The requests process often involves several steps and various different groups from within the EKLIPSE Community. When eligible requests are progressed, they often lead to the need for Expert Working Groups, knowledge syntheses or different kinds of foresight events such as conferences and events or science cafes. The process is explained in more detail below and in our short video.
Calls for requests
Our first Call for Requests (CfR.1/2016, Sept 2016) generated 15 submissions (see pdf) and resulted in the selection of five requests.
Our second Call for Requests (CfR.2/2017, Oct 2017) generated 12 submissions (see pdf) and resulted in the selection of five requests.
Our third Call for Requests (CfR.3/2018, April 2018) resulted in ten requests, four of which were selected to go through to the scoping phase. Based on a suggestion from the Strategic Advisory Body (SAB), they first went through a dynamic phase of cross-fertilisation where we invited requesters and other parties to discuss potential partnerships on a request, contribute to the framing of a request, and/or potentially merge two or more requests into a more strategic EU policy-relevant question.
NOW OPEN: CfR. 5/2020/1 Invitation to request knowledge for informed decision-making - Policy and other societal actors are invited to identify topics or evidence needs relating to biodiversity and ecosystem services and of EU policy relevance, requiring in-depth analysis and a consolidated view from science and other knowledge holders.
Requests in the scoping phase
None at the moment
Click on a request to read more about it and its related activities and outputs:
- CfR.3/2018/1 To determine the kind of and how to cultivate hedgerows most beneficial to indigenous pollinator populations
- CfR 4/2018/1 To significantly contribute to the development of the EU post 2020 Biodiversity Strategy and the success of its implementation by, inter alia, ensuring the policy relevance of the ALTER-Net conference sessions and maximise uptake of its outputs.
- CfR.1/2016/2 Which types and components of urban and peri-urban blue/green spaces have a significant impact on human mental health and mental wellbeing?
- CfR.1/2016/3 How can environmental regulators support businesses to improve the outcomes of their operations for biodiversity, with a focus on small and medium-sized enterprises in the food and beverage sector in Europe?
- CfR. 5/2020/1 Invitation to request knowledge for informed decision-making -
Policy and other societal actors are invited to identify topics or evidence needs relating to biodiversity and ecosystem services and of EU policy relevance, requiring in-depth analysis and a consolidated view from science and other knowledge holders.
- CfR.2/2017/2 What are the main knowledge gaps hampering effectiveness and possible integration into existing approaches (including different governance systems and approaches) to restore ecosystem biodiversity, function and services)?
- CfR.1/2016/1 Understanding farmer uptake: what measures are most promising to deliver on supporting biodiversity and ecosystem services in the next round of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)?
- CfR.2/2017/1 How are European energy policies affecting biodiversity and ecosystem services in countries globally?
- CfR.2/2017/4 Identify methodologies for the assessment of measures to protect biodiversity, as required in 6th National Reports under the CBD
- CfR.3/2018/2 How could the comments from the scientific community support the comments/questions of the EU negotiators of the IPBES SPM on Global assessment?
- 1st Knowledge Synthesis Process : Nature-based Solutions to Promote Climate Change Resilience in Urban Areas - developing an impact evaluation framework.
- CfR.1/2016/4 What are the impacts of artificial electromagnetic radiation on wildlife (invertebrates, vertebrates and plants)?
- CfR.1/2016/5 Discussing how diverse values of nature could be integrated into public policy through a series of science cafés in Autumn 2017
- CfR.2/2017/3 Research and knowledge on biodiversity and ecosystem services: from global to European level, and vice versa
- CfR.2/2017/5 Investigate positive and negative feedback loops of ecosystems contributing to regulating climate.
- CfR.2/2017/6 Collect evidence on combined impacts which are reinforcing and further exacerbating the overall impact; e.g. invasive species impact under changing climate or impact of several invasive species or chemical impact under changing climate
- CfR.3/2018/3 How to enable a Science-Policy dialogue on biodiversity at the CBD CoP-14 Science forum?
