Workshop Information Pack

Transcription

Workshop Information Pack| Workshop title
Workshop Information
Pack
Workshop Large Spain
Madrid 24th February 2013
1
Partners
2
Contents
1.
Program ....................................................................................................................... 4
2.
Information about the workshop ................................................................................ 6
3.
Information about the professional facilitator.......................................................... 34
4.
Workshop location .................................................................................................... 36
5.
Transport ...................................................................... ¡Error! Marcador no definido.
6.
Participating organizations confirmed ...................................................................... 37
3
1. Program
EASW WORKSHOP PROGRAM
on the search for funding policies / programs that promote food innovation in relation
to health
Inprofood, towards an inclusive programming for sustainable food research, is an
innovative project funded by the seventh Framework Program of the European Union,
that aims to draw together the civil society, the scientific community and the companies
to deal with policy issues on food and health research.
A one-day Scenario Workshop, brings together participants having different profiles,
knowledge, perspectives and experiences, to discuss on research programs in the area of
nutrition and health and co-create scenarios of future programming, to ascertain barriers
and to propose possible measures and strategies for achieving common solutions.
The workshop was carried out in a relaxed atmosphere and included activities and group
dynamics, to promote the development of ideas and scenarios by the participants, and
the holding of plenary presentations with the working group.
Information panels were present to facilitate the task of the group and the results of
workshop interactions are documented in a descriptive manner.
Facilitation of the workshop was conducted by a team of facilitators (RED Group team) to
conduct the group work process.
Venue:
Workshop Date:
Timetable:
Contact:
FIAB Madrid Headquarters (C/Velázquez, 64 – 3rd floor)
21 February 2013
9.00 am to 4.30 pm
Pilar García Pérez. CTAEX Training In-charge
[email protected] Tel. 924 448 077
4
EASW WORKSHOP SCHEDULE
9.00 am
REGISTRATION OF PARTICIPANTS
9.05 am
WELCOME OF PARTICIPANTS
Clarification of the framework and scope of EASW project and matching EASWs,
INPROFOOD project. Explanation of objectives and results of EASW
References to the programming of research projects on health and food.
9.35 am
Sociometry of the group and instructions for working in groups
10.00 am
Homogeneous group work to identify research areas and barriers in funding and
research
11.10 am
COFFEE BREAK
11.20 am
Continuation of homogeneous group work
12.00 pm
Plenary of presentation
12.30 pm
Heterogeneous group work
to co-create future programming scenarios
2.15 pm
BUFFET-LUNCH
2.45 pm
Plenaries of presentation and clarification
3.30 pm
Reflection on the Workshop and assessment
4.00 pm
FAREWELL AND CLOSURE OF THE WORKSHOP
5
2.
Information about the Workshop
1.- HOMOGENEOUS WORK GROUPS
INSTRUCTIONS FOR HOMOGENEOUS WORK GROUPS (1)
Negative scenarios
Purpose: Identify important fields of research and "worst-case scenarios" (or bad
practices or negative cases) for research and innovation programs in food and health.
Guidelines for group work:
Decide on a person to take notes on the flipchart.
Make sure that everyone has something to say in a balanced way.
Seek mutual understanding and consensus whenever possible, but not to underestimate
or hide disagreements or differences, make them transparent.
Timetable, 21 February 2013:
10.00 am. Commencement of homogeneous work groups
11.10 am. Break
11.20 am. Continuation of homogeneous working groups
12.00 pm to 12.30 pm. Plenary of presentation.
Content for homogeneous work groups:
1) Important fields of research, in relation to the development of high quality, healthy
products, safe and sustainable food:
What items –from the point of view of the group– must be investigated?
How to group these items in a reasonable manner?
2) Ways to organize funding and research in these fields:
Identify barriers and difficulties in funding and research, in the area of food and health,
from the knowledge of the group. What should be avoided in the organization of
funding and research?
6
FLIPCHART I BLUE GROUP
7
FLIPCHART TRANSCRIPT 1 BLUE GROUP
1) Initial Phase
