How to cooperate Scenarios for future S

1
How to cooperate?Scenarios for future ST
cooperation possibilities between EU and SA

• Florian Gruber
• KNAW, Amsterdam WP4 planning WS
• October 9, 2009

2
Original work plan

• As a first step towards the implementation of
  joint foresight activities in SEA and the
  European Union in the field of ST cooperation, a
  small futures study will be implemented for the
  project partners. This task aims to open up and
  structure the discussion on the potential future
  cooperation(s) between the EU and the SEA in the
  field of ST by implementing a scenario-based
  Delphi process with policy and programme makers
  from the EU and SEA in order to assess potential
  futures of the way how ST relations between
  the EU and SEA are organised in 2020 and,
  essentially, to discuss and inform on the
  consequences and implications of these different
  potential futures (Deliverable 4.2. to be
  submitted to the EC).

3
Original work plan cont.

• Based on an analytical review targeting the
  region under scrutiny and other major influential
  players on the Southeast Asian region, such as
  the USA, China, India or Australia, three
  different scenarios on the conduct of ST
  cooperation between the EU and the SEA for the
  year 2020 will be developed
• a selective intensification scenario (with
  pronounced preferential cooperation only in
  certain themes and with certain countries with
  the consequence of consciously withdrawing from
  others),
• a moderately balanced adjustment scenario (with a
  gradual, however, inclusive European approach
  towards the entire region) and
• a progressive inclusive intensification scenario
  with the entire region (aiming to position Europe
  as one core RTD partner throughout SEA by
  offensively competing with other influential
  powers).

4
Resources from the project

• Reports
• Report on internationalisation strategies of SEA
  countries
• Report on success factors and barriers of
  cooperation (to come)
• Excellence mapping
• WP2 survey
• Manpower
• 1 year of working time, Alex and Florian
• Support by organisations in SEA and EU (CIRAD,
  Royal Society, GIGA, KNAW, NACESTI, NSTDA)
• Access to experts working in exactly this field
  (SEA-EU-NET Steering Committee)
• Additional intellectual resources
• ZSI working group on foresight
• Link to established foresight experts

5
Planning the foresight

• Planning horizon future in 2020
• Starting with basic scenarios on bi-regional ST
  cooperation futures
• Use different foresight methodologies and experts
  to flesh them out
• Outcome fully-fledged cooperation scenarios as
  basis for the Futures Paper on ST cooperation
  between EU and SEA, showing benefits and
  pitfalls

6
Intensity axis we assume highly increased
cooperation
100
0
7
Region country axis 4 scenarios
Region EU
Region SEA
Country SEA
Country EU
8
basic assumptions

• We consider only scenarios with high intensity of
  cooperation
• We do not consider greater societal changes
  within the scenarios, as the time-span is rather
  short (10 years)
• Scenarios of interest
• EU SEA regional cooperation (the rise of ASEAN
  as an international ST power)
• EU SEA country cooperation (everybody cooks
  his own meals)
• EU regional SEA country cooperation (big
  brother EU)
• EU country SEA regional cooperation (we in the
  European country decide on the cooperation)

9
Cooperation scenarios

• EU-SEA region cooperation
• Upscaled ASEAN ST scheme and EC Framework
  programme cooperation (multilateral cooperation)
• EU-SEA country cooperation
• FP is no longer important outside Europe
  countries select cooperation partners according
  to priorities and possibilities (bilateral
  cooperation)
• EU region SEA country cooperation
• FP is the most important cooperation instrument
  bilateral cooperation has been downscaled
  (uni-sided multilateral cooperation)
• EU country SEA region cooperation
• FP not important EU countries select groups of
  other countries to cooperate with brain
  circulation issue (unilateral cooperation)

10
Attributes of the 4 scenarios

• specific thematic all thematic areas
• specific instruments all instruments
• Budgetary aspects
• Ease of planning implementing changes to fit
  upcoming needs
• Equal footing of partners where lies the power
  to create?
• Short term vs. long term benefits
• Importance of Europe as seen in SEA in relation
  to other countries/regions of the world
• Politically driven / science driven