Our first request came from the European Commission DG Research and Innovation to develop an assessment framework to evaluate the multiple benefits, disservices, trade-offs and synergies of Nature-Based Solutions (NBS). The main purpose of the request was to apply this framework to H2020-funded NBS demonstration projects for increasing urban resilience to climate change.
The resulting Call for Experts (No.1/2016) closed on June 17th 2016 and was hugely successful, with 117 applications being received and 15 experts being selected to form the EKLIPSE Expert Working Group on Nature‐based Solutions to Promote Climate Resilience in Urban Areas. Read more about the selection process here.
The Expert Working Group on NBS, as it became known, developed a peer-reviewed method protocol in October 2016. The outputs from this project include a final report and a peer-reviewed article which were published in 2017, and a briefing from the European Parliamentary Research Service.
Other activities relating to the NBS request
In December 2016, EKLIPSE, EPBRS and BiodivERsA jointly organised a participatory foresight workshop in Brussels to discuss research needed to face future societal challenges and emerging issues. The workshop resulted in a presentation, main report with annexes, and a policy brief summarising key recommendations for science policy on NBS and social innovation.
Past requests addressed through foresight activities and science cafes:
- CfR.1/2016/4 What are the impacts of electromagnetic radiation on wildlife (invertebrates, vertebrates and plants)?
- CfR.1/2016/5 How are various ecological, economic and socio-cultural values related to nature and the ecosystem services it provides emphasized in different ways in dynamic social contexts and across policy sectors?
Watch our short video about the process of answering a request.
Figure: the steps of the EKLIPSE knowledge synthesis process
1) The request process starts with an Open Call to decision-makers and policy-makers across the EU to put forward a Call for Requests. A request can be a question like ‘what is the current knowledge on a particular issue?’
3) The KCB liaises with the requester during a scoping phase to refine the question and identify how EKLIPSE could give added value in terms of what they need. This usually involves sending out a public Call for Knowledge (see some previous examples here) via our Open Calls, the KNOCK Forum, our Network of Networks and to wider stakeholders who have knowledge in a particular area of expertise. Knowledge holders post comments on the KNOCK Forum telling us about any existing publications, projects or reviews on the topic to avoid duplicating any existing studies.
a) The KCB works with the requester to develop a Description of Work (DoW). This captures the essence of the request: why the request is being put forward and what the requester wants from the process as well as highlighting the EU policy relevance of the request.
b) Once the DoW is agreed we put out a public Call for Experts (see previous examples here) on the requester’s topic. This Call for Experts is promoted on our KNOCK Forum, the Open Calls page and is sent out to our Network of Networks.
The KCB conducts a selection process to make sure the best people from different sectors, different disciplines and different parts of the EU can all contribute their expertise. Then we set up an Expert Working Group (EWG) which will work to all the guidelines agreed in the description of work.
c) The EWG develops a protocol of methods and approach which describes exactly how they will answer the request. The protocol goes through an extended peer review process which involves an open consultation with the public and all the knowledge holders of that particular topic (see a previous example here).
d) Next the EWG synthesises all the current knowledge and produces an end product, (e.g. a report). Then a peer-review is conducted on the knowledge synthesis to make sure the end product is robust and credible.
4) The end product is then given to the requester and finally, it is widely disseminated and made publicly available to all via our Outputs page.
Advantages of the EKLIPSE request process:
- The EKLIPSE approach responds directly to policy and other societal actors' knowledge needs through regular Calls for Requests
- The EKLIPSE approach builds on existing knowledge and links requests for knowledge to the most relevant knowledge holders through Calls for Experts
- The EKLIPSE approach frames questions directly with requesters to better understand what knowledge they need, for what purposes, in what timescale and with which resources
- EKLIPSE includes a Methods Expert Group, who have identified 21 knowledge synthesis methods, and can suggest the most relevant methods to match requesters' needs
Assessment of effectiveness of the product/item:
The assessments, reports and other outputs produced through the EKLIPSE approach are likely to have strong policy and societal impact as they are answering these actors' needs directly.