FIV, Alm.del - 2011-12 - Bilag 27: Det Internationale UNIK Ekspertpanels årsrapport 2011, fra ministeren for forskning, innovation og videregående uddannelser

Annual report 2011 and mid-term evaluation from the UNIK Expert PanelThe international UNIK Expert Panel reports annually to the Danish minister ofscience, technology and innovation on the progress of the granted UNIKs. In2011, the annual report also constitutes the mid-term evaluation as foreseen in theperformance description of the UNIK initiative.BackgroundCurrently there are four UNIKs running, all of which were funded in 2009. Theannual report 2011 is the second report from the panel to the minister on the pro-gress of the UNIKs. The report is based on the annual reports on progress of re-search 2010 from the UNIKs and site visits to the UNIKs in May 2011.The four UNIKs:oCASE-Catalysis for Sustainable Energyat the Technical University ofDenmark.oMINDLabat Aarhus UniversityoSynthetic Biologyat University of CopenhagenoFood, Fitness and Pharmafor Health and Disease at University of Copenha-genThe universities have received approx. DKK 120 million for each of the UNIKs(including a 44 percent overhead) to cover a five-year period of funding.The four UNIKs were chosen by the former minister from a total of 28 proposalsfrom the Danish universities who were each invited to submit a limited numberof applications. The minister’s decision was based on an evaluation and rankingof the proposals carried out by the international UNIK Expert Panel.Plans for evaluation and final embedmentEvery year, the UNIKs provide a cost statement and a brief progress report inwriting. In addition to the progress report, the UNIK Expert Panel carries out an-nual site visits at the UNIKs. The Danish Agency for Science, Technology andInnovation (DASTI) holds the legal responsibility for supervising the correct useof the funding. DASTI’s supervision is based upon the cost statements, the pro-gress reports and the site visits by the UNIK Expert Panel.26. september 2011

It is stated in the funding agreements between DASTI and the beneficiary univer-sities that the initiative shall be subject to a mid-term evaluation in 2011 and a fi-nal evaluation in 2013 or 2014. DASTI shall carry out the evaluations.The mid-term evaluation is also mentioned in the performance description ofthe UNIK initiative. The following is stated:"The target audience of the mid-term evaluation is primarily the universitiesthemselves. It is a requirement that the successful parts of the UNIK must be em-bedded in the university’s ordinary activities. Therefore, the mid-term evaluationwill as a key element point to the level of success in the different elementsof the UNIK. Secondly, the mid-term evaluation may be used by DASTI and theDanish parliament in relation to possible adjustments of the UNIK initiative incase the initiative will be continued". [Translation from Danish]At present, there are no political plans to continue the UNIK initiative with newinvestments. Therefore, the mid-term evaluation is aimed primarily at the univer-sities themselves.On the issue of embedment, the following is stated in section 5 in the generalagreements on funding between the receivers of the grant (the universities) andDASTI:“After the end of the funding period, the Applicant is expected to be responsiblefor ensuring that “the successful parts” of the initiative are embedded in theuniversity’s activities and ordinary budget. In the proposal (Appendices 2 and 4),the Applicant has stated any plans for such embedment. It is expected that theseplans will be specified year by year in the annual reports.Generally, “the successful parts” are expected to comprise all parts of theinitiative. This means that only failed or pointless activities are not expected tobe carried out.The final report must include a reasoned account of the identification of the partsassessed to be unsuccessful and accordingly not planned to be carried out. Theplanned mid-term evaluation will be able to contribute to this identification”.Conclusions and general comments on the UNIK initiativeSpecific comments to the individual UNIKs are stated in separate sections. In thischapter, the panel wishes to address key issues that are general to the UNIK ini-tiative and to all four UNIKs.All four UNIKs are progressing well. The panel has raised a few minor concernswith all four UNIKs, but all have good structures, dedicated management andhave begun a process that will hopefully ensure embedment after the duration ofthe funding period. The UNIK initiative has provided the opportunity to bring in-ternationally strong teams of researchers together.Forsknings- ogInnovationsstyrelsen

