Showing posts with label funding. Show all posts
Showing posts with label funding. Show all posts

Monday, April 24, 2017

March for Science: Dispatches from Berlin

March for Science: Dispatches from Berlin

The Scientist's Diana Kwon is in Berlin, Germany, covering the demonstration designed to celebrate the research enterprise and advocate for evidence-based policymaking.
By  | April 22, 2017
March for Science, Berlin, Germany April 22, 2017DIANA KWONThe sun began to peak through the clouds on a rainy day in Berlin as marchers gathered in the courtyard of Humboldt University, one of the cities’ oldest academic institutions. As pre-march speakers took to the stage, what started off as a few hundred people quickly swelled into thousands of marchers, many holding signs about science, facts, and evidence—though a few anti-Trump and anti-Alternative für Deutschland (the right-wing populist party in Germany) placards appeared scattered among the masses.
The crowds marched relatively silently—no shouts or chants could be heard—along Unter den Linden, a wide boulevard stretching through one of the most popular tourist districts in Berlin. According to unofficial police estimates, around 11,000 people had gathered by the time the march reached the Brandenburg Gate. “We had people counting, and the first estimate we gave to the police was 5,000,” said march organizer Claudio Paganini, a PhD student at the Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics in Potsdam, a city just outside of Berlin. “They just looked at us and said, no, there’s no way that’s just 5,000.”
A series of statements by scientists from various disciplines and from Michael Müller, the mayor of Berlin, were met with cheers from the marchers. The demonstration ended with the crowd singing “Die Gedanken sind frei,” a popular German protest song about the freedom of thought.  
Leonardo Tozzi, a neuroscientist at the Otto von Guericke University in Magdeburg, Germany (left) and Beatriz Lara Amaro, a researcher at the Leibniz Institute for Neurobiology (right)DIANA KWON
“I'm marching because throughout the world—I believe—there have been some pretty strong attacks to the scientific community in many ways, and also I believe there’s a need, somehow, to reaffirm the importance of scientific investigation for the general public.” —Leonardo Tozzi 
Aude Noiray, a language scientist at the University of Potsdam, Germany (left) and Patrick Piwowarski of the Institute of Medical Physics and Biophysics, Humboldt University (right)DIANA KWON
“I feel that it’s necessary to create awareness that science is very important for society and for culture, and that it’s something that’s independent of opinions. And we have to defend it in these times.” —Patrick Piwowarski
Academic translators Laura Radosh (left) and Allison Brown (center) , and Leslie Kuo (right), a library science student at Humboldt University (The middle sign translates to: “Freedom is the freedom to say 2 + 2 = 4” —1984, George Orwell)DIANA KWON
“My employer told us that we should definitely go to the march. I think for the Berlin science institutions, it’s completely obvious that this is something we need to fight for.” —Leslie Kuo
Percy Rohde, a biologist at an environmental NGO, with his two daughters (8 and 10 years of age) DIANA KWON
“We just watched a documentary on Charles Darwin the other night, and my older daughter, when I told her that in some countries—Turkey, Russia, and parts of the United States—evolutionary theory is taken out of the school curricula, she said, ‘We have to make a sign!’ And we [created] these ones.” —Percy Rohde
Marchers gathered at Humboldt University. The sign on the right says: “In the operating room, there is no room for alternative facts.”DIANA KWONCrowds marching down Unter den Linden. The sign in the middle says “Alternative Facts Germany” and the one on the far right says, “GMOs saves lives.” DIANA KWONCrowd at the March for Science in Berlin, April 22, 2017DIANA KWON
Marchers assembled at the Brandenburg Gate for the March for Science in Berlin, April 22, 2017DIANA KWON

See “Science March Sights and Signs

See “March for Science: Dispatches from Chicago

See “March for Science: Dispatches from Washington, DC

March for Science: Dispatches from Washington, DC

reposted from

March for Science: Dispatches from Washington, DC

The Scientist's Bob Grant and Tracy Vence are in the nation's capital, covering the demonstration designed to celebrate the research enterprise and advocate for evidence-based policymaking.
By  and  | April 22, 2017
“We made history!” marchers chanted at the terminus of a mile-and-a-half walk from the Washington Monument to Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. And indeed, if only in spirit, the flagship March for Science in the US capital was the largest display of advocacy for science in the U.S. for more than 50 years, according to Rush Holt, CEO of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), a partner of the march. (Official attendance estimates have not yet been released.) Scientists and science advocates joined in more than 600 marches around the globe today.
“To get this many thousands of scientists in so many towns and cities around the world to say, ‘We should go public with our science and with our concerns about the future of science,’ that is something I’ve never seen—at least in half a century,” Holt told The Scientist at AAAS headquarters following the march. “So, just by itself, that’s a success.”

