Yearly Archives / 2012

FP7 Social Science application top tips

EU

If you are thinking about applying for a Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) related call under FP7 and missed the info day, fear not I have some useful tips from the day to share with you. The European Commission SSH Unit representative said that proposals should:

  • include a range of partners from different countries and show added value for each of these
  • use both qualitative and quantitative methods
  • look at projects funded on the website between 2007-10
  • not replicate previously funded projects
  • pay attention to dissemination plans (give specific info on the journals, conferences, etc)
  • demonstrate interaction between the different Work Packages
  • support Policy.

There were several other presentations on the day which you can access using via UKRO the links below:

Key messages from the July ECR Forum! Winning grant funding and writing papers for publication.

Guidance

We’ve started a series of open forum meetings for academics at an early stage in their research careers (ECRs) to provide an opportunity to ask for advice and guidance from a team of experienced academics and research managers in an informal setting. Questions can be about anything related to research – from publications to projects to funding to research strategy! The Forums also provide an opportunity for ECRs to network with colleagues from across the University.

The first Forum meeting took place on Wednesday this week and provided seven ECRs with the opportunity to meet with Prof Stephen Page (School of Tourism), Dr Robert Britton (School of Applied Sciences) and Julia Taylor and myself from the Research & Knowledge Exchange Office (R&KEO). The main discussion points were around writing and submitting a first research proposal and writing papers for publication. The key messages were:

First research proposals – The key message here is collaboration! You need to work collaboratively with others (both at BU and external) to learn and to be successful. Ideally you should have an internal mentor in a similar research area to you who you can talk through your ideas with, who can comment on your draft proposals, and who can advise you on your career.

For large grants there are two main ways in: as a Principal Investigator (PI) on your own proposal to a dedicated ECR call or as a Co-Investigator (Co-I) on a colleagues’ proposal to a standard call. You will need to select the right scheme for you and your research. Many funders offers schemes specifically targeted at ECRs (e.g. ESRC’s Future Research Leaders scheme or EPSRC’s First Grant scheme). You will need to identify at least one experienced academic who will mentor you if the proposal is successful and to identify a suitable mentor you need to network and build relationships with experienced colleagues with similar interests. Ideally the mentor will be someone you can meet with regularly, so a colleague at BU or a University nearby is perfect. You can also submit a proposal to a standard call as Co-I with a more experienced colleague as PI. To identify a colleague to work with you need to network and meet colleagues with similar interests. Prior to submitting a collaborative bid it is beneficial to have previously worked with, or at least know, your collaborator – this is reassuring to funders as they can see evidence of an existing, productive relationship and also gives you both the confidence that you know you can work well together (this can save problems down the line if you prove to be incompatible!). Start early when writing proposals as the process will take much longer than you initially anticipate and you will need enough time to ensure your proposal can be reviewed and refined and improved throughout the writing process to ensure the best chance of success.

Also vitally important is gaining experience by submitting proposals for small research awards such as travel grants and small grants offered by charities.  The application forms are usually short so do not take a lot of time to prepare and they give you vital proposal writing practice and experience and often you receive feedback that can help develop your skills further. Small research awards are important in building and progressing your research career as they indicate that you are continuing to undertake research and that you are gaining valuable experience in budget management, project management and delivery. This is essential experience to be able to demonstrate to funders for larger funding calls that you are a capable researcher and have a track record of successful project delivery; they will also help to build your confidence as a researcher. Smaller calls often have quicker response times meaning you can use the awards to continue your research whilst you are waiting for award decisions from larger funding proposals, such as to the Research Councils.

Prior to submitting your bid externally you are strongly advised to put your draft proposal through the University’s internal peer review scheme (the RPRS). You will receive feedback from two experienced academics and from the Research Development Unit. This can help you to shape your final proposal and to ensure it stands as good a chance as possible of being awarded. At a more local level bid writing need not be a lone activity – ask more experienced colleagues in your School for their advice and guidance.

