Friday, May 4, 2012


date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 08:20:18 +0100
from: Eystein Jansen <>
subject: Re: travel, workshops,management
to: Keith Briffa <>

Keith and other SCC members.

The budget squeeze is problematic and we face
the problem of meeting the reality of doing what
we were told to do: establish one large paleo
project that showed the community could team up,
avoid being split up in several projects with
different foci, and then adjusting this to the
level of funding the EU will be able to provide,
which is probbaly 50% less than what the project
really needs.

I appreciate all the problems you are faced with.

With respect to travels, I think one travel per
year of 1-2 kEuros, depending on where people
live, for the PI and those employed in a Task
to do the job is reasonable. This allows
participation in key workshops and/or
international meetings when science is ready for
presentation and dissemination, for the duration
of the period the Task is being performed.
If there are excessive travel requests, they need
to be cut. If not now, then they will be in the
contract negotiations when we trim the budget
for each partner to get to the budget we have
been given by the EU. Thus we should not do too
much micro-management of budgets now, since all
items and all partners will be revisited in the
contracts phase anyhow, but exsessive demands
need be dealt with.

In terms of management:
There are two management aspects:
1. The science management.
2. The project management, including financial matters, reporting etc.

What you ask for concerns 1. As I indicated in
the meeting in London, I think it is fair to
support the work of the WP leaders/co-leaders of
WP 1-4 and 6,7 with science management
resources. My indication then was about 1
month/year for the duration of the WP. If we
assume that each has a lifetime of 3 years ,
this amounts to 36 months of salary. My
thinking is that we need to distinguish science
management from Project management - project
office etc. This will also help balancing the
management costs and avoid having inflated
"office-costs", and show that we prioritise
having science done. And for that we also need
science management to support your work in
efectively leading the WP to reach their
Thus the best thing is to add 1 month to your
institution�s budgets per year for a three year
period, justified as WP scientific management.
This can be accomodated by increasing the
overall WP budgets accordingly. Hence, do not ban
these costs, but add them to the grand total of
the WP. I will then reduce the central
management budget accordingly, and let this only
deal with running the project office, centrally
funded meetings and take care of the "mercantile"

We need to detail how workshops are funded.
There will be some workshops that are for all
partners, only a few.
Then we have the workshops to integrate data,
which is particularly intense in WP 1.
Particuarly in WP 1, these also involve people
from outside the consortium.
I think some workshop support needs to come from
the central budget. I don�t think we are at the
level ofdetail which makes it possible to
identify excactly what we need outside of the
first 18 months. Given the importance and the
magnitude of the WP 1 data gathering efforts,
and the tight squeeze on budgets, I am inclined
to say that the data gathering workshops needed
in the first half should be funded outside of
the WP 1 budget of 3.7 mill. We can detail how
this is done later, whether by moving costs or
inside the management budget.

Hope this clarifies some things. Comments welcome.

I am available on mobile phone today 9-12 and
after 6 PM (+47906 18 858) for discussions.
Central Europe time.

best wishes,

>it is clear that we need some general formula
>for working out the travel, management costs.
>People have used random numbers . We are having
>to make hard cuts - and there is no room for
>random, inflated or unreasonable costs for the
>above. We do not know how this has been handled
>across WPs
>but I feel you need to specify a standard amount
>for institutional travel , that will be balanced
>by the use of carefully chosen locations for
>Also what can be included as management costs?
>In the situation we find ourselves in , real
>management costs should be born by the
>management budget - so do we have a rule to ban
>these across the WP costs? If we do this in WP1
>, it should be likewise elsewhere. Where people
>need resources to pay salaries , this should
>take preference.
>Also we have insufficient funds for holding
>"workshops" - so a random approach to these must
>also be avoided . Can the database WP pay for
>these? We need at least 1 per task , and at
>least 1 large one across tasks in WP1 . We have
>no money for radiocarbon dates as far as I can
>see - so where will these come from. We are
>reducing the budget as you instructed , but this
>must be helped by answers to the questions
>above. Thanks
>Professor Keith Briffa,
>Climatic Research Unit
>University of East Anglia
>Norwich, NR4 7TJ, U.K.
>Phone: +44-1603-593909
>Fax: +44-1603-507784

Eystein Jansen
Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research and
Dep. of Earth Science, Univ. of Bergen
All�gaten 55
N-5007 Bergen
Phone: +47-55-583491 - Home: +47-55-910661
Fax: +47-55-584330
The Bjerknes Training site offers 3-12 months fellowships to PhD students
More info at:

No comments:

Post a Comment