Scene at the pre-march rally in Washington, DCBOB GRANT
In DC, the rain arrived early in the morning—and stayed. But the precipitation didn’t seem to dampen the spirits of the thousands of rally attendees, some who traveled from out of state to voice their support for the scientific community. The Scientist spoke with marchers from New York to New Mexico, many of whom indicated it was their first time demonstrating for science.
Karl Klose, a microbiologist at the University of Texas, San Antonio, told The Scientist that the Trump administration’s proposed FY 2018 budget, which suggests cutting funding for several federal science agencies, including that of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), compelled him to march. “I’ve never protested before, ever. Specifically when the [proposed] budget cuts to the NIH were announced, it was kind of life a gut punch to me,” he said. “Because the NIH funds most of the science in the entire country, in addition to all the other agencies. . . . For me it was very personal. I didn’t want to pass up the opportunity to promote science and to show that science still plays a very important role in our society.”
Scene at the pre-march rally in Washington, DCBOB GRANT

“This isn’t the end. This is the beginning.” –L.H. Griffin, artist, DC

Most researchers The Scientist spoke with voiced a positive message—that science has inherent value, and that they had turned out to express this sentiment in a public way. But some had strong words for the Trump administration, which they said has shown a disregard for scientific thinking in some of its policy pronouncements and cabinet nominations thus far. “I think it’s very clear that the direction of the current administration is to deny what we absolutely know is the result of human activity in changing emissions,” said Nigel Hughes, a paleontologist at the University of California, Riverside. “And this will and has in the past had many effects on Earth’s climate. I think we can learn from that, but only if we accept it and are prepared to engage with it.”
Holt mentioned some of the executive orders signed by President Donald Trump, one of which restricted the travel of people—including scientists—hailing from certain Muslim-majority countries. “If science is going to thrive, you need freedom of movement, freedom to collaborate, free exchange of ideas, and so forth,” he said. “It is true that there are some political challenges to that. And scientists should push back, sound the alarm and if necessary, push back.”

“The hope is somebody will listen. We’re not going anywhere.” –Susan Spires, associate professor of pathology and laboratory medicine, Kentucky

There also seemed to be a realization that researchers could not sink into complacency after the march ended. “I would hope that it doesn’t peter out and people do continue to look into avenues to help people; that [the march] establishes, within universities when people are training as scientists, they understand the importance of being able to reach out to the general public,” said University of South Florida neuroscientist Parmvir Bahia. “That, for me, would be a primary thing to focus on.”
Holt also said that the AAAS will be meeting with march organizers and representatives from scientific societies tomorrow (April 23), to draft a plan to build on the marches’ momentum to further their goal of communicating science to the public and to policymakers.
“We want to work with other science societies to start preparing their members—the scientists and the friends of science—to communicate what needs to be communicated,” he told The Scientist.
Marchers in Washington, DCTRACY VENCE

See “Science March Sights and Signs

See “March for Science: Dispatches from Berlin

See “March for Science: Dispatches from Chicago

Wednesday, September 7, 2016

Ottawa unveils research fund winners

reposted



Adrian Owen, (left) Canada Excellence Research Chair (CERC) in Cognitive Neuroscience and Imaging and BrainsCAN Co-Scientific Director, prepares a patient for scanning in a high-field (3T) functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) system at Western University's world-class Centre for Functional and Metabolic Mapping. (Western University photo)

Ottawa unveils research fund winners


Thirteen large-scale initiatives led by universities across Canada are the winners in a high-stakes federal competition aimed at helping the country’s top scientists make a mark in the global research arena.
The projects will split a total of $900-million in federal funding to build on Canada’s existing strengths, and advance knowledge in fields as diverse as data science and sustainable food production.
Spread over seven years, the money represents the second and, by far, the largest boost for university-based science to come out of the Canada First Research Excellence Fund (CFREF), a program that was launched by the former Conservative government in late 2014 and has since been carried forward under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Liberals. An earlier round of awards, totalling $350-million, was announced in 2015, just ahead of the federal election call.
The objective of the cash injection “is to help our strongest research institutions reach a world-leading level of excellence in areas that matter to Canada,” said Minister of Science Kirsty Duncan, who announced the results of the competition at an event at Ontario's University of Waterloo on Tuesday.
Waterloo’s growing quantum technology community is among the beneficiaries of the federal money, with a $76-million award that will allow researchers to develop ideas for devices that operate on quantum principles – from the drawing board into the hands of early adopters who can put them to practical use.
“What we’re doing is giving ourselves a chance to explore and find those applications,” said David Cory, deputy director of Waterloo’s Institute for Quantum Computing.
The kinds of devices that Dr. Cory said he envisions he and his colleagues developing over the coming years range from a prototype quantum computer to sensors that could revolutionize medical diagnostics by making it possible, for example, to easily distinguish between cancer cells and fat cells in human tissue.
The initiative will also dovetail with industry players in the region, including Quantum Valley Investments, co-founded by former BlackBerry pioneer Mike Lazaridis, as it seeks to generate a pipeline that can move quantum technologies developed in Waterloo into the marketplace.
When CFREF was created, it was billed as a way to play to Canada’s strengths by vaulting research groups and centres that are already doing good work into the world’s top tier. But proposals also had to fit with a handful of strategic areas that the government pre-selected, including environment and agriculture, health and life sciences, natural resources and energy, information and communications technologies, and advanced manufacturing.
Critics warned the competition would lead to a concentration of limited federal resources at a few big universities at the expense of researchers at smaller institutions.
Yet the list of winners, selected through a process of merit review, are more widely distributed than might have been expected – including a $49-million project led by Laurentian University in Sudbury to discern subtle differences in metal and non-metal bearing sections of the Earth’s crust.
“It wasn’t simply the largest institutions that received all of the funding,” said Brent Herbert-Copley, executive vice-president of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, which administers CFREF on behalf of the federal government. “It shows that there is excellence throughout the Canadian research landscape.”
Several of the winning proposals involve collaborations between institutions that take a multidisciplinary approach to a major research challenge. This is true of the largest single award, amounting to $93.7-million, for a joint effort by three schools in the Maritimes – Dalhousie University, Memorial University and the University of Prince Edward Island – to conduct an integrated study of Canada’s Atlantic waters with an emphasis on sustainability and marine safety.
“By combining our research, we can tackle more complex questions than we can individually,” said Julie Laroche, a Dalhousie researcher who specializes in marine microbiology.
Paul Davidson, president of Universities Canada, which lobbied hard for CFREF when it was first conceived, said the fund has enabled a different scale of research than can be achieved through grants to individual scientists or through the Canada Foundation for Innovation, which relies on a partnership model to support research infrastructure.
“We wanted to put an accent on some of those areas of research that are the most promising, the fastest moving and that have the most implications for Canada and the world,” Mr. Davidson said.
It remains to be seen if CFREF will continue in its current form after the seven years of funding has expired. Ms. Duncan said that “it would have been unfair” to stop the competition in mid-stream after the new government was sworn in and many universities had already invested significant time and resources into their proposals.

