Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Salem Smith oecd web version


Published on

Presentation from the conference Science diplomacy in action Governance for international science co-operation: the example of Health Research 11-12 February, 2013, arranged by the French and British embassies as a follow up to the OECD STIG project, see

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Salem Smith oecd web version

  1. 1. Health and well-being in a changing urbanenvironment: a systems analysis approach G. Salem*, ** and C. Smith**. * University Paris Ouest- IRD ** International Council for Science Science Diplomacy in action Governance for international science cooperation: the example of health research Institut Pasteur, February, 11th-12 th, 2013
  2. 2. A new approachNeed intra-urban approaches to HealthAt the same time need comparativeapproaches across cities, regions andcountriesIntersectorial and systemic approaches toHealth determinants 3
  3. 3. An ICSU ProgrammeInterdisciplinary – natural, social, medical,engineeringIntersectoral – policy relevantInternational – Glocal approach including allregions 4
  4. 4. ChallengesICSU has no track-record in health researchICSU has no fundingRely on volunteer scientists and ‘champions’Many players in the urban health areaNeed to build effective partnerships fromscratch 5
  5. 5. The Governance structure Programme Sponsors (ICSU+ ) Global Science CommitteeInternational programme Office ICSU Head Office Regional Implementation Committees ICSU Regional Offices Regional partners National CommitteesICSU National Members (~130) National partners 6
  6. 6. Global ScienceCommittee•13 scientists, nominated by ICSU Members, serve inindividual capacity (diff countries and disciplines)•ICSU ex officio and WHO Observer•Responsible for strategy and policy•Overall planning, coordination, guidance andoversight of programme•Engagement with global partners•Advocacy role with relevant funders and donors 7
  7. 7. International ProgrammeOffice (IPO)•Selected after open call for offers•Initial ‘core’ funding provided by host country (~500keuros p.a.)•International Director + science and admin support•Supports the work of the global science committeeand links with regional and national structure•Outreach, advocacy and fund-raising•Organises workshops and Conferences 8
  8. 8. Regional and nationalcommittees•Similar composition to Global Science Committee•Supported by ICSU Regional Offices or Nationalmembers•National committees established where criticalmass, interest and resources exist•Regional committees focus on less-developedcountries•Facilitate planning and implementation of projects,including links with funders 9
  9. 9. Structural challenges andrecommendations•Partnerships are critical but ownership and brandingissues can be a real obstacle•Need better incentives and credit for scientists toengage with international programme activities•Need enabling mechanisms for interested youngscientists•Co-design and trans-disciplinary approaches areunder-valued and under-supported 10
  10. 10. Funding challenges andrecommendations•Glue funds for IPO and committee activities difficultto obtain•The ‘host (or single donor) funds all’ model issusceptible to bias•Trans-national project funding (outside EC) alsoscarce•Funds for projects in less developed countriesscarce but opportunities to work with developmentaid donors. 11
  11. 11. 12