de Genève Daniel Schneider EU procedures may have become too complex because administration always adds complexity in order to fight bad behavior (e.g. some partners not doing research). In reality, the opposite is true. There is a strong correlation between inefficiency + corruption and administrative complexity. Rich and low corruption countries tend to have leaner administrations and procedures. Another reason for the increase of burden is a misunderstanding of the R&D process. It needs to be very flexible and must be able to shift goals (at least some) and therefore be able to redefine priorities, deliverables and work packages. EU project management stiffles productivity and even may inhibit creation of real tangible results, since too much energy must be spend on creating fake deliverables that are not anymore needed, etc. 9 May 20:50 Switzerland Université de Neuchâtel Bruno Betschart Science should have as a first priority to carry out research and teaching. It is however more and more a perverse situation that researchers are forced to become administrators who have to fulfill local, regional , national and international rules and directives in order to obtain potentially some funds. What a waste and what a shame ! 3 Mar 14:08 Switzerland University of Applied Sciences Lucerne Thomas Nussbaumer The criteria for funding should be based on the relevance of the topic and the creativity of the project proposal. Prohibitive and specific boundary conditions should be avoided, since they disable innovation. Hence: There should be no limitations of which type of institutions can apply and if a cooperation between countries should not be mandatory as well as industry participation should be optional. Furthermore, the time schedule for the evaluation should be much shorter, i.e., certainly less than 3 months in total. 18 Feb 15:19 Switzerland University of Applied Sciences Northwestern Switzerland Franz Barjak I dont believe in declarations but this is simply a necessity. 3 Mar 12:28 Switzerland University of Basel Marc Creus Science is a creative endeavour, where you cannot always tell the end from the beginning. Let a larger portion of grant funding provide freedom for true creativity. Liberate the researcher from the enslavement of writing endless applications, self-justifying reports and plans that allow only for narrow milestones and deliveries: accept that these current approaches, although they may assist administrators and politicians, do not provide the best way toward real innovation. In short, let scientists do science! 3 Mar 12:58 Switzerland University of Basel Christian Cajochen Just follow the example of the Swiss National Foundation for Research: simple, straightforward and efficient. 4 Mar 10:30 Switzerland University of Basel Frank Wilhelm I was involved in a FP6 Project and will never again consider this kind of project funding if the administrative overhead will not be significantly reduced in the future. 4 Mar 11:16 Switzerland University of Basel, Physics Department Dominik Zumbuhl please simplify the bureaucratic EU funding rules! Compared to our other funding agencies, it is significantly more complicated, and drains far too much time for administration - time which otherwise would be used for research. 16 Feb 01:00 Switzerland University of Bern Jens Stein As an FP7 expert reviewer and FP6 MEXT recipient, I fully support the crucial necessity of simplifying EU financial rules 17 Feb 08:22 Switzerland University of Bern Rolf Vogel reduce to the max 3 Mar 12:16 Switzerland University of Bern Oliver Mühlemann It is inherent to basic research that you dont not know at the beginning of the journey where it will lead you, and plans have therefore to be adjusted throughout the projects progression. Funding schemes therefore only work if they are flexible enough to allow the continuous adjustments of budgets and work plans. The rigid rules of EU funding result in a massive waste of money in nonproductive administrative exercises and hamper the progress of research. 3 Mar 12:55 Switzerland University of Bern Robert Rieben Financial reports are too complicated and we pay thousands of Euros for financial audits for nothing. We should rather use this money for research! 3 Mar 13:07 Switzerland University of Bern Tosso Leeb I greatly appreciate being funded within an FP7 project and the ideas behind EU funding are very sound. However, the application procedure and especially the accounting once the grant has been approved should be simplified. 3 Mar 16:04 Switzerland University of Bern Ernst Niggli The excessive administrative complexity of EU grant submissions is reflected by the perverted necessity to hire a company to apply successfully. Please SIMPLIFY! 4 Mar 07:10 Switzerland University of Bern Claudia Kuehni I support the request for a simplification of the financial and administrative procedures related to EU-funded research. 16 Mar 11:53 Switzerland University of Bern and ASK-FORCE Klaus Ammann we urgently need also a simplification of regulatory procedures for some widespread GM crops, see some contributions on regulatory matters on http://www.botanischergarten.ch/ASK-FORCE-Summary/ASK-FORCE-Summary.pdf Klaus Ammann 16 Feb 09:15 Switzerland University of Berne Stephan Christen I fully agree that the administrative process for getting research funding should be kept as simple as possible to advance science in the most effective way 16 Feb 09:42 Switzerland University of Berne Laurent Excoffier Simplified grant application and management would be highly appreciated and allow us to concentrate on research 3 Mar 13:32 Switzerland University of Fribourg Urs Albrecht Spend time on research not on administration and bureaucracy 3 Mar 14:44 Switzerland University of Fribourg Andreas Conzelmann An effort also ought to be made to involve top scientist in the grant reviewing process. 