BU’s Grants Academy provides an excellent opportunity to develop the skills and expertise required to design, write and structure a competitive, fundable research proposal. Academics attend an intensive two-day training workshop delivered by Dr Martin Pickard which looks at how to write a winning grant proposal and then receive dedicated support afterwards for a period of 18 months to write research proposals. The dates for the next academic year are currently being finalised and will be published on the Blog soon however if you’d like to express your interest in joining the Academy then email Caroline O’Kane and she’ll provide further details.

Writing papers for publication – again the key message is collaboration! Single author journal papers, especially as an ECR, are becoming increasingly rare and you will need to collaborate with colleagues (at BU and at other institutions) to produce papers, particularly people with skills you don’t have. Each author should bring a new perspective and skill set to the paper. One of the benefits of collaborating with co-authors is that more experienced colleagues can offer advice and guidance and revise the paper prior to submission to the journal – this will ensure your paper has the best chance of being accepted. The different perspectives of co-authors are also very useful in developing and refining your paper. It is critical that the submitted paper is written in excellent English and many papers are rejected on the basis that the language, grammar, etc are not up to scratch. Colleagues can help with this and you should always proof-read your paper prior to submission. Match the standard of the published articles you have read in journals and use this as a guide. Always take time to craft something good – it is quality over quantity. Having 3 or 4 strong papers is much more beneficial to your career and enhances your ability to get grant funding than 10 poorer papers. Be ambitious and challenge yourself! Try submitting to a journal with an excellent reputation – if you’re not successful then try a different journal.

open access logo, Public Library of ScienceOne way to get your paper published more quickly and make your results available to a larger audience is to publish via an open access outlet. There are dedicated open access journals or you can publish via a hybrid journal (a traditional print journal that also offers an open access option). BU has been running a successful Open Access Publication Fund for just over a year now to support academics and researchers to publish via this route.

Don’t just have one thing on the go at once! – you should build a portfolio of your research and have lots of activity (papers and proposals) going on at the same time. For example, if you are awaiting a decision on a Research Council proposal then keep submitting small grant applications in the meantime, or be working on your next journal paper as soon as you’ve submitted your current one. To build your academic career you need to demonstrate consistent performance with grants and outputs and also excellence in teaching.

If you’re interested in coming to one of the next ECR Forums you will need to book to confirm your attendance (this is so we can order enough food and refreshments in advance). The next Forums are scheduled as follows (rooms to be confirmed):

17 September 12:30 – 15:00 on the Talbot Campus

19 November 12:30 – 15:00 on the Lansdowne Campus

11 December 12:30 – 15:00 on the Talbot Campus

Defra Funding Opportunity – Development of coordinated in situ and ex situ UK farm animal genetic resources conservation strategy and implementation guidance

BU research, Funding opportunities

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs invites applications for its development of coordinated in situ and ex situ UK farm animal genetic resources conservation strategy and implementation guidance call.

This call aims to fund a project that will provide an up to date record, analysis and evaluation of effectiveness of current breeding programmes and conservation strategies for farm animal genetic resources and FAnGR at risk in the UK and provide evidence-based best practice for conservation strategies and breeding programmes that can be used directly by livestock breeders, policy makers and advisors aiming to conserve sustainably FAnGR in the UK. The project is expected to start by 1 October 2012 and take no more than six months to complete ending by 31 March 2013.

View the full details of this call here.

The RKE Operations team can help you with your application.

Defra Funding Opportunity – Biodiversity segmentation scoping study

BU research, Funding opportunities

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs invites applications for its biodiversity segmentation scoping study.