ScienceThe site visits in 2011 suggest that the UNIK grant has allowed the beneficiariesto address questions they would otherwise not have been able to, in part due totheir cross-disciplinary character. Also, by integrating different disciplines withinone organisational model, the UNIK grant has helped to break down barriers tointra-university cooperation and has established vital networks for researchers.Common to all UNIKs is that there can be no expectations of great scientificbreakthoughs and an increased publication rate as a direct result of the UNIKgrant at such an early point in the process. All four UNIKs have alreadypublicised results, but as all UNIKs partly build upon the already existingresearch excellence of senior researchers, it is difficult to say whether currentpublications are mainly a result of the UNIK grant or of previous performance.The panel expects the UNIKs to show increased research output as timeprogresses as a result of the grant. The panel is increasingly interested inevidence of the the difference made by the UNIK grant. Therefore, researchoutput will be a point of attention for future site visits.Regarding international cooperation, the panel expects to see increasingly en-hanced activity in the years to come. The UNIK grant should provide the possi-bility for larger international collaboration because of the big investment andcross-disciplinary approach. As research results are produced, these will help toopen the doors to the UNIKs to new international partners, both within public re-search institutions and industry.OrganisationThe UNIKs have served as an inspiration and a laboratory for cross-disciplinarycollaborations at the universities. In this respect, the site visits in 2011 gave aclear impression that the UNIK initiative has had an effect on the culture and or-ganisation of the universities and provided an inspiration for new forms of or-ganisation with a focus on cross-disciplinary cooperation.EmbedmentConcerning embedment, there are already good signs in all four UNIKs, e.g. inthe established infrastructures and the recruitment of new researchers. Further-more, UNIK has been successful as strong research teams are now establishedwho can apply for external funds. Nevertheless, embedment plans in all theUNIKs lack some detail. As it is still a very early stage in the process, the panelfinds this understandable to some degree. However the site visits in 2011 suggestthat there is a need to raise awareness of the universities obligations to embed theUNIKs after the funding period and for each university to specify the plans andthe process further.Therefore, the universities’ plans for embedment will be of increasing concern tothe UNIK panel. As it is stated in the general funding agreement:“After the endof the funding period, the Applicant is expected to be responsible for ensuringthat “the successful parts” of the initiative are embedded in the university’s ac-tivities and ordinary budget.”

It is further stated in the funding agreement that “the successful parts” aregenerally expected to comprise all parts of the initiative. Only failed or pointlessactivities are not expected to be carried out. How will the university point outthese failed activities?The panel encourages the UNIKs and the universities to begin the developmentof an embedment process and the establishment of internal evaluation criteria.The panel will raise the question of embedment in coming site visits with in-creased concern and will expect to see more detailed plans as the funding periodprogresses.Mid-term evaluation of CASEThe overall impression of CASE is that it is professional and well managed. Thisyear’s site visit confirmed the conclusions from last year, that CASE could verywell constitute a role model for UNIKs both in terms of organisation and researchresults. There are no major concerns regarding CASE. However, the question ofembedment and continuation of CASE after the UNIK grant runs out will be apoint of attention in the coming years.ScienceResearch is strong and impressive, consisting of four pathways, six projects and18 milestones. CASE would probably have a good position in an internationalbenchmark although the field is big and global competition is strong. The groupof PhDs and postdocs showed excellent results in particular.CASE has generated a number of peer-reviewed publications and pipeline papers.Many are truly cross-disciplinary and there is a fine representation of highlyranked journals.The aim of CASE is to undertake basic but applicable research:Improve our understanding of catalytic reactions involved in producing solarfuelsUse the insight to develop rules of catalyst designDesign cheap, efficient and stable catalystsOrganisationCASE has a matrix and project organisation permeated by cross-disciplinarycollaboration and thinking at all levels including at student level. The interviewswith researchers revealed that everybody knew how their particular part fittedinto the larger picture of the UNIK. Although CASE research is highly cross-disciplinary it is all, however, within the field of technical science whereas otherUNIKs try to build bridges between very different fields of science such as medi-cine and humanities. CASE is far more cross-disciplinary than most competinginternational groups and the CASE-model has now been adopted by the energydepartment at DTU.CASE has not already allocated the entire UNIK grant to projects, which leavesroom for the management to influence the direction of the UNIK. The fundingprocess of CASE is divided in two steps - each covering a PhD period of threeyears.

