1. HOW TO AVOID OIL SPILL DAMAGES IN OYSTER FARMS? A European Project to provide better Conflict Management Tools for the Coastal Zone

2. HYDROMOD Scientific Consulting European Projects - A Chance or a Mess for SMEs?

3.  Introduction Oilspills Oilspills

4. INTRODUCTION: From AMOCO CADIZ to PALLAS - 20 years lost?

5. Beach cleaning after the AMOCO CADIZ desaster

6. ? The Project OPCOMOPCOM  Introduction Oilspills Oilspills

7. OPCOM Operational Modelling for Coastal Zone Managment ? Definition of User Requirements ? Improvement of Coastal Zone Models ? Integration of Modelling and Monitoring

8. Turku

9. ? The Project OPCOM ? The Company Hydromod  Introduction Oilspills

10. HYDROMOD Scientific Consulting Main fields of operation: Modelling of coastal, estuarine and inland water Project management Water quality studies Environmental impact assessment studies Data management

12. ? The Project OPCOM ? The Company Hydromod  Hydromod‘s Partners  Introduction Oilspills

13. Partners in OPCOM

14. Typical Test-Visit of a Restaurant in Finland

15. ? The Project OPCOMOPCOM ? The Company Hydromod Hydromod  Hydromod‘s Partners Partners  Introduction Oilspills Oilspills ? How to join the European Club?European Club?

16. How to enter/build the ‘European Club‘ of Project Partners? Picking up old Connections Using the EUROMAR gateway to MAST Support from Focal Points

17. Balance Sheet - European Projects for SMEs Positive Aspects: European experience Access to R&D-results Increase of competitveness Access to new markets Special SME-support actions Critical Points: Lack in financial resources High administrative efforts No clear identification of routine services for SMEs

18. INSTITUTO SUPERIOR TÉCNICOINSTITUTO SUPERIOR TÉCNICO: Portuguese Technical University joins Forces with European SMEs

19. Research, Universities, Companies and Public Labs Ramiro Neves Instituto Superior Técnico, Lisboa, Portugal ramiro.neves@ist.utl.pt Seen by a (Portuguese) University member

20. Research Products Tools  hardware,  software. Expertise  To exploit the tools,  To tackle uncommon problems. Knowledge  Teaching improvement,  Production of scientific literature.

21. Research Players In a “chronological” order:  Universities,  Public Labs,  Companies. Why this chronological order ?

22. Research: Products and Players Universities Public Labs Companies A Ministry Knowledge Tools LSF

23. Companies LSF A Ministry Tools Knowledge Universities Companies Public Labs How is this system evolving ? Companies

24. Because it is an evolving system The situation is different from country to country according:  national stage of development,  size of the country (market),  national research policy. EU partnerships “smooth” the situation.

25. My Own Experience Assoc. Prof. at IST (Eng. School of Tech. Univ. of Lisbon) IST has:  6000 undergraduate students  1500 graduate students  a no-longer young staff I am a modeller chairing a young research group composed mainly by students:Ph.D and M.Sc

26. Subjects of concern in a student’s based team How to supervise many students ? How to assure continuity of the work ? How to increase success of students in the employment market ?

27. Student’s needs To generate results => support To contribute for a modelling tool => co- ordination To avoid unproductive tasks => a tool To increase employment success => close relation with potential employers or good knowledge of society needs.

28. High tech micro - companies role Create specialised jobs Transform research tools into management tools, Create a market for technology, Their staff can be co-supervisor of post- graduation students.

29. IST team benefits from co-operation with high-tech companies Definition of a research program more consistent with user needs, Consolidation of our research products, Pre- and post-processing tools,Pre- and post-processing tools Co-operation on students supervision, Model preservation (waves; high).waveshigh

30. Benefits from EU projects Model integration, Smaller costs and higher quality, Credibility, Stable funding policy.

31. Conclusions Universities do have : a permanent need for innovation, access to powerful human resources: the students, freedom to choose their research subjects and to test new ideas and methods,

32. Conclusions (cont.) Universities don’t have:  Clear ideas of society needs,  Capacity to produce exploitable tools, Universities, very hardly produce:  Integrated tools  Quick answers

33. Conclusions (cont.) Micro-companies: Have a clear idea of society needs, Can contribute to create a market for technology, Create jobs for specialised people, Transform “prototypes” into exploitable products.

34. Conclusions (cont.) EU Projects involving Companies and Universities: Decrease costs and improve quality and credibility Tend to shorten the delay for exploitation, Increase market and employment.

35. HOW TO AVOID OIL SPILL DAMAGES IN OYSTER FARMS? A European Project to provide better Conflict Management Tools for the Coastal Zone