The aim of this project is to undertake a biodiversity segmentation scoping study, to help understand the attitudes, values, motivations and behaviours of key groups and how to engage them more effectively. The objectives of the project are: to undertake a review of existing segmentations, data sources and relevant literature, to inform understanding of target audiences and behaviours and possible approaches to increase engagement with biodiversity issues; to undertake in-depth qualitative research with key groups, including key stakeholders and public groups; to assess options and make recommendations for development of a full-scale biodiversity segmentation, including consideration of target audiences and behaviours; to make other recommendations in addition to or apart from segmentation to help identify and understand target audiences and behaviours and develop effective interventions and approaches; to be flexible in response to evidence needs identified by the people engagement group and inform its work, as well as future biodiversity people engagement policy; to work closely with the two PEG task and finish groups on priority audiences and priority behaviours; to provide high quality outputs in a range of formats. It is expected that the cost of the project will be within the range of £70,000 to £100,000.

View the full details of this call here.

 The RKE Operations team can help you with your application.

BU celebrates Digital & Creative Economies at the Olympics

BU research, Featured academics

The excitement of the London 2012 Olympic games is starting to be felt in many corners of the UK, including Dorset. BU will join in with these celebrations with UKTI and the Dorset Olympic Group who are staging a weeklong programme of sector-focused business events in Weymouth. One such event will be the Creative & Digital Economies showcase which is designed to celebrate the strength of the UK in digital media innovation and content production in a global market.

 

BU will promote their Creative & Digital Economies Research Theme by curating an exhibition of work by leading South West based Creative & Digital Economies practitioners.  This event will provide a unique opportunity to associate BU with an enviable and well-respected collection of successful innovators, whilst showcasing our engagement with the Creative & Digital Economies and positioning us as a centre for research, knowledge exchange and business services in this sector.

Applying for FP7 Transport? Then read on …

EU

Attending info days are a key way to meet potential partners and to find out more about a call, but for some busy academics there just isn’t enough time to go.  Thankfully if you missed the FP7 Transport infoday, you can download the presentations, see minutes of the Q&A for surface transport and air transport and also take a peek at the Brokerage session presentations and partner profiles.

There is also a lunchtime webinar tomorrow on the Transport Systems Catapult.  Join the live, interactive webinar chaired by Andrew Everett , Head of Transport at the Technology Strategy Board and hear an update from Daniel Ruiz , Project Manager for the Transport Systems Catapult, on the analysis of the survey results of a study to inform the enhanced business casefor the Transport System Catapult and explaining what the next steps in the process will be.

EPSRC – Research Challenges in Geological Storage for Carbon Capture and Storage

BU research, Funding opportunities

Closing date: 16:00 on 13 November 2012

Issue date: 25 July 2012

Category: Invitation for proposals 

Related theme: Energy

EPSRC, as part of the RCUK Energy Programme invites proposals for collaborative research projects to undertake fundamental engineering and physical sciences research to tackle challenges around geological storage that will help advance carbon capture and storage (CCS) towards deployment.

The Energy Programme supports a substantial portfolio in carbon capture and storage research, but the majority of it supported through EPSRC focuses on carbon capture and transport. It is clear that geological storage aspects of CCS offer substantial research challenges so this call focuses on the contribution that engineering and physical sciences research can make to the challenges of geological storage for CCS.

The scope of the call was developed at a scoping workshop held on 10 July 2012. A report of the outputs from this workshop can be downloaded from this page.

Contact: Jacqui Williams

The RKE Operations team can help you with your application. 

ESRC Future Research Leaders scheme 2012/2013 – how to apply

Funding opportunities

The ESRC’s Future Research Leaders call is currently open with a closing date of 4th October 2012.

Universities are expected to consider applications very carefully prior to submitting them to the ESRC through this call, and all applications need to be supported with a letter from the PVC (Research, Enterprise and Internationalisation).

With this in mind BU has established a process for submissions to this call. All proposals must be submitted to a special version of our internal peer review scheme (the RPRS) first and must be signed off by Matthew Bennett as PVC (Research, Enterprise and Internationalisation) prior to submission.