- Use of biofactory plants
- Bioprospecting
- Use of plant improvement
- Genetic Improvement
2) Cultivation Phase
- Prophylaxis
- Animal welfare
- Feed Improvement Animal
- Plant nutrition
- Harness New species
3) Collection and processing Phase
4) Marketing Phase
- Marketing innovation
- Smart packaging (Traceability-Authenticity)
- Active packaging (prolong shelf life of food, avoid deterioration)
- Cold chain maintenance
- Information /Training - consumer and/or chain operators
Within these last 3 items the following are included:
- Automation. Mechanization
- Optimisation and recycling of raw materials
- Use of by-products
8
FLIPCHART 2 BLUE GROUP
FLIPCHART TRANSCRIPT 2 BLUE GROUP
-
Lack of Public-Private collaboration
Lack of technology transfer
Duplication of funding of the same action
9
-
Poor planning in the funding of projects
Very long periods to resolve and to fund
Mono-disciplinary committees in the assessment of projects. Partiality of
assessors ()
Lack of utilisation of research agendas of technological platforms and other
agencies
Inadequate funding throughout the duration of the project
Lack of cooperation in public-public, public-private and govt-public-private
network
Lack of correlation between project funding and execution
Lack of intellectual property protection and awareness
10
FLIPCHART 1 RED GROUP
FLIPCHART TRANSCRIPT 1 RED GROUP
1) New sources of proteins of vegetable origin
Novel foods
New formulations in animal feed.
2) Promote healthy fatty acids in food of animal origin.
11
FLIPCHART 2 RED GROUP
12
FLIPCHART TRANSCRIPT 2 RED GROUP
Researchers:
Duplication of groups or centres
Lack of Synergy between researchers, centres or companies
Non-efficient OTRIS (Offices for the Transference of Research Results)
Research has to do everything
Lack of capacity for undertaking research in transfer towards companies or its
research sector
Lack of preliminary information in preparation for European projects
Company:
Lack of understanding / meeting between company and the sector we work
Lack of valid interlocutors between researchers and company or sector
Parks:
Technology-based companies from different origins: universities, OPIS (Public
Research Entities)
Common to these three sectors:
Excessive bureaucracy
Lack of office management of European projects
Low participation in lobbying of European projects.
13
FLIPCHART 1 GREEN GROUP
14
FLIPCHART TRANSCRIPT 1 GREEN GROUP
Health, Food Security and Nutrition
- Excessive medicalisation of food
- A lot of R&D+i focused on compounds and not on food. Interactions?
- Inexorable duration of health research
Sustainability of the chain
- Lack of understanding and joint vision of the food chain
- Firstly little orientation of R&D+i towards the needs of the sector and lack of
leadership in processes
- Need to make greater efforts in R&D+i in raw materials that reduce external
dependency, even focussing on traditional products
The R&D+i in food does not always bring value to the consumer because it does not
meet their demands.
15
FLIPCHART 2 GREEN GROUP
16
FLIPCHART TRANSCRIPT 2 GREEN GROUP
Funding problems
- The assessment system of projects is not participatory.
- The 6th and 7th Framework Program had barriers for the participation of
beneficiaries
- Difficulty of access to funding of food and minority productions (minority
materials)
- Difficulty of access to funding for R&D+i when it is not a company or University
(Association of companies)
- The requirement of research experience presents a barrier to new researchers
- The EC should not only consult topics with researchers
Problems in the organisation of research
- The R&D+i needs do not always arise from the recipients
- There are duplications and repetitive R&D+i lines
- Lack of a real collaborative spirit among different operators to improve the
results thanks to greater efficiency
- Little use of new technologies (ICTS 2.0)
- The assessment system of researchers does not pursue to solve real problems
- Very few patents are made
- There is a gap between the scientific community and agro-food sector (double
track)
- The consultations of the European Commission do not manage representative
participation
- Lack of Spanish officials in relevant decision-making positions at the community
level.
17
DEBATE IN THE PLENARY SESSION OF THE PRESENTATION OF THE HOMOGENEOUS
GROUPS
-
There is no transversality that goes from the field to the consumer.
-
There is a lack of collaboration and understanding among researchers.
-
Spreading of awareness of tools must be done, the mission of