16 Feb 15:58 Switzerland University of Geneva Nicolas Gisin Science without trust is unproductive 3 Mar 14:09 Switzerland University of Geneva Urs Schaltegger I am fortunately not P.I. of the FP7 program, but I see the amount of work done by those people. I am used to work on a trust and partnership basis within Swiss research programs and am surprised by the amount of control exerted by the European officials. The success of a program is definitely quantified by scientific output and not by the number of time-sheets filled. 3 Mar 17:20 Switzerland University of Geneva Ruth Durrer Please let us concentrate on doing research which is what we are good at and trained for. Presently we are drowning every year a bit more in burocracy and administration 8 Mar 17:02 Switzerland University of Geneva Howard Riezman I agree that the administrative procedures are too complicated concerning European research grants. This is precisely why I have not been interested in coordinating a grant myself. Personally, I feel that the lack of trust of scientists by administrators, penetrating even into review panels of the ERC is insulting. 9 Mar 14:32 Switzerland University of Geneva Dimitri Konstantas Project proposals in FP7 are evaluated based on several criteria, which are applied randomly by the evaluators. One example is the the project management: the same structure copied and paste from one proposal to another, is evaluated from 2 to 4.5, being either too complex or to simple, etc. Different parts of the proposal are totally useless, like European Dimension, a bunch of bla-bla without any real meaning. Finally the so-called impact description adds a useless complication in the proposal since the a researcher must describe how the market will change with his project, being obliged to write down where he/she will publish, to which journals, which exhibitions will be present etc, just for the sake of writing something. We all know that it is to the interest of the researcher to publish to the most appropriate conferences, so this useless description makes excellent projects fail the criteria because the researcher concentrated on the real work description and not the bla-bla of where will he publish or because he failed to mention a conference or journal that an evaluator consider important. 10 Mar 13:38 Switzerland University of Geneva Laurent Eyer We are VERY thankful that the EU is providing programs which fund research! However the principles behind these programs should be: simplicity, efficiency and pragmatism. Knowledge and its diffusion MUST BE the first priority of these programs! Administration should be at the service of the funding authorities and of the researchers, not the inverse... 12 Mar 01:47 Switzerland University of Geneva Mihaly Varadi Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler. - Albert Einstein 13 Apr 22:49 Switzerland University of Geneva Robbie Loewith The Swiss granting system seems to me to work wonderfully and is far less complicated. 11 May 18:33 Switzerland University of Geneva Peter Kündig The administrative procedures are a nightmare The evaluation processes should be made by top level researchers only and should primarily be based on scientific quality 16 Feb 09:19 Switzerland University of Lausanne Dieter Haas A sharper focus on scientific merits and originality should replace the current emphasis on non-scientific issues and administrative procedures. 16 Feb 11:02 Switzerland University of Lausanne Farmer Edward I feel that having Marie Curie fellows fill out time sheets both wastes their time and sends them a bad message. I dont see how this will reduce corruption. I feel that supporting active scientists is the best way to reduce waste so Id rather see the criteria for support toughened than recipients having to use time for non-scientific work. 17 Feb 09:36 Switzerland University of Lausanne Anne-Claude Berthoud This would be an extremely useful measure to motivate the interested people to submit a project 3 Mar 13:29 Switzerland University of Lausanne Pierre Goloubinoff A much greater simplification of adminitrative burden and more individualisation of the european grants are the only ways to improve their quality, save money on administrative salaries and compete with US grants 3 Mar 18:48 Switzerland University of Lausanne Marius Brülhart I have recently declined two offers of collaboration in FP7 research projects, out of frustration with the time and effort wasted on incessant and utterly unproductive reporting requirements under a current FP6 project. 3 Mar 17:35 Switzerland University of Neuchâtel Adrian Bangerter I wholeheartedly support this initiative. I have always tried to get interested in obtaining European funding, but have been repeatedly turned off by the red tape. 3 Mar 12:43 Switzerland University of St. Gallen Franz Schultheis I have been the coordinator of a research network in the context of the 6th framework and have done other E.U. financed projects before. I really suffered form the bureaucratic burden of this kind of research in comparison to national research projects. 