“We’re taking a look at it,” she added, noting that earlier this year the federal government launched a review panel to assess the effectiveness of Canada's research funding process. Led by former University of Toronto president David Naylor, the panel is expected to report its findings to the science minister by the end of the year.
The winning initiatives are:
1. Safe and Sustainable Development of the Ocean Frontier
Amount: $93,732,000
Lead Institution: Dalhousie University
Focus: Integrated ocean analysis of the Northwest Atlantic with emphasis on climate impacts, food supply and shipping safety.
2. Data Serving Canadians: Deep Learning and Optimization for the Knowledge Revolution
Amount: $93,562,000
Lead Institution: University of Montreal
Focus: Combining powerful computational tools, including deep learning, with massive data sets to extract useful information across a range of applications.
3. Healthy Brains for Healthy Lives
Amount: $84,000,000
Lead Institution: McGill University
Focus: Bringing computational and mathematical tools to bear on questions relating to brain function and neurodegenerative disorders to improve diagnosis and to accelerate the development of effective treatments.
4. World Water Futures: Solutions to Water Threats in an Era of Global Change
Amount: $77,840,000
Lead Institution: University of Saskatchewan
Focus: Developing new methods and tools for monitoring water quality and managing water needs, particularly in the north.
5. Food from Thought: Agricultural Systems for a Healthy Planet
Amount: $76,613,000
Lead Institution: University of Guelph
Focus: Increasing capacity, sustainability and safety of global food production without compromising the environment or livestock health and welfare.
6. Transformative Quantum Technologies
Amount: $ 76,277,000
Lead Institution: University of Waterloo
Focus: Developing new quantum devices for a range of applications including computation, materials characterization, navigation and sensing.
7. Future Energy Systems Research Institute
Amount: $75,000,000
Lead Institution: University of Alberta
Focus: Develop new and sustainable approaches to producing, transporting and using energy.
8. Global Research Initiative in Sustainable Low Carbon Unconventional Resources
Amount: $75,000,000
Lead Institution: University of Calgary
Focus: Developing technologies to reduce the carbon footprint of unconventional fuel sources including heavy oil, bitumen and tight oil and gas.
9. BrainsCAN: Brain health for life
Amount: $66,000,000
Lead Institution: Western University
Focus: Understanding higher brain function and its role in thinking, learning, movement and communication to better maintain healthy cognitive performance throughout life.
10. Canadian Particle Astrophysics Research Centre
Amount: $63,744,000
Lead Institution: Queen’s University
Focus: Build on efforts that began with the Nobel prize-winning Sudbury Neutrino Observatory experiment to use particles arriving from deep space to study fundamental questions about matter and the universe.
11. Metal Earth
Amount: $49,269,000
Lead Institution: Laurentian University
Focus: Gaining an improved understanding of the process that governs the distribution of metal resources in Earth’s crust at continental scales.
12. Montreal TransMed Tech Institute
Amount: $35,625,000
Lead Institution: Polytechnique Montréal
Focus: Developing advanced medical technologies for diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation.
13. Vision: Science to Applications (VISTA)
Amount: $33,338,000
Lead Institution: York University
Focus: Using an interdisciplinary approach to visual neuroscience and computer vision to develop new technologies for assisted living, surveillance, image-guided surgery, filmmaking and a host of other applications.
 Report Typo/Error
Follow  on Twitter: @ivansemeniuk