technological platforms is to disseminate. Spreading of awareness of tools is
pending.
-
There is a problem or deficit with the technological platforms i.e., there
are no farmers in none of them, research, innovation is being carried out
(agrarian party) without talking to the ultimate beneficiaries, they are not in the
process nor have they been able to lead it. Also in the food part consumers who
are the ones who ultimately decide whether or not to buy a product are missing.
-
Problems with OTRIS and transfer, do not known how to transfer. All the
groups have had problems with OTRIS, something is not functioning properly.
Technology platforms: corporate vision, focusing on the various stages of the
chain. Within all the stages that a product has.
Excessive bureaucracy: Do only the researchers say so? Everyone has difficulties
at the time of submitting projects, the time it takes…, the bureaucracy problem
is taken for granted.
18
2 .- HETEROGENOUS WORK GROUPS.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR HETEROGENOUS WORK GROUPS (2)
Positive scenarios
Purpose: Identify the "best-case scenarios" (or desirable trends) for research and
innovation programs in food and health.
Guidelines for group work:
Decide on a person to take notes on the flipchart.
Make sure that everyone has something to say in a balanced way.
Seek mutual understanding and consensus whenever possible, but not to underestimate
or hide disagreements or differences, make them transparent.
Timetable, 21 February 2013:
12.30 pm. Commencement of heterogenous work groups
2.15 pm. Buffet-lunch break
2.45 pm. Plenaries of presentation and clarification
3.30 pm. Reflection on the Workshop and assessment
4.00 pm. Farewell and closure of the workshop.
Content for heterogeneous work groups:
Reflect and develop in group on "positive scenarios":
How should research and innovation programs be organized for the development of
high quality, healthy, secure and sustainable food products?
Take work on the "negative scenarios" as a starting point.
Avoid being too abstract and general. Trust your experience and the specific information
you have on real cases.
Discuss the different points of view and find a joint solution.
19
Write down the different scenarios or desired trends taking into account the following
issues on how the future programming should be, regarding:
a) Decision-making on relevant topics/areas
(who must decide and participate and how decisions are to be taken).
b) Decision-making on the funding of projects
(How these decisions should be taken and how to select the operators involved).
c) Quality criteria
(What scientific criteria must considered with regard to sustainability?).
d) Exploitation of the results
(How they should be used? How rights or patents should be defined? How can they be
easily accessible?).
e) Assessment of the project
(How it should be organised? With what criteria?).
f) Design of the project
(Types of cooperation, distribution of roles, management, budget-tasks-relations...).
20
FLIPCHARTS BLUE GROUP (1) HETEROGENEOUS
21
22
23
FLIPCHARTS RED GROUP (2) HETEROGENEOUS
24
25
26
FLIPCHARTS GREEN GROUP (3) HETEROGENEOUS
27
28
29
TRANSCRIPT OF FLIPCHARTS OF THE HETEROGENEOUS GROUPS
Write down the different scenarios or desired trends taking into account the following
issues on how the future programming should be, regarding:
a) Decision-making on relevant topics/areas
(who must decide and participate and how decisions are to be taken).
Group 1 BLUE
- Prioritization of R&D lines also based on private capital
- Public-private coordination (Comp-In -Govt)
Group 2 RED
- Open process: Technology Platforms to draw together the entire sector and
operators
- Multidisciplinary assessment committees (CE)
- Interaction between the technological platforms on the national scale
- Assessment committee: the consumer must be represented
Group 3 GREEN
- Based on actual needs of the industry / productive fabric (consumer)
- Funding in time according to the project goal. Long term vs short term
- Promote public-private partnerships
b) Decision-making on the funding of projects
(How these decisions should be taken and how to select the operators involved).
Group 1 BLUE
- Influence over decision-making by agencies more localized with more direct
knowledge of the problem
- "Complete" multidisciplinary assessment groups
- Public-private funding of projects of interest
Group 2 RED
- Spain: Should have positioning in strategic sectors for the country.
Group 3 GREEN
Decision making
1) Research areas / topics
30
-
All in general those involved in the chain
