COST-European coorporation in the field of scientific and technical research
Partners & governance structure

• European partners in the network – update list of involved countries
• Members in the Management Committee

Governance structure

The MC agrees to install a Core Group (CG) and 3 Working Groups (WG).

The CG consist of the chair (Geert Bouckaert) and the vice chair (Per Lægreid). They are fixed members of the CG. Further the CG will be represented by one of leaders from each WG (this can alternate between the two working group leaders of each WG). So the CG consists of five members in total. The CG is also authorized to invite experts at the MC and WG meetings, to select young researchers for STSMs among the applicants, and to shift budgets between budget items during the operational year. The MC will be fully informed about these decisions.

The operational processes of this COST-action will be done by 3 WG’s. These WG’s are topic-related and must have attention for a gender-balance and an international equity in each WG. For the first operational year, the 3 topics are:

1) WG Autonomy, Steering and Control
Coordination by: Sandra Van Thiel (NL) and Dario Barbieri (IT)

2) WG Coordination
Coordination by: Koen Verhoest (BE) and Salvador Parrado (SP)

3) WG Performance
Coordination by: Tina Randma-Liiv (EST) and Gerard Hammerschmidt (AUST)

Coordinators are selected, based on criteria such as geographical distribution, gender balance, topical affiliation, and relative young researchers. If the definition of the WGs is changed, coordinators will be re-selected. It is not necessary for the coordinators to be presented at every meeting of their WG. They can substitute each other. They set out the strategy of the WGs in mutual consultation, prepare and chair the meetings, and suggest strategies for publication and dissemination.

The definition of the WGs may change after the first operational year, based on the discussion of the state of the art and an evaluation of the appropriateness of the WGs to deal with the remaining challenges. For instance, it could be that after the first operational year a methodological clustering in WGs is considered to more suitable for the remainder of the action.