CASE has substantial international collaboration, especially with Stanford. JensK. Nørskov’s move to Stanford, taking young researchers with him, has turnedinto a win-win situation for the UNIK as he remains involved with CASE.The panel believes that CASE is highly relevant to industry. According to CASE,students from CASE are attractive to industry, and many companies, includinglarge multinationals, are interested in the research carried out by CASE. Asregard to scientific outreach, CASE is a good role model. On the basis of theCASE research, a school book was published introducing “energy” to students inthe 8thand 9thgrade.EmbedmentThere are plans for eight new faculty positions, and so far three associate profes-sors have been hired and one professorship and one associate professorship areadvertised. Moreover, new computer server rooms and new laboratory facilitiesfor (photo-) electro-chemical and catalyst testing has been established.During the site visit, it seemed that CASE receives strong support from theuniversity management. Nonetheless, the message from CASE was that withoutfurther external funding beyond the UNIK grant it will be very difficult forCASE to survive in its present form and maintain the CASE brand. The panelfinds that the site visit 2011 gives rise to some concern, considering theobligations of the university to embed all succesful parts of CASE in theactivities and ordinary budget of the university.Mid-term evaluation of MINDLabThe general impression was one of significant progress since last years visit. Theresearch activities have shown good results and the staff and leaders of MIND-Labhave shown good skills in disseminating and communicating their resultsboth to academia and the wider public. Plans for embedment are still not detailedand the issue will therefore be a point of attention at future site visits. Even so,the grass-roots dedication to cross-disciplinarity from researchers, the develop-ment of an international reputation – among the wider public as well as amongscientists – bode well for the continuation of the UNIK after 2014.ScienceMINDLab only began last year, but already new appointments are well inte-grated. The management gives emphasis to cross-disciplinarity in the selection ofresearch projects and in the composition of research teams. The UNIK has stronginternational cooperation e.g. with partners in University of California SantaBarbara and in Canada. Researchers have successfully published in highly es-teemed journals and have been successful in attracting additional external fund-ing.Research is organised in five streams:Integrative NeuroscienceCognition, Language and MusicCognition and Memory

MINDLab addresses scientific problems within culture, music, language andmemory. It combines this knowledge with research on novel technologies to ex-amine the living brain, and on the most devastating neurological and psychiatricdisorders. The aim is to create new means to preserve and recover function andquality-of-life in relation to diseases.OrganisationThere have been substantial changes in the organisation of MindLab where re-sponsibility has shifted back to principal investigators and the different faculties.While the panel was impressed with the cross-disciplinary projects presented atthe site visit, there is a risk that this recent organisational change may jeopardizefuture synergies. The UNIK budget has been split up in five “streams”, possiblyaffecting the overall strategy of the UNIK as the significance of the commonboard decreases. It is a concern whether this new organisation leaves sufficientroom for an integrated management of the UNIK.Regarding the change in the organisation the site visit gave the impression thatthere is close cooperation between the head of the UNIK and the deans and thatgrass-roots dedication to the cross-disciplinary approach of the researchers isstrong. Moreover, according to MINDLab, cross-faculty collaborations such asthe UNIK served as an inspiration to the recent restructuring of Aarhus Univer-sity where the cross-disciplinary approach has been central.EmbedmentIt is unclear at this point how MINDLab will be embedded in the university. Re-searchers at MINDLab are well integrated in faculties, but if no further fundingbeyond the UNIK grant is received, there will be some casualties. Aarhus Uni-versity has a substantial strategic fund to which MINDLab can apply. The headof the UNIK is aware that a close relationship with industry is necessary, both interms of outreach and as a way to increase chances of future external funding fore.g. infrastructure. Furthermore, patents are a focal point for MINDLab in theprocess of finding an interface between academia and industry.