Weight based on the position in the chain (consumer is not the same as
researcher depending on what the project is based upon)
2) Funding
- Funding agency -> Advisory bodies > Advisory bodies abreast of what is being
researched. Take into account Non duplicity, establishing synergies
c) Quality criteria
(What scientific criteria must be considered with regard to sustainability?).
Group 1 BLUE
Actual impact of the outcome of the project (not just of optimum management)
Group 2 RED
End user Inclusion
Useful research outcome for the sector
Group 3 GREEN
- Projects with participation of companies.
- The average curriculum of the group must prevail on the name of the senior
researcher
- With potential for transfer
- Align scientific quality and economic return
d) Exploitation of the results
(How they should be used? How rights or patents should be defined? How can they be
easily accessible?).
Group 1 BLUE
Information has to reach the "user": Creating channels of dissemination.
Promotion of protection models-regime
Group 2 RED
- Bolster / promote marketing of patents
- Innovation brokers (new technologies)
- Open Access to publications (research outcomes)
- Informational publications ( "translate" scientific language into common language
in order to reach out to the final consumer).
31
Group 3 GREEN
- Faster
- Cheaper
e) Assessment of the project
(How it should be organised? With what criteria?).
Group 1 BLUE
The "unwritten" criteria in calls must be clear to everyone
Group 2 RED
- Multidisciplinary, participatory and transparent assessment
- Greater assessment of the outcome, final assessment.
Group 3 GREEN
- Scientific quality: The Project and Groups wherein participated
- Actual potential for exploitation (company) and dissemination
- Economically viable
f) Design of the project
(Types of cooperation, distribution of roles, management, budget-tasks-relations...).
Group 1 BLUE
Prior agreement on the scope of the project amongst the consortium partners
Group 2 RED
- Role of Technological Platforms to promote Public-Private partnerships
- Greater participation in Technology Platforms of the sector
- Greater consensus on the national scale
- Further training to submit professional projects (different drafts)
- SOST Training Courses (few seats)
- Information about expert entities in project preparations
Certification entities
- Sign agreements with consortium at the commencement of projects
Group 3 GREEN
- Networked
- Synergies amongst groups that are doing similar things
32
PLENARY DEBATE
We believe that groups enrich each other.
It has been repeated a lot of times to increase and promote public-private
cooperation, so as to respond more to the technological challenges of the
productive sector, to the actual demands of society. Also try to include all the
sector or specific topic, if 20 agencies or relevant experts have to collaborate, to
enable all of them to participate, encourage participation, learn and any one
who wants to is able to participate.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/10904076/Fotos%20Papel%C3%B3grafos.zip
3.- WORKSHOP ASSESSMENT
3.1.- MEASUREMENT WITH WORD CARD
Active participation
Communication amongst different groups
The Workshop has been dynamic and productive
Intensity, debate
Networking
Creative and interesting
Integrate ideas in research
Collaborative and constructive workshop
Usual
Active participation
Very timely, the decision making system has to change
3.2.- INDIVIDUAL FULFILLMENT WITH ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE
(See assessment report in ANNEX 1)
33
3.
Information about the professional facilitator
There was participation from three facilitators of RED "Formación y Desarrollo" S.L.U.
team. (www.grupored.net)
1. MARÍA LUISA LOZANO GIL
She is a trainer and advisor of agencies. She was the founder of "Training and
Development NETWORK" in 1995 and its first president. With university
education in Education Sciences and additional training in Methodology of
Participation, Equality of Opportunity and Creativity, has since 1988, built her
professional career in the cooperative company "Taller Zafra" of Educación
Popular, as self employed worker and starting in 1997 as partner member of
Grupo RED. She has coordinated and delivered numerous training projects in
methodology of participation and equal opportunities with women, youth and
discriminated minorities and promotion of social participation. She has worked
with social organisations and brokers, private companies and public institutions –
local governments, development partnerships, associations, associative
