FromKeith BriffaDateTue May 17 17:24:34 2005
ToEystein Jansen
CCib troen
SubjectIMPRINT
Eystein
We have now heard that Millennium will definitely be funded . This means that the very
worst case scenario has been realised - because it means that the EU are not likely to call
for any palaeoclimate in the next funding round.
I have to say that, though there is normally an element of randomness in the refereeing of
EU proposals , that to a large extent is unfortunate but inevitable, I believe strongly
that the system has let us down very badly in this case.
It is clear that we, the IMPRINT community were misled ; first by Ib Troen's direction
(given publicly in Utrecht) that we should produce a proposal which was of the scale to
unify the whole Palaeoclimate community , with a specific role to bring data and modelling
foci to bear on the issue of climate predictability; that we should be careful to not to
over-emphasise the collection of new data but rather work mostly to consolidate and jointly
interpret existing data , and that we should formulate a scheme where these are fed
directly into a hierarchy of modelling experiments that would address causes of climate
change, model viability and issues of probability of future climate and its causes.
Secondly, We were misled by the accepting , on the basis of the published call, that the EU
required IP proposals of ambitious scope , large enough to move the science of European
palaeoclimate forward as a whole and with relevance to globally important issues, with
aims clearly beyond the scope of "slightly bigger STREPS" . On reading the cursory
referees' responses to our proposal , I am also moved to express my own opinion that they
are an insult to the community of researchers that constitute IMPRINT , and an indictment
of the failure of the referees to address their assessment to the generally publicised aims
of the IP concept.
To describe the whole proposal as "too complicated", and to state that there is " no value"
in the first four workpackages , and most of all , to rate the quality of the consortium as
4 out of 5 , all require explicit justification well beyond the few lines with which we
are presented.
While I have no ill will at all regarding the competing proposal Millennium , I feel that
the extended IMPRINT community can justifiably ask very serious questions regarding the
apparent lack of equitable assessment of the two proposals in the light of the published
call requirements - the efforts of the IMPRINT consortium over recent months at least
deserve answers as to how , for the sake of 0.5 of a mark , that proposal will be funded
when it clearly did not address the scope of the original call - in terms of community
integration, emphasis on wider data consolidation, scope of model hierarchy, and specific
addressing of the data/model integration towards the issue of climate
sensitivity/predictability.
Expressing these concerns should not be considered "sour grapes " . They are not and I
congratulate the MILLENNIUM team on having succeeded . They will do valuable research.
Rather these comments are justified because the review process has not taken account of the
scope of the IP concept, and the need to invoke a research plan with the necessary breadth
and expertise (and proven managerial ability - as can be gauged by the assessment of the
CARBO OCEAN coordination plan) , and because the success of the much more limited
MILLENNIUM project has already been cited by European officials as justification for the
lack of any need to fund palaeoclimate research in the next call - effectively cutting off
the wider palaeoclimate community from EU research support for the next few years.
I believe we are justified in questioning the operation of the IP concept , and questioning
it in fora beyond the circle of EU administration, which has , in my opinion has done a
serious dis-service to our community and palaeoclimate in general. At the very least , the
"goalposts" regarding IP proposals seem to have been moved and the time of many researchers
has been wasted.
Please feel free to forward this message to the rest of our group .
At 08:26 16/05/2005, Valérie Masson-Delmotte wrote:

Dear Eystein and Keith,
I hope that you had a good trip back from Beijing. On our side it was a bit hectic (3
hours delay in Amsterdam, arrival at midnight in Paris and lost of Pascale's luggage
without ability to find where it was lost!).
I have just received this suggestion from a CEA EC representative that there is a RTN
Marie Curie call for september 8th which has a lot of funding - 220 Meuros. You can
apply for up to 6 M euros for a series of PhD thesis and postdocs around a real research
network (up to 3-4 contracts per participant).
I think that it is an excellent idea... if you and your people, Eystein, would be ready
to put some more energy in the proposal.
It would require to re think about the scientific perimeter and the key partners maybe.
Sincerely
Valerie.
Return-Path:
Received: from muguet.saclay.cea.fr (muguet.saclay.cea.fr [132.166.192.6])
by dsm-mail.saclay.cea.fr (8.12.11/jtpda-5.4) with ESMTP id j4G6I6mU023329
for ; Mon, 16 May 2005 08:18:06 +0200
Received: from cincidele.saclay.cea.fr (cincidele.saclay.cea.fr [132.166.192.111])
by muguet.saclay.cea.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10/CEAnet-internes.4.0) with ESMTP id
j4G6I7Tt016417
for ; Mon, 16 May 2005 08:18:07 +0200 (MEST)
Received: from agrione.extra.cea.fr (unverified) by cincidele.saclay.cea.fr
(Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.3.17) with ESMTP id
for ;
Mon, 16 May 2005 08:18:07 +0200
Received: from cirse.extra.cea.fr (cirse.extra.cea.fr [132.166.172.102])
by agrione.extra.cea.fr (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j4G6FXcJ010248;
Mon, 16 May 2005 08:15:33 +0200
(envelope-from jouzel@dsm-mail.saclay.cea.fr)
Received: from shiva.jussieu.fr (shiva.jussieu.fr [134.157.0.129])
by cirse.extra.cea.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10/CEAnet-Internet.4.0) with ESMTP id
j4G6I5AN028850;
Mon, 16 May 2005 08:18:05 +0200 (MEST)
Received: from [134.157.81.169] (169.ext.jussieu.fr [134.157.81.169])
by shiva.jussieu.fr (8.12.11/jtpda-5.4) with ESMTP id j4G6I069096644
; Mon, 16 May 2005 08:18:03 +0200 (CEST)
X-Ids: 165
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: jzipsl@mailhost.ipsl.jussieu.fr (Unverified)
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To:

