[cmath] Changes at NSERC-Need a community response

[Nassif Ghoussoub]

Dear colleagues in the Canadian mathematical science community,

There are some major changes happening at NSERC, which will be affecting 
the future of the funding of the math. sciences in Canada. Consultation 
has been so far inadequate and I am asking our community and its 
institutions to immediately initiate a "Liaison Committee" to coordinate 
our response. This cannot wait till the Chairs meeting in November nor for 
the CMS meeting in December.

Here