networks…– in many rural areas and cities of Extremadura and other
Communities. She is founding partner and voluntary of ACUDEX, associative
promotion association. She has coordinated the department of Knowledge and
Imagination of the Young Initiative Cabinet and among other projects, the
implementation of the decree of Participation through training events in several
regions of Extremadura, the revitalisation of Joint Women's Councils, MEDEA
program of IMEX, and the drafting group of the Preliminary Draft of the Law on
Equality between men and women and against gender-based violence in
Extremadura. She currently coordinates the services of the company in the ROT II
Project (Provincial Government of Badajoz) and IMEX (Government of
Extremadura).
2. MIGUEL ÁNGEL MORENO PULIDO
He is a Technical Engineer in Computer Management from the University of
Extremadura and employee of Grupo RED since March 2006. He has been a part
of various digital literacy projects such as the "Internet for All" campaign by the
Ministry of Industry in Caceres, Badajoz, Cuenca, Ciudad Real; as teacher in
several courses of Office automation and Graphic Design, and at Grupo RED as
Revitalisation Operator of the Tele-centre Network of the public enterprise
RED.ES in Caceres, Badajoz and Malaga and as a technician-trainer in several
courses of advanced computing for local technicians. Technical-coordinator in
training programs and technological literacy of Red Conecta and Conecta Joven,
convened by ACUDEX with Esplai Foundation. Also participates in on-line training
or e-learning projects and in the building and maintenance of websites. He is
part of the Observatory team that coordinated the drafting and assessment of
34
the IV Youth Plan of Extremadura. With additional training in Moodle,
participates in the management of platforms for training of trainers in virtual
environments. Collaborates with several services of participation of ROT Project
of the Provincial Government of Badajoz.
3. JOSÉ FRANCISCO GRAS MUÑOZ
Advisor to agencies and director partner of the business and work initiative
Grupo RED (www.grupored.net) since 1995. Previously, he was the director of
the Popular University of Zafra, where he worked from 1984 to 1990, partner of
"Taller Zafra" of Educación Popular S. Coop. Ltda. (1990-1992) and director of
programs of the Board of Trustees "Pedro de Ibarra" of the Provincial
Government of Caceres (1992-1995). Currently he carries out professional
activity as a advisor and sole manager of RED “Formación y Desarrollo” S.L.U.,
with headquarters in Extremadura. He is a member of the Advisory Council of
Esplai Foundation and author and co-author of publications and articles
specialized on innovation, social development and territorial cooperation.
Participates as a volunteer with CRAC and ACUDEX associative promotion
associations. Founding Partner of Knowledge and Imagination cluster of
Extremadura. He has worked professionally with Iniciativa Joven since 2004 and
with the General Directorate of Training for Employment of the Government of
Extremadura since 2008. From within Grupo RED has coordinated amongst other
projects, the design of I Comprehensive Plan for Extremaduran Citizens Abroad
and their Return and collaborates with services of the Department of Equality
and Local Development of the Provincial Government of Badajoz. The team of
Grupo RED companies provides services in training, equality and social
participation, entrepreneurship and territorial development.
35
4.
Workshop Location
Madrid. FIAB Madrid Headquarters (C/Velázquez, 64 – 3rd floor).
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10904076/Fselec_EASW_21.02.2013.zip
36
6.
Confirmed participants and agencies and attendants
Nº
ENTITY
1
INTERCITRUS COAG
2
FORO INTERALIMENTARIO
3
ORGANIZACIÓN INTERPROFESIONAL PARA IMPULSAR EL SECTOR CUNÍCOLA
4
ORGANIZACIÓN INTERPROFESIONAL DEL ACEITE DE OLIVA ESPAÑOL
5
ALERTA-CITOLIVA
6
BIOVEGEN
7
PLATAFORMA TECNOLÓGICA AGRICULTURA SOSTENIBLE
8
Plataforma Tecnológica de la Pesca y la Acuicultura
9
PACKNET
10
INIA
11
PARQUE CIENTÍFICO MADRID
12
Hospital Puerta de Hierro
13
CITA
14
CDTI
TYPE
BUSINESS
BUSINESS
BUSINESS
BUSINESS
NPO
NPO
NPO
NPO
NPO
PUBLIC
PUBLIC
PUBLIC
PUBLIC
PUBLIC
37

Workshop Information Pack

Transcription

Similar documents

Chancey - George R. Stuart Elementary

if you`re not first you`re last!

Sound Pads

WHAT TO PACK FOR YOUR STAY AT UMNGAZI

Xooma Worldwide - Hydrating The Nation

English 9 Syllabus

Switlik ISPLR Brochure

Cellar Selection - Co-op Wine Spirits Beer

OSOYOOS LAROSE Cellar Selection - Co

ARROWPACK TitePack