White Paper on Theme Areas
Prepared by Anders W.
Andren, Director, Wisconsin Sea
Grant
Washington, March 1, 1999
Background | Concept
| Areas | Responsibilities
| Procedure | Definitions
As we move into the 21st century, we are embarking upon a period of great scientific, technological, environmental and
governmental change. There is no doubt that the technology-driven information revolution now in its early stages will continue to
change the way in which the we all will carry out our missions, the way we interact with our constituents, shape our research
and development programs, and the way we interact with each other. As NOAA keeps refining its mission and goals, as they
seek to focus on its unique strengths, so must the National Sea Grant College Program strive to optimize the way we do
business.
With this realization in mind, it was at the September 1998 Sea Grant Association Meeting held in Fairbanks, Alaska, that SGA members voted to support a document that set forth the principles and definitions of Initiatives and Investments.
It was also recognized that we must establish a procedure for developing new Initiatives and Investment efforts. To that end, the SGA membership voted to support the concept of Thematic Areas and Theme Teams. These teams would be responsible for the development of a number of products that could enhance the way in which the entire Sea Grant College Program operates. A thematic area approach also offers the following benefits:
Helps organize all Sea Grant activities under common areas of interest
Serves as a method for synthesizing thematic area efforts on a national scale. All programs will have to be more results-oriented in the "New Procedures" and GPRA era. Individual programs must intensify their efforts on writing and synthesizing research and outreach results using a thematic area approach. A national scale synthesis of these results could therefore elevate the visibility the entire Sea Grant network
Creates opportunities and new directions for initiatives and investments
Catalyzes cooperative efforts between: Sea Grant College Programs, individual programs and the NSGCPO, Sea Grant
and NOAA, and Sea Grant and DOC
Provides opportunities for cooperative ventures with other agencies
Focuses the flow of funds to high impact areas
Provides a forum to organize Communications, MAS, education and research efforts on a national scale
Provides a mechanism to further solidify Sea Grant’s local, regional and national identity
Accommodates an interdisciplinary approach
Provides a strategically useful method for providing information to policymakers
Provides information for strategic planning
The SGA membership also voted at the Fairbanks meeting to develop a framework that would set forth the operational principles of Theme Teams. This paper sets forth these operating principles.
A Thematic Area is a core area of emphasis and expertise in Sea Grant’s purview. Ideas for themes could come from
anywhere within the Sea Grant enterprise, but should be conveyed to the Program Mission Committee (PMC). The PMC will
then coordinate this information for eventual presentation to the Board of Directors. After discussion with the SGA
membership, the Board of Directors would then work with the Nation Sea Grant College Program Office to establish priorities
for thematic areas.
Proposed List of Thematic Areas.
The following list of thematic areas was agreed upon in principle at the Fairbanks meeting. Some minor modifications were made during a Sea Grant leadership retreat in Seattle, October 28 and 29, 1998 (Dearborn, Moll, D’Elia, Andren, Echols, Stevens, Baird, Schuler, Stephan, and Kudrna).
Aquaculture
Coastal Communities and Economies
Coastal Hazards
Ecosystems and Habitats
Education and Human Resources
Fisheries
Ocean and Coastal Technologies
Seafood Science and Safety
Urban Coast
Responsibilities of Thematic Area Teams.
Basically, the team would be responsible for the entire product. The team would develop a position paper with initial justification, background and synthesis of the scientific issue. The final product(s) would ideally include: (1) A fairly detailed state-of-the-art review of the science and recommendations for research priorities; (2) Short one-pagers; (3) Brochures; and (4) Workshops or Conferences.
To accomplish these tasks, it is anticipated that the Thematic Team members would convene a workshop of experts for the development of synthesis and priorities. This would hopefully be done with funds from the national office. A synthesis effort might also be encouraged via a yearly national competition.
Each Thematic Area Team would ensure that the product (or products) is developed within an agreed upon time frame, with a date-certain for a product. The Thematic Area Teams would be appointed (selected) for an indefinite time period.
Procedure for Appointing Thematic Area Teams.
SGA membership, via Board of Directors, would select the SGA representative. This Sea Grant Director would serve as a co-chair.
The National Sea Grant College Program Office, via the Director, would appoint one or two additional members. One person from the NSGCPO would serve as co-chair.
The National Review Panel would appoint a liaison to each Thematic Area Team.
Definitions of Investments and Initiatives.
"National Strategic Investments"
Can be former "national initiatives" that have occurred but have been incorporated into the core appropriation, and are based on reallocation and refocusing of existing funding resources
Managed and competed at the local level with national coordination
Are national, not geographically limited in scope, addressing issues of national importance
Developed when Sea Grant support can make a definable impact and demonstrate Sea Grant's unique approach
Extend beyond the usual purview of the separate programs, either because of scale of multi-program effort needed or
because the activity itself is at a stage in development where a "pulsing" of the activity is likely to yield significant benefits appropriate for the expenditure of existing funds, rather than development as a separate new initiative or as a multi-agency partnership
May get possible NSGO match of exceptional local activities, particularly for regional collaborations and for outreach components, but the amount of funding held back by NSGO should be minimal
Based on concept that has scientific pith as well as real world potential
Represent an undertaking with the potential to involve investigators from a substantial number of our institutions
Have some grounding in existing program activities and are of sufficiently high priority in the future to be absorbed in the
regular programs, or that can be developed still further as a national initiative
Should only reallocate resources to programs after PAT review for their effectiveness in participating in and developing
these initiatives
Should be managed by thematic teams established in the network.
Examples: Marine Biotechnology Initiative (after the initial "new" resources were added), Essential Fish Habitat
"National Initiatives"
Add funding resources to program, typically by special Congressionally mandated line items
Managed through the national office, but with as much local and regional activity (peer review, etc.) as possible
Combined under the umbrella of a single national competition
Leverage funding resources by partnering with other federal agencies, such as NSF
Examples: Non-indigenous Species, Oyster Disease Research, Aquaculture
"Regional Initiatives"
Are those activities limited to regional and interprogram alliances
Get funding resources from a variety of mechanisms: state and local funding, private sources, inter-program pooling of
funding, etc.
Are managed by a mechanism selected by programs involved, but consistent with national principles for openness, conflict of interest, etc.
Examples: MERP, CBEEC, New England groundfish
Background | Concept | Areas | Responsibilities | Procedure | Definitions