INTERVIEW WITH SINIŠA BOROTA – INSTITUTE FOR DEVELOPMENT AND INNOVATION (IRI)

“We want to see differences in the implementation of cutting-edge open-science principles between them, to understand which are the strong points and where improvements are needed”. In this interview, Siniša Borota, Program Manager at IRI, explains how they plan to oversee the alignment of BEAMING results with European Research Area priorities and conduct the assessments of institutional Open Science practices.

Q: Could you explain your role in conducting assessments of Open Science practices in the European Union and widening countries? Why is it necessary to conduct this activity?

A: Certainly. Our role is to assess the current Open Science practices in higher education institutions and research institutes in the European Union and widening countries. We want to see differences in the implementation of cutting-edge open-science principles between them, to understand which are the strong points and where improvements are needed. Based on this we can develop a concise set of roadmaps that provide actionable recommendations to help them adopt, integrate, and improve open science practices more effectively. This is important because these practices enhance transparency, accessibility, inclusiveness, and collaboration in research, which is crucial for advancing the bioeconomy sector and contributing to wider sustainability goals.

Q: The Institute for Development and Innovation is also in charge of aligning BEAMING results with ERA priorities (European Research Area), and supporting research assessment practices, what are the main outputs of these tasks?

A: Results of aligning BEAMING’s results with the most recent ERA priorities will be presented in the Report on BEAMING achievements in implementing ERA priorities (D10.3). We will present this report at a final event in Budapest, gathering the most relevant stakeholders, to highlight our cumulative efforts.

Another important output is related to a collection of best practices and recommendations for improving research assessments. The goal is to redefine and broaden the scope of traditional quantitative metrics to include values like transparency, citizen involvement, collaboration, social impact, etc. This will help partner institutions support research that is better aligned with the broader ERA goals.

We will also organize online workshops to enhance understanding of ERA priorities and help the institutions connect with the most up-to-date policy agenda. The video material from these workshops will be open to the public.

Q: Could you tell us a bit about how you plan to create a tool integrating and compiling all the results generated in the previous project tasks? What are the main challenges?

A: One of our key outputs will be the BEAMING Toolbox for ERA implementation. This toolbox will consolidate individual action plans on 4 BEAMING pillars – Bioeconomy Research, Open Science, Knowledge Valorization, and Inclusive Innovation Culture, and valuable inputs gathered directly from local expert stakeholders. Its design will be widely adoptable, helping partner institutions implement effective research and innovation strategies in line with ERA priorities. It is all about ensuring that our results and outputs are sustainable and impactful beyond the project’s lifecycle.
The challenging part is to harmonize a vast variety of information and transform this complex input into a toolbox that is concise, widely adaptable, and designed in a user-friendly way. This is crucial for supporting higher education institutions and research organizations in aligning with ERA priorities in the best way possible. Therefore, we need to collaborate closely with our project partners and follow the iterative data-gathering process.