Difference between revisions of "Ecosystem Approach Community of Practice: Governance of EA-CoP"
Marc.taconet (Talk | contribs) |
Marc.taconet (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
How to govern a CoP. The issue is to define the question ! Governance of which CoPs?; when ? (after the project); at which scale ? (solutions are different depending on the level of scaling-up). | How to govern a CoP. The issue is to define the question ! Governance of which CoPs?; when ? (after the project); at which scale ? (solutions are different depending on the level of scaling-up). | ||
| − | Need a better definition of CoP. Define Community, define Practice ! Is it world statisticians, modellers, oceanographers, data crunchers? | + | Need a better definition of the EA-CoP. Define Community, define Practice, make your target clearer! |
| − | iMarine needs to decide where the boundaries are, with clear interfaces defined. e.g. how do communities with little IT capacity interact with the infrastructure | + | |
| + | - Community: Is it world statisticians, modellers, oceanographers, data crunchers? | ||
| + | |||
| + | - The approach can be “organic growth” (stepwise) with a nucleus (statisticians and/or deep seas communities seem to be possible CoPs) from which emulation can see an expansion of the CoP connecting iteratively with other groups, up to the universe (e.g. the global EA-CoP Deep seas) | ||
| + | |||
| + | - iMarine needs to decide where the boundaries are, with clear interfaces defined. e.g. how do communities with little IT capacity interact with the infrastructure | ||
Once the components of CoP are identified, the structure should include a small advisory board for each CoP that can decide/ influence governance. | Once the components of CoP are identified, the structure should include a small advisory board for each CoP that can decide/ influence governance. | ||
| − | In aiming at bringing together different communities (e.g. VME and EBSA), Politics are often blocking, so iMarine needs to offer a platform for discussion and exchange of opinions, in addition to the exchange of data. If the communities don’t come together, the data collected will not be used. | + | |
| + | In aiming at bringing together different communities (e.g. VME and EBSA), Politics are often blocking, so: | ||
| + | - consider the risks of competition with existing CoPs having different political agendas (for instance, for Deep Seas, InDeep could argue that they are the federators) | ||
| + | - iMarine needs to offer a platform for discussion and exchange of opinions, in addition to the exchange of data. If the communities don’t come together, the data collected will not be used. | ||
The concept of "dashboard" might provide a response to this requirement. The dashboard is integrated to the infrastructure, allowing sharing of data and results as well as supporting group discussions, in a secure environment. | The concept of "dashboard" might provide a response to this requirement. The dashboard is integrated to the infrastructure, allowing sharing of data and results as well as supporting group discussions, in a secure environment. | ||
Revision as of 17:15, 21 July 2012
iMarine is providing tools to create synergies in the community. Main goal is synergies, data and IT is just the tool. CoPCommunity of Practice. are central.
How to govern a CoPCommunity of Practice.. The issue is to define the question ! Governance of which CoPs?; when ? (after the project); at which scale ? (solutions are different depending on the level of scaling-up).
Need a better definition of the EA-CoPCommunity of Practice.. Define Community, define Practice, make your target clearer!
- Community: Is it world statisticians, modellers, oceanographers, data crunchers?
- The approach can be “organic growth” (stepwise) with a nucleus (statisticians and/or deep seas communities seem to be possible CoPs) from which emulation can see an expansion of the CoPCommunity of Practice. connecting iteratively with other groups, up to the universe (e.g. the global EA-CoPCommunity of Practice. Deep seas)
- iMarine needs to decide where the boundaries are, with clear interfaces defined. e.g. how do communities with little IT capacity interact with the infrastructure
Once the components of CoPCommunity of Practice. are identified, the structure should include a small advisory board for each CoPCommunity of Practice. that can decide/ influence governance.
In aiming at bringing together different communities (e.g. VME and EBSA), Politics are often blocking, so:
- consider the risks of competition with existing CoPs having different political agendas (for instance, for Deep Seas, InDeep could argue that they are the federators)
- iMarine needs to offer a platform for discussion and exchange of opinions, in addition to the exchange of data. If the communities don’t come together, the data collected will not be used.
The concept of "dashboard" might provide a response to this requirement. The dashboard is integrated to the infrastructure, allowing sharing of data and results as well as supporting group discussions, in a secure environment.
Industry and NGOs would have an interest in this form of collaboration.
Promote: - the dashboard idea - the role of the iMarine platform in EU's eRS-Fishframe-Cost environment - the outreach to Data rich on-going Policy processes: CBD/GOBI, IMO, International Seabed Authority. - Deep Seas could become client via the InDeep group headed from Southhampton