27 Feb 19:37 Switzerland University of Zurich Michael Hengartner Thank you for pushing these much-needed reforms. 2 Mar 20:03 Switzerland University of Zurich Konrad Basler I sign it with the hope that the next generation of scientist will have less administrative work and can thus be more creative! 3 Mar 10:20 Switzerland University of Zürich Markus Grütter Simplification of financial as well as reduction of administrative burden is essential to keep the focus on scientific issues 3 Mar 11:01 Switzerland University of Zurich George Lake The reporting is beyond cumbersome to being a surreal exercise that could be scenes in Terry Gilliam movies. One is asked for codes that describe things with inscrutable descriptions of both what that is and the possible responses. Its like an automated translation system was used dozens of times so that something like Principal Investigator comes out as head of high school detective except that one, you might even figure out. The help desk *Never*, absolutely *Never* responds to any queries and the program officers instruct you to contact the help desk. 3 Mar 19:59 Switzerland University of Zurich Hans-Peter Lipp I have been spending thousands of hours neglecting research 4 Mar 09:07 Switzerland University of Zurich Arand Michael My personal feeling is that the regulations are made by administrators who have few insight into the consequences that result from the burocratic hurdles and overadministration involved in the present EU-supported research projects. My impression is that too much money is lost in administratory tasks at both ends, the EU and the researcher side, resources that would much better be invested into the science of the projects. 9 Mar 09:37 Switzerland University of Zürich Renato Pajarola I have avoided for some time writing EC grants due to the administrative complexity. I hope this can be simplified and also reporting and other project management instruments should be made as simple as possible to better exploit the fast EC funding sources and reduce administrative overhead. 9 Mar 09:43 Switzerland University of Zurich Gerhard Schwabe I have stopped participating in EU projects. One important reason is the administrative burden. It changes the culture of the research group: Either you become a liar by professional window-dressing. This endagers the general credibility of the group leader. Or you kill motivation. Both is not attractive. 11 Mar 07:31 Switzerland University of Zurich Max Lungarella Have we already moved beyond the point of no return? 14 Mar 15:58 Switzerland University of Zurich Roberto Speck administrative hurdles must be kept at a minimum! everything else consumes too much time 15 Mar 08:08 Switzerland University of Zurich Huldrych Günthard Compared with other funding agencies, in particular with the Swiss National Science Foundation, the administrative burden is much more time consuming and very complicated. It cannot be handled without specialists, which consumes too much research money that should go into research and not into administration. 15 Mar 09:47 Switzerland University of Zürich Rudolf Probst the administrative effort is unbelievable and needs much too much special knowledge. 16 Mar 18:08 Switzerland University of zurich Thomas Felix Lüscher Let us do more science and less administration! 18 Mar 14:59 Switzerland University of Zurich Thimios Mitsiadis Please, make your best to provide with less administration for EU projects. Simpler procedures must be explored. 19 Mar 19:38 Switzerland University of Zurich Josef Jiricny I have co-ordinated a 5th framework program, have participated in the 6th and am now participating also in the 7th. Although I recognise the need for scientists to be accountable to funding organisations in general, the procedures implemented by the EU are far too complex and thus difficult to understand and follow. Most importantly, the concept of Deliverables and Milestones may be applicable to industrial research, but it is not suitable for cutting-edge basic research. If we could foretell our results years in advance, we could write the papers now and save ourselves the time and trouble of doing research. Having to adhere to pre-defined Deliverables and Milestones stifles the freedom that is essential for new discovery. The holding back of the final installment is also problematic, especially for those of us outside the Eurozone, due to fluctuating exchange rates. 2 Mar 21:30 Switzerland University of Zurich and ETH Zurich Richard Hahnloser The Swiss National Science Foundation is a good example of a funding agency imposing minimal administrative burden. An example to follow. 3 Mar 09:34 Switzerland University of Zurich, Evolutionary Biology & Environmental Studies Wolf Blanckenhorn I have shied away from writing EU grants because of lack of transparency and too high administrative burden. 3 Mar 12:07 Switzerland Universtiy of Zurich Fritjof Helmchen Being involved in three FP7-projects, I directly experience how urgently a lowering of administrative burdens is needed for EU grants. The administrative framework of EU-projects should enable and support - not hinder and slow down - research and innovation. 3 Mar 12:28 Switzerland Vetsuisse Faculty Bern Dirk Dobbelaere Any concrete measure that scales down bureaucracy and augments the focus on basic, innovative research, can only serve to promote European Science Back | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||