For applicants interested in the scheme, the key internal dates are as follows:

28th Aug Proposals to be submitted to the RPRS and sent for review.
10th Sept Proposal feedback to be returned to applicants.
10th Sept – 21st Sept Applicants to finalise proposals based on reviewer feedback.
21st Sept Final proposals to be sent to Matthew Bennett (via RKE Ops).
  Matthew Bennett to review and approve final proposals (and write the PVC letter of support). Once reviewed, CRE Operations will let applicants know when to submit via Je-S.
26th Sept Final decision from Matthew Bennett re: proposals to submit
26th – 1st Oct Selected applicants finalise proposals
1st Oct Final proposals submitted via Je-S
4th October ESRC deadline
   

If you are considering applying to the scheme but have not yet confirmed this with the RKE Ops team please could you do so as soon as possible.

Please take the time to read through the call documentation available on the ESRC website – it contains a lot of important information about assessment criteria and what the ESRC are looking for in a proposal.

If you have any questions about this call or the Resarch Proposal Review Service please contact Caroline O’Kane

Find out about the ‘Wayfinding & Spatial Cognition’ Lab in Psychology

BU research

Successful spatial navigating is one of the most fundamental behavioural problems and requires complex cognitive operations. To navigate in both familiar and unfamiliar environments, we need to monitor various internal and external cues, build, access, and update mental representations of space, plan and execute movements. In the Wayfinding & Spatial Cognition Lab we conduct research into the psychological processes underlying navigation and wayfinding behaviour addressing both fundamental and applied research questions. We make use of a variety of methods including behavioural navigation experiments, virtual reality techniques, static and mobile eye-tracking and cognitive modelling.

Click on image to see a short video of our virtual reality setup that we now combined with a head mounted (mobile) eye-tracker. This allows us to study visual attention across a large field of view while participants solve navigation tasks in highly controlled virtual environments that are build to exactly match the experimental demands.

The “Wayfinding & Spatial Cognition Lab” is currently involved in a number of fundamental and applied research projects:-

 

 

 

 

  • We just received funding from “Army of Angels” and the BU Foundation to start an exciting new project investigating the relationship between PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) and navigation.

 

Dr. Jan Wiener in the Psychology Research Centre leads the “Wayfinding and Spatial Cognition” lab. For more information about our projects, the team, and our publications, please visit our lab page at www.spatial-cognition.org. You can also follow us on Twitter.

We are always eager to discuss new project ideas and collaborations, so please get in contact by dropping me an email: jwiener@bournemouth.ac.uk

MRC – PET neuroscience specialist postdoctoral training programme 2012

BU research, Funding opportunities

Background

PET is a technology of key importance for understanding physiology and pharmacological mechanisms and for translation of discoveries through to the clinic. PET imaging techniques have good potential to provide high impact in both diagnosis and therapy across a range of diseases.

This call is for proposals of up to four years in duration for neurosciences research that depends on the use of PET imaging. The goal is to address continuing shortfalls in specialist post-doctoral training to enable skills development for PET imaging. The call for proposals follows up on a previously successful pilot scheme which made three awards in 2009, which sought to address two principal challenges for PET imaging in neuroscience research.

These were that:

  • Major academic centres are establishing new PET centres in the UK even though difficulties already exist in recruiting scientists with the necessary radiochemical, analysis or applications expertise;
  • It is difficult to develop or gain access to novel molecular probes for innovative applications of PET imaging.

These issues remain pertinent for the field, and this new call will seek to build further capacity in the field. Those Institutions successful under the pilot scheme will be welcome to bid under this open competitive call, where they will be assessed on an equal basis with other applicants. There is no assumption that the awards previously made will automatically continued.

Through the MRC the community is working with the MHRA to find ways to address the regulatory issues experienced by the community; this experts group includes representation from many UK Institutions engaged in PET research.

Objectives and remit

The scheme is being run through the MRC Neurosciences and Mental Health Board (NMHB) and is intended to allow suitably qualified post-doctoral researchers to both train in specialist PET-related disciplines and then potentially contribute towards the development of novel PET molecular imaging methodologies (for example, new molecular probes) that will benefit the neurosciences. It is hoped that at least four awards each employing at least one post-doctoral research assistant will be made.

