In Europe, practitioners interested in the uptake of security research and innovation (e.g. firefighters, police and intelligence communities, border guards, custom authorities, explosive specialists, forensic laboratories, medical emergency teams, etc.) are dedicated to performing their duty and to focusing on their operation. In general, practitioners’ organisations have little means to free workforces from daily operations, and to dedicate time and resources to monitor innovation and research that could be useful to them. They have little opportunities to interact with academia or with industry on such issues. All stakeholders – public services, industry, academia – including those who participate in the Security Advisory Group, recognize it as an issue.Scope:
Practitioners are invited to associate in 4 different categories of networks:
a. Practitioners (end-users) in the same discipline and from across Europe (some examples: firefighters; police and intelligence bodies; border guards, coast guards, and custom authorities; explosive specialists; forensic laboratories; medical emergency teams; think-tanks on security; etc.) can get together to: 1) monitor research and innovation projects with a view to recommending the uptake or the industrialisation of results, 2) express common requirements as regards innovations that could fill in capability and other gaps and improve their performance in the future, and 3) indicate priorities as regards domains requiring more standardization;
b. Practitioners (end-users) from different disciplines and concerned with current or future security or disaster risk and crisis management issues in a particular geographical area can get together to: 1) monitor research and innovation projects with a view to recommending the uptake or the industrialisation of results, 2) express common requirements as regards innovations that could fill in capability and other gaps and improve their performance in the future, and 3) indicate priorities as regards common capabilities, or interfaces among capabilities, requiring more standardization.
Geographical priorities include:
These networks should gather the largest number of Member States or Associated Countries.
c. Entities from around Europe that manage demonstration and testing sites, training facilities, including simulators or serious gaming platforms in the area of CBRN and for first responders or civil protection practitioners, can get together to: 1) establish and maintain a roster of capabilities and facilities, and 2) organize to share expertise, and 3) plan to pool and share resources with a view to optimize investments.
Opinions expressed and reported by the networks of practitioners should be checked against what can be reasonably expected, and according to which timetable, from providers of innovative solutions.
d. In addition, support will be given in 2017 to a consortium of formally nominated NCPs in the area of security research. The activities will be tailored according to the nature of the area, and the priorities of the NCPs concerned. The network should focus on issues specific to the "Secure societies …" challenge and follow up on the work of SEREN 3.[[http://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/194868_en.html]]
Indicative budget: The Commission considers that proposals requesting a contribution from the EU of about € 3.5 million per action for a duration of 5 years (recommended duration) for Parts a), b) and c); about € 2 million per action for a duration of 3 years (recommended duration) for Part d) would allow for this topic to be addressed appropriately. Nonetheless this does not preclude submission and selection of proposals requesting other amounts.Expected Impact:
This activity directly aimed at supporting the development and implementation of evidence base for R&I policies and supporting various groups of stakeholders is excluded from the delegation to the Research Executive Agency and will be implemented by the Commission services.