11
Timeline

• Structural feedback during WP4 planning WS in
  Amsterdam, October 09
• Expert workshop during Steering Board meeting in
  Bogor, Indonesia November 2009
• Pros and cons of regional perspective
• Fact finding mission to SEA countries (April
  2010)
• Pros and cons of country perspectives (and
  entrepreneurs?)
• FFM to European countries(?)
• Delphi survey (June 2010)
• Target group scientists
• Representative, unified, bottom-up view of
  cooperation
• Scenario writing WS in Vienna September 2010

12
Expert workshop in Bogor regional perspective

• participants receive scenario sheets in advance
  with scenarios as a short text, and list of
  indicative pros and cons for each scenario listed
  
• participants are invited to list additional
  advantages and disadvantages of each scenario
  from their personal point of view in a brain
  writing exercise
• After the session the scenarios with pros and
  cons will be printed and handed out. Participants
  will anonymously rate the pros and cons according
  to perceived importance for the process

13
Agenda Scenario building workshop Bogor, WoC

• 9 930
• 930 1100
• 1100- 1130
• 1130 1230

• Presentation of 4 scenarios, brainstorming on
  relevance for EU-SEA cooperation changes
  included
• brain writing exercise with participants pros
  and cons of scenarios according to different
  stakeholders, but main focus will be given to
  region-region (and region country ) cooperation
• Coffee break
• Feedback session about the importance and
  relevance of suggested attributes of scenario
  ranking done anonymously

14
Fact finding mission to SEA countries country
perspective

• The FFM team will travel to 6 SEA countries
  (Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand,
  Vietnam, Philippine), 3 weeks
• Interviews and brainstorming will be conducted
  with policy makers and other stakeholders to see
  pros and cons of
• Bilateral cooperation
• EU regional SEA country cooperation
• Unilateral cooperation
• To be decided team coordination with OECD FFM?

15
Delphi analysis scientists point of view

• Contacts from FP7 participants, SEA-EU-NET
  events, bilateral cooperations and/or
  bibliographic analysis of EU-SEA cooperation
• Pros and cons of bilateral vs. multilateral
  cooperation
• Preferred instruments size of projects
• Reasons for cooperation barriers
• Confrontation of scientists with policy makers
  views

16
Outcome and possible continuation

• Futures paper with full scenarios to be presented
  at Budapest Week of Cooperation November 2010
• Possible continuation
• INCO-NET top-up call could finance a task 4.8
  that will delineate for each of these scenarios
  the boundary conditions in the two regions that
  directly affect the planning of joint actions. In
  addition, this task will show which actors have
  to be involved as stakeholders for the process.

17
Task 4.8 Defining boundary conditions for
successful EU-SEA ST actions

• The aim is to give ST policy makers from both
  regions a roadmap for the following years that
  identify, (for whichever scenario they choose to
  opt for), the most convenient points in time to
  jointly create new programmes and initiatives.
• These points in time are derived from matching
  the planning circles in the various countries
  (e.g. the 5 year planning circles of ST in many
  countries of SEA) but also on regional level
  (e.g. by the EC Framework Programme planning)
  matching the most convenient times to create new
  programmes (level of detail to be decided e.g.
  vacation times?)
• Added to this will be information on the most
  important stakeholders including contact details
  persons, organisations, and networks.

18
Defining boundary conditions for successful
EU-SEA ST actions cont.

• This task will provide a synthesis of the
  outcomes of the analysis work done in WP4 until
  then
• Methodology - desk research - expert
  workshops - backcasting - fact finding mission
• Deliverable Roadmap for intensifying ST
  cooperation between SEA and Europe, based on 3
  different scenarios
• Task lead ZSI
• Partners KNAW, GIGA, COLBUD, BHC, all SEA
  countries AIT(?)