References:
Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 07:57:43 -0700
To: CAMINADE Jean Pierre
From: Jean Jouzel
Subject: Re: URGENT : IMPRINT en RTN ?
Cc: masson@dsm-mail.saclay.cea.fr
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="============_-1095865763==_ma============"
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.7.2
(shiva.jussieu.fr [134.157.0.165]); Mon, 16 May 2005 08:18:05 +0200 (CEST)
X-Antivirus: scanned by sophie at shiva.jussieu.fr
X-Miltered: at dsm-mail with ID 42883B1E.000 by Joe's j-chkmail
([1]http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)!
X-Miltered: at shiva.jussieu.fr with ID 42883B18.001 by Joe's j-chkmail
([2]http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)!
X-CEA-Source: externe
X-CEA-DebugSpam: 13%
X-CEA-Spam-Report: The following antispam rules were triggered by this message:
Rule Score Description
DATE_IN_FUTURE_06_12 1.300 Date: is 6 to 12 hours after Received: date
X-CEA-Spam-Hits: DATE_IN_FUTURE_06_12 1.3, __CT 0, __CTYPE_HAS_BOUNDARY 0,
__CTYPE_MULTIPART 0, __CTYPE_MULTIPART_ALT 0, __HAS_MSGID 0, __MIME_VERSION 0,
__SANE_MSGID 0
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64 (2004-01-11) on dsm-mail.cea.fr
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.9 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,DATE_IN_FUTURE_06_12
autolearn=no version=2.64
Cher Jean - Pierre,
Excuse-moi de réagir un peu tardivement (je reviens de Chine).
Mais surtout merci pour ce courrier et l'aide proposée ; je pense vraiment que
cela vaudrait le coup de le relancer sous la forme RTN et que l'obtention de post-docs
correspond bien à l'idée d'imprint (exploitation des données, modélisation).
Pour faire avancer les choses je mets copie à Valérie Masson - Delmotte une des
chevilles ouvrières d'IMPRINT au LSCE. Je suggère à valérie de te contacter directement.
Bien amicalement Jean

Bonjour Jean,
J'ai appris ce matin au GTN environnement qu'IMPRINT n'avait pas été accepté.
Avez-vous pensé à le relancer sous la forme d'un (ou de plusieurs) RTN-Marie Curie
(Research Training Network) pour l'appel du 8 septembre qui est richement doté (220
MEuros ! du jamais vu !); le montant demandé peut aller jusqu'à 6 MEuros, pas très loin
d'IMPRINT.
Il s'agit de proposer une série de post-docs et de thèses articulés autour d'un
véritable projet de recherche; environ 3 à 4 CDD pour chaque participant.
La DSM a une expérience dans ce domaine (Greencycles rien qu'au LSCE); on peut t'aider à
te monter un projet taillé sur mesures.
Aujourd'hui je ne vois que cette solution car manifestement la ligne "modélisation
climat" ne repassera pas au 4ème appel et je ne vois rien d'autre d'aussi bien "doté"
dans le paysage du FP6 (qui est sur sa fin).
Cordialement
JPC
<[3]http://promos.hotbar.com/promos/promodll.dll?RunPromo&El=&SG=&RAND=25607&partner=hot
bar>

Jean Jouzel
Directeur de l'Institut Pierre Simon Laplace
- Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin
Bâtiment d'Alembert, 5 Boulevard d'Alembert, 78280 Guyancourt
tél : 33 (0) 1 39 25 58 16, fax : 33 (0) 1 39 25 58 22
Portable phone : 33 (0) 684759682
- Université Pierre et Marie Curie,
Tour 45-46, 3ème étage, 303, 4 Place Jussieu, 75252 Paris Cedex 05
Bureau 303, e-mail : jzipsl@ipsl.jussieu.fr 01 44 27 49 92
***********
Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement,
UMR CEA-CNRS 1572
CE Saclay, Orme des Merisiers, 91191 Gif sur Yvette, FRANCE
tél : 33 (0) 1 69 08 77 13, fax : 33 (0) 1 69 08 77 16
e-mail : jouzel@lsce.saclay.cea.fr






--
Professor Keith Briffa,
Climatic Research Unit
University of East Anglia
Norwich, NR4 7TJ, U.K.

Phone: +44-1603-593909
Fax: +44-1603-507784
[4]http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/people/briffa/

References

1. http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr/
2. http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr/
3. http://promos.hotbar.com/promos/promodll.dll?RunPromo&El=&SG=&RAND=25607&partner=hotbar
4. http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/people/briffa/