Mid-term evaluation of Synthetic BiologyThe general opinion of the panel was that the site visit was far better organisedthis year compared to last year. Furthermore, Synthetic Biology has handled theissues raised at last year’s visit satisfactorily, e.g. the ethical issues and the risksof a relatively narrow research focus. The UNIK appears to be progressing well.It is still early in the process and major breakthroughs in science cannot be ex-pected at this point. That being said, the panel finds that research is clearly verypromising.ScienceSynthetic Biology contains several potentially groundbreaking ideas and a highlevel of research excellence. The UNIK addresses a “hot” research topic which

presents many opportunities, but also high risk. At an international level, manyresearch groups are struggling to be in the lead.Synthetic Biology has extensive international collaboration. An internationalworkshop is being co-organised with University of California at Berkeley in Au-gust 2011. Industry contacts are not that pronounced yet, which is to be expectedat this early stage. The panel finds that if industry relations can be advanced at alater stage, it will be a very positive development.A concern last year was that the projects were overly-focused, in the sense thatthere are no alternatives if the focus of the research is proven to be wrong. Theimpression given from the second site visit is that Synthetic Biology has ex-panded its research focus. Moreover, the current management supports a moreflexible approach to the research focus that enables the groups to seek and ex-plore their success.Forsknings- og

OrganisationThe anticipated change in the management of the UNIK was a matter of concernafter the last site visit. This year’s site visit proved that the current managementis highly capable and has contributed positively to the enthusiasm and profes-sionalism which is clearly present in Synthetic Biology.There is a vast cross-disciplinary collaboration and collaboration among facultieswithin the university, which seem to drive the research forward. There are clearlynew synergies emerging across different fields of research, and this appears to behighly motivating and educational for all parties, not least for the PhD students.The implied ethical issued regarding Synthetic Biology has been discussed withinthe UNIK. Although the ethical issues are not fully resolved, it is reassuring thatthe matter is being addressed in a timely and professional manner.EmbedmentRegarding embedment Synthetic Biology has already secured significant externalfunding and will train a large number of highly qualified researchers. Further-more, the UNIK is home to important research infrastructure and a universitybuilding for a Plant Science Centre at LIFE is envisaged. The UNIK has suc-ceeded with four recent international recruitments, which will support the em-bedment of the UNIK.Nevertheless, how the University of Copenhagen intends to continue with identi-fied successful elements from Synthetic Biology after 2014 is still unclear. TheUniversity of Copenhagen is currently working on its new strategy and it hasbeen indicated that the UNIK embedment is a part of the coming strategy. Em-bedment should be a focus point on the agenda for next year’s site visit.Mid-term evaluation of Food, Fitness and PharmaThe overall impression is of a well-functioning and successful UNIK with an en-thusiastic spirit. Food, Fitness and Pharma is perhaps the broadest or the mostcomplex of the four UNIKs but handles this complexity well.