To be employed on these grants, the trainee PET researchers recruited by the Institution are expected to have a clinical or non-clinical PhD in one or more of the following scientific disciplines:

  • chemistry
  • neuropharmacology
  • mathematics
  • biological sciences with experience of working in clinical imaging or with animal or cellular models

Key elements will be:

  • The provision by the host institution of a good training environment; and
  • Evidence that following an appropriate period of skills training, the trainee will have opportunities for independent research using PET imaging in an academic or industrial scientific environment.

Each award will be made for up to four years, with at least two years specifically designated for appropriate skills training relevant to PET. After training, the following years would be designated for application of these acquired skills to a neuroscience imaging problem. These time periods are suggested as a guideline only; the NMHB will be flexible if a good case is made for a different approach to suit a particular project, candidate or environment.

Further details are provided, under general features, training requirements and scientific details.

Funding available

£2m is available from the MRC’s Neuroscience and Mental Health Board. Applications will be considered by NMHB at its meeting to be held on 6th and 7th March 2013. Applications must be submitted via the JeS system by 4pm on the 25th September 2012. Applications should be submitted as a Standard Proposal, a Research Grant, to the NMHB September call and should include prefix to the title – PET Call.

Interaction with industry partners will be desirable, and preference will be given to applications that can offer evidence of meaningful collaboration with partners who are able to complement the bid and strengthen the training component of the award or otherwise enhance potential for success.

Awards may be made either to the same or to different academic centres – this has not been pre-specified and will depend upon the quality of the proposals.

For more information on General Features, Training Requirements, Scientific Details, Networking, and Advice to Applicants, please click here

Assessment process

Applications must be submitted via the JeS system by 4pm on the 25th September 2012. Applications should be submitted as a Standard Proposal, a Research Grant, to the NMHB September call and should include prefix to the title – PET Call.

Applications will be assessed by reviewers in November and December 2012. A specially convened review panel will meet to make triage decisions on the applications. Following the triage meeting, applicants will be contacted with the outcome. Applications will either be declined or go forward for consideration at the Neurosciences and Mental Health Board (NMHB) in March 2013. The Panel’s triage decision is final and not open to appeal. For those proposals going forward to the Board, applicants will be invited to respond to the referee comments. The timeline for this will be relatively tight.

NMHB members will receive the applications, external reviewers’ comments and the applicant’s response. Awards by the Board at the March meeting will be made in competition with other proposals at the Board and only research proposals of high quality will be funded.

Final decisions will be made by the Board and applicants will be informed of the decision and provided with Board feedback in March 2013. The Board’s decision is final and not open to appeal.

In addition to using the standard assessment criteria, where appropriate, key considerations for the Panel will be:

  • Eligibility for the call;
  • Quality and suitability of the research environment and of the facilities for the proposed work;
  • Quality and suitability of the general training environment(s)
  • Arrangements for mentoring of the post-holder once the grant-funded post is offered and accepted
  • Evidence that following the award, the trainee(s) will have opportunities for independent research using PET imaging in an academic or industrial scientific environment
  • Suitability of the specific training proposal and project(s) for developing the trainee’s skills and career;
  • Potential importance of the specific research being conducted as part of the training;
  • Strength and clarity of any collaboration and the potential for collaborations to strengthen the PET community in the neurosciences
  • Value for money.

If you have a query about this call please email: Joanna Jenkinson

E-mail: joanna.jenkinson@headoffice.mrc.ac.uk

 The RKE Operations team can help you with your application.

New Economic Models for the Digital Economy

BU research, Featured academics

Advances in Media Management (AiMM) researchers, Dr John Oliver, Dr Sukhpreet Singh and Conor O’Kane recently hosted a nano-symposium on New Economic Models for the Digital Economy. The event was attended by the likes of Prof. Robert Picard, one of the world’s leading authorities on Media Economics, as well as researchers from Brunel and Westminster universities and practitioners from Virgin Media  and Freemantle Media.

