1. Issues in international collaboration in large astronomical projects Richard Schilizzi Chair, IAU Working Group on Future Large Scale Facilities

2. acknowledgements Report of the OECD Global Science Forum Workshop on Best Practices in International Scientific Cooperation ALMA Project Plan Pierre Auger Observatory Management Plan SALT Business Management Plan Square Kilometre Array Management Plan

3. A few general remarks  Individual scientists  Universities  Research institutes  International Scientfic Unions  Funding bodies  Government agencies  Legal advisors  High level government officials  Intergovernmental agencies  General public  large international research collaborations are not straightforward  they involve long drawn-out procedures  international is more complex than national  the players are:

4. What forms do research collaborations take? 1) between individual scientists – informal, no exchange of funds 2) between research institutions – can be more formal, requiring government agency funding 3) collaborations needing large injections of capital or operational funds formal approach needed with more complex arrangements, even if no exchange of funds can be based on an existing facility, or require a new facility 4) collaborations designed to provide a new facility, including those beyond the capability of a single country Driving motivation: mutual benefit

5. International collaboration or not? advantages can broaden the research base reduces financial burden to individual partners (but note that total cost usually higher) cross-cultural benefits at scientific and personal level can provide access to facilities or information beyond the reach of individual participants disadvantages loss of national sovereignity and control loss of “home-team” advantage extra administrative complexity potential difficulties of working abroad

6. Policy-makers Governments and their agencies dont like surprises! Bring policy-makers into the process at an early stage

7. Types of collaborative agreement Intergovernmental treaty eg ESO Cooperative agreement eg Canary Islands Agreement on Cooperation in Astrophysics Inter-agency agreements eg CFHT, IRAM, JCMT, Gemini, JIVE, ALMA

8. leadership Individual level Need motivated individuals to steer project through the scientific, administrative and political processes Consultation with potential stake-holders and scientific community Lead country? Host to formal secretariat/headquarters/facility itself If a lead country arrangement is preferred, better to evolve this early in the project so host country characteristics can be included in project decisions

9. Funding and finance Flat rate Based on GDP Based on expected usage Host country premium? Cash vs “in-kind” “juste retour ” Realistic negotiations with partners and government agencies require realistic cost estimates early in project Need to consider division of costs amongst partners Business plan Problem: how to align funding opportunities world-wide in an international project

10. Project governance Statutes, rules and procedures  managerial framework clear decision-making procedures voting rights Should the organisation be a legal entity? Entrance and exit criteria for partners

11. Access policy Open access Only members of the collaboration Access by payment

12. Intellectual Property Procedures needed from the start Take account of different guidelines and regulations for IPR in the different countries

13. Site selection for facility, HQ, or science centres Best facility site for the best science Need well-defined and transparent criteria to allow potential sites to compete on a fair basis In some cases, site is determined uniquely by geography. Where this is not clear-cut, financial and political trade-offs may play a role.

14. Industry and business Large astronomical projects attractive to commercial interests Participation in pre-competitive research together with research institutes Contracts for construction Government policy to encourage public-private partnerships in many countries

15. Organisation and management Pre-international funding Square Kilometre Array Funded ALMA Pierre Auger Observatory South African Large Telescope

16. International SKA Steering Committee Executive Committee International Science Advisory Committee SKA Project Office Engineering Management Team Site Evaluation and Selection Committee Simulations Working Group Outreach Committee Long Term Planning Committee Square Kilometre Array Current organisation

17. Outreach Committee International SKA Steering Committee Executive Committee International Science Advisory Committee International Technical Advisory Committee SKA Project Office Engineering Working Group Site Evaluation Committee Simulations Working Group Science Working Group International Site Selection Advisory Committee Industrial Liaison Committee sponsors Square Kilometre Array Likely organisation in 2005

18. Pierre Auger Observatory Separate financial and scientific oversight - Collaboration Board - Financial Board Executive financial institution (CERN) 80% of construction funding is in-kind Common fund is essential

19. ALMA One ALMA Board - no separated financial and scientific oversight Financial authority remains with the legal entity in each region, the “regional executive” -Fair Return  multiple project offices

20. South Africa Large Telescope (SALT) Foundation Pty LTD Board of directors Officers of the Board: Project Manager Project Scientist Chief Financial Officer Company Secretary Private company, registered in SAfr, and operated as a non- profit organisation 10 shareholder organisations in 5 countries Limited liability, long term, clear ownership structure Shareholders fund capital costs and first 10 years of operation

21. Global issues global funding – role for the OECD Global Science Forum? develop astronomy-wide scientific priorities for large projects – role for the IAU? multi-wavelength observatory requires telescopes across the e-m spectrum to be contemporaneous and able to see the same sky forget about detailed collaboration on individual projects, and agree at a global level that one country or region does one of the large projects, and another country or region does another.

22. Conclusions Successful international collaborations require: Clear and compelling scientific objectives Motivated scientists committed for the long term Mutual benefit for all participants Credible organisation and management Early participation of policy-makers A means of internationally-coordinated funding What role for the IAU? develop scientific priorities for individual projects? global “forward look” for astronomy?