Evaluation of individual research units - Norges forskningsråd

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Evaluation of individual research units Ecological & Environmental Change Grading of scientific quality Good 32 Evaluation of biology, medicine and health research in Norway (2011) Description of unit The group has seven permanent staff members, one postdoctoral fellow, two researchers, and 9 PhD students. It reports that since 2000 it has expanded its focus to include climate change and the response of species and ecosystems to interactions among natural and human drivers. The core strength of the group appears to be in quantitative ecology and paleoecology. It also has expertise in natural and social sciences related to coastal heathlands. The group has a large number of MSc and PhD students and provides strong mentoring for students and postdoctoral fellows. Popular dissemination of research is encouraged in addition to scientific publication. General evaluation & recommendations The group exhibits strong and distinctive expertise in paleoecology, as well as in vegetation ecology, and collectively offers expertise in diverse ecosystems worldwide. The need for, or advantage of, discriminating between so-called ‘basic’ and ‘applied’ research on species and ecosystems is unclear. The self-assessment states, “Our research is motivated both by ‘basic’ questions of how biodiversity patterns emerge and are maintained, and by ‘applied’ questions of how global change drivers … affect biodiversity and ecosystems.” One might argue that both these sets of questions have limited practical relevance unless the work is conducted in partnership with managers or decision-makers who help set research objectives and who can apply the results and inferences to planning and action. The work with collaborators in Uganda and Nepal appears to be a promising example of research with clear applications to potential end users. Societal impact Some of the work appears to be curiosity-driven and does not necessarily affect societal decisions (although it certainly contributes to knowledge). Other work, especially outside Norway, may be more relevant to societal needs or to priorities relating to the understanding and management of natural resources. The educational programs in which the group is engaged in Asia and Africa also may have a positive societal impact. Behavioural & Evolutionary Ecology Grading of scientific quality Very Good Description of unit This unit is subdivided into an Aquatic Behavioural Ecology group and an Evolutionary Ecology group. There are 13 scientists in total (professors, associate professors, and researchers) and membership is still somewhat in flux because people are continuing to adjust to the reorganisation that followed the evaluation in 2000. Nearly one third of the
Evaluation of biology, medicine and health research in Norway (2011) staff is female and most staff are over the age of 50. There are nine permanent scientific positions in the group. General evaluation & recommendations Like the other units in the department, this one has been reorganised in response to the previous evaluation, and it is clear that the groups are still determining which changes have been effective. The creation of two subgroups within Behavioural & Evolutionary Ecology appears to reflect historical patterns rather than a response to current needs. As was discussed during the panel meeting, this unit may need to rethink its group structure and alter it to suit current staff as well as to optimise recruitment. We recommend that the group members discuss a possible renaming of the unit and integration of the two groups into one. Additionally, we suggest the group develop clear succession and recruitment plans as members move towards retirement. Vigorous leadership, perhaps following an international search, may be necessary after the group decides how to integrate the aquatic biology and behavioural and evolutionary ecology. Societal impact The unit has been successful at merging fisheries and aquaculture research with investigations into more curiosity-driven research on life history evolution. These efforts affect society directly by providing answers to practical questions, as well as by illustrating the continuum between curiosity-driven and practical research. Microbiology Grading of scientific quality Very Good to Excellent Description of unit The Microbiology Research Groups (MicBio) are within the Department of Biology. In the previous evaluation, microbiology was a separate department, with research groups evaluated by two different panels whose assessments ranged from fair to outstanding. The previous microbiology panel thought the sizes of most groups were below optimal size. The current microbiology unit has about the same number of permanent faculty (eight) as the Department of Microbiology in the previous evaluation. Microbiologists at the University of Bergen are involved in two centres of excellence (the Centre for Geobiology and the Centre for Integrated Petroleum Research), one ERC Advanced Research Grant, and several other substantial projects funded by national and international sources. General evaluation & recommendations The group has a small number of permanent faculty and there is a wide spectrum of research topics. These topics are split under the three headings of Marine Microbiology, Geomicrobiology, and General Microbiology. We thought the rationale for the three groups was weak because there were many overlaps or complementary research areas and the groups are co-located. However, MicBio appeared satisfied with this arrangement. We were impressed by the quality of the output from this group, which is among the most substantial in the Department. Many articles have been published in top-quality international journals and cited extensively. There are some areas of low productivity within the group that could be addressed in future planning. We recommend considering 33
Page 1: Public Health and Health-related Re
Page 4 and 5: © The Research Council of Norway 2
Page 6 and 7: 2 Evaluation of biology, medicine a
Page 10 and 11: Statement from the Panel To the Res
Page 14 and 15: 10 Evaluation of biology, medicine
Page 24 and 25: Evaluation of individual research u
Page 42 and 43: Evaluation of individual research u
Page 44 and 45: University of Nordland Faculty of B
Page 48 and 49: Seafood Quality Grading of scientif
Page 62 and 63: Fish Biology & Population Genetics
Page 64 and 65: Marine Plankton Grading of scientif
Page 72 and 73: Deep Sea Species Grading of scienti
Page 74 and 75: Observation Methodology Grading of
Page 84 and 85: Section of Plant Pathology Grading
Page 86 and 87:
82 Evaluation of biology, medicine
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Norwegian Polar Institute 90 Evalua
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
SNP Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
2. Organization and methods 100 Eva
Page 106 and 107:
102 o Gender and age balance in aca
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Dialog og tilbakemelding 106 Evalua
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Vedlegg 2 Avgrensning og organiseri
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
124 2. Fungal systematics Evaluatio
show all

Evaluation of individual research units - Norges forskningsråd

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?