The group explored various aspects of ‘existing business models that are being adapted’ and the variety of ‘new business models at that are emerging’ in the media. A raft of research project ideas were also generated in a brainstorm session with the intention of working up one of these ideas as a funding application to the EPSRC.

Nominations for AURIL Lifetime Achievement Awards 2012

Research news

After the success of last year’s Lifetime Achievement Awards AURIL are now seeking nominations for this year’s Awards.

The Awards are issued to members who have made a significant contribution to knowledge transfer. AURIL Council will set up a group to assess the nominations and the Awards will be presented at our Annual Conference in Sheffield.

Nominees are expected to be able to demonstrate several key qualities namely:

  • A substantial contribution to the Association itself (either by service on Council , committees, working groups, hosting events, etc).
  • A proven track record in knowledge transfer as a practitioner.
  • A regional, national, devolved or international contribution to knowledge transfer.

As a reminder last year’s winners were Pat Frain, Adrian Hill and Hugh Thomson.

Please can you pass your nominations directly to Alasdair Cameron with a short (no more than 1 page) supporting statement.

Nominations must be received no later than Friday 10th August 2012 in order to be eligible.

Dr Alasdair Cameron MInstKT

Executive Director, AURIL

50 George Street, Glasgow G1 1QE
Direct Line: 0141 548 4765

Twitter: @AR_Cameron 
Skype: alasdair.r.cameron

Decisions, decisions: where do I publish?

News from the PVC, Publishing

My beloved cat – Tilman Bennett – is sitting on the key board right now trying to help write this post as he often does.  We will ignore the fact that he has just dribbled in my tea and focus instead on when we first met in August 1997.  In those days academic publishing was relatively decision free – you wrote the paper, selected the journal from the one or two in your field and committed it to the post to await the verdict of an editor and reviewer in due course.  Fifteen years later everything is online with a bewildering array of journal titles to choose from and academics now keep libraries of PDF’s instead of cat-eared photocopies.  Despite these changes traditional publishing models remain largely the same; free to the author with the reader having to pay for the privilege of reading your work. 

This model has been challenged in the last few years by Open Access Publishing in which articles are free to read and the author has to pay for the privilege of being published.  There are also some new online journal titles which are free at the point of submission and for the reader as well.  This debate has been stoked further in recent weeks by the publication of the Finch Report which advocated a move to Open Access Publishing for all government funded research, a view endorsed recently in an article in the Guardian, although not funded, by Willets the Minster for Higher Education. 

The Finch Report proposes three different models of Open Access Publishing:

  • Gold Open Access: where the costs of peer review, editing and production are met by charging an author’s fee, but the article on publication is free to readers.
  • Green Open Access: where articles are published in subscription based journals as now, but a copy is place in an open access repository.
  • Green Open Access (Overlay): where articles are placed in repositories which are only open up to the public once peer review has been completed.open access logo, Public Library of Science

The government supports the use of Gold Open Access which they estimate will cost the research community around £40 to 50 million a year to ensure that all publically funded research is available free to the user.  This assumes that publishing models remain largely as they are now, with existing journals and the publishing houses that produce them simply switching production fees from the subscriber to the submitter.  This is a point worth returning to, but if one accepts this for the moment then you have to ask where this additional money is to come from and sadly the answer is from existing research budgets.  There is no new money on the table although publishing costs will become eligible expenditure within government funded research in the future.  The alternative of course is that researchers will change their publishing habits, especially where they don’t have access to publication costs from research grants or where institutional open access funds like our own [the BU Open Access Publication Fund] become increasingly stretched, to favour those publications which are free to both the submitter and subscriber.  This is an intriguing question; will open access change publishing habits?  One would like to think so especially in the face of the shifting cost burden, but in reality journal rankings and the perception of what constitutes a quality journal are so ingrained in UK academics, particularly as the unofficial currency of the Research Excellence Framework (REF), it is perhaps unlikely at least in the short term.

This creates a rather negative view on something which is actually a real positive to the research community.  Ultimately it is about allowing the free movement of knowledge between researchers, the public and business/industry to help drive innovation, societal gain and economic growth.  Removing the restrictions on the dissemination of knowledge is a big deal and one we should actively support as an academic community, or at least in my opinion.  The only questions are around the implementation of this ideal and where the burden of cost will lie between the producer and user of that knowledge.  The point here is that there are some excellent low cost solutions to Open Access.  A couple of weeks back I read a piece in the Guardian about how physicist’s use a discipline specific archive (arXiv, curated by Cornell University) to provide free access to their publications, in addition to publishing in a mainstream and conventional journal.

It is of course possible to do the same using our own institutional repository BURO which is now even more accessible given the new interface provided by BRIAN.  So there are lots of ways to follow the Open Access philosophy without necessarily incurring big costs.  It is perhaps a shame that one method was so openly favoured by the Finch report.

So far the response to the Finch Report from academics has been very positive since most researchers want to be read, but it is also a change and as we all know academics can be quite conventional in their outlook.  In this respect you can understand how the model of Gold Open Access appeals since it simply involves the journals we know and love just changing the cost from reader to author and most big publishing houses already offer this service.  There has been some negative reaction from Russell Group institutions who are concerned about the cost implications given the output of their staff and the high proportion of RCUK funding they receive, but otherwise it has been welcomed by most.  I have seen some comment from journals based around learned societies dependent on their income who feel threatened by a shift in publication models; something which is understandable and potentially an issue if the publishing landscape was really to change radically. 

This is the big question – will it change the publishing landscape for research in the future, or will the status quo remain with a simple shift in who pays?  This is an intriguing question since part of me would like to see the growth of free publishing options – free at point of submission and free to the reader – and there are some online journals that are growing in reputation that do just that, but in truth I suspect that as conventional souls academics will simply continue to publish in the same journals they have and look to their institutions or research funder to bear the cost.  I would love to see the publishing landscape change but I suspect that Tilman and I are living in an utopian dream if we believe this is likely. What is clear however is that Open Access is now something that all researchers will need to actively consider in deciding where and how to publish our results.

So where does this leave academics within BU?  Well we have had the BU Open Access Publishing Fund for the last 15 months supported centrally and we will continue to monitor its use and invest further in this fund to ensure that this caters for academic demand within BU.  There is no doubt that this fund will need to grow in future and while one could expect subscription packages to decline I doubt, being a little cynical about the publishing industry, that this will happen very quickly or in pace with the needs to invest further in our Open Access Fund.  I would encourage all academics with Charity or RCUK based funding to start to embrace Open Access Publishing at least as part of the dissemination strategy for all their current grants and to ensure that they bid for open access funds as part of future grants as this becomes possible (it is already possible with some funders, including Research Councils).  This already entered my own planning with respect to dissemination of the results from own NERC grant.  In short Open Access Publishing is set to increase and to be a big part of our futures and as publishing model change we will need to change with them.  Increasing our academic reach through Open Access is in line with BU’s research strategy to be more societally focused and to impact on the world in which we live.  In the meantime periods of transition and change require one to be adaptable and I have no doubt that we will need to be.  For those wanting a cat update, he is now asleep on the floor dreaming of a day when open access extends to the cat food cupboard!

Fancy applying for FP7 Security? Need some Partners? Then you need this!

EU

If you have been having a scan over my summarised Security Work Programme and a call has caught your eye, you can find people looking for Partners on this fantastic Security Research Projects Database, developed by the European Commission National Contact Points. A total of 251 legal entities from across Europe have so far registered on the Database, which includes 15 organisations from the UK, so it is a great opportunity for you to get your foot in the door for a FP7 Cooperation call!

 

You can also sign up to attend the free Infoday in Brussels in September on the EC website.