ScienceThe site visit revealed interesting and potential research projects and researchersestimated that the UNIK possesses an international competitive advantage be-cause of e.g. new infrastructure, unique cohorts and cross-disciplinary projects.Research has already resulted in several publications in highly esteemed journals.However, comprehensive research results are not expected at this point. Later onthe UNIK should be able to present increased publication and major break-throughs.The UNIK grant has contributed to financing of four core facilities and 29 pro-jects in total within four streams of research:Food, Gut Hormones and Pharma (12 Research Projects)Social Sciences and Humanities (5 Research Projects)Fitness and Muscles (9 Research Projects)Genetics and Epidemiology (3 Research Projects)

Food, Fitness and Pharma aims to identify and understand the interrelated envi-ronmental, genetic and epigenetic causes of obesity, diabetes and associated life-style diseases. The ambition is to develop new means for preventing and curingthese conditions including better, health-promoting food; optimal fitness pro-grammes and recommendations; novel and efficient regimens for changing peo-ple’s lifestyle; and new and better pharmaceuticals. This ambition is pursued us-ing a cross disciplinary-approach.The UNIK experiments with co-publications between researchers from social sci-ence and humanities and researchers from health science. The UNIK panelstrongly encouraged continuation of this work, as the UNIK apparently is break-ing new ground here. Different traditions and patterns of publications betweenthe scientific disciplines entail certain challenges to co-publications across disci-plines.Food, Fitness and Pharma encompasses already highly profiled research fields atthe University of Copenhagen. The added value of the UNIK grant appears to bemainly funding of core facilities that would not have been there without theUNIK grant and creating networks amongst researchers. Although the merger in2007, whereby the Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University was merged intothe University of Copenhagen, was a prerequisite for winning the grant, theUNIK plays an important role in bringing the parts together. Furthermore, the fo-cus on developing a cross-disciplinary approach makes a unique contribution tothe culture of the university.Last year, the panel was concerned that the entire grant was distributed alreadyfrom the outset of the UNIK. This year, the site visit suggested that the manage-ment is handling this in a very reassuring manner. There appears to be sufficienttrust in the principal investigators to allow for changes or redirections of the re-search projects over time if paths show not to be fruitful.

OrganisationAlthough the grant has financed 29 separate research projects, the UNIK hasmanaged to create a culture of cooperation within and between disciplines.Food, Fitness and Pharma has experienced that a project of the size and complex-ity of a UNIK requires a professional administration. Therefore, administrationand management has been strengthened since last year and with good results.There is support amongst researchers for the relatively high level of administra-tion, since it has made new successful initiatives like the Young InvestigatorsNetwork possible.The UNIK has not established PhD schools or MA programmes to sustain thecross-disciplinary field of research. However, the young investigators networkshave proved very successful in creating both a sense of belonging and good con-nections between the many young researchers affiliated with the UNIK.Forsknings- og

According to Food, Fitness and Pharma, the UNIK has good relations with indus-try, e.g. the pharmaceutical industry in Denmark. Food, Fitness and Pharma hasalso engaged in outreach activities aimed at potential future students. Neverthe-less, the panel finds that outreach activities could be enhanced, for example withinspiration from CASE.The researchers have good international relations and the UNIK has close con-nections to the German research centre IFB based in Leipzig (Integriertes For-schungs- und Behandlungszentrum AdipositasErkrankungen Leipzig). The centrehas a similar research profile as Food, Fitness and Pharma. IFB supports the stra-tegic plan of Food, Fitness and Pharma of lobbying for obesity to be integratedinto the future EU framework programme for science and innovation “Horizon2020”. Also in terms of embedment, this would be a vital step for Food, Fitnessand Pharma and therefore a point of attention.One concern is the low level of PhDs in the social science fields. Whereas manyyoung researchers in the ‘wet science field’ contribute to a vibrant research envi-ronment and sustainability, there are only few PhDs involved in the UNIK withinthe social sciences. The lacking development of future generations of researcherswithin these fields constitute a problem for the sustainability of the research fieldand the UNIK as such. Therefore, the panel encourages the UNIK to involvemore PhDs in the social science fields.EmbedmentFood Fitness and Pharma presents their plans for embedment along two lines orplatforms:1. Buildings, core-facilities, equipment and grants for research2. Culture and managementThe overall objective of the UNIK is that research in obesity and metabolic dis-eases continues to be a ‘flagship’ at the University of Copenhagen. The fulfil-ment of this objective demands an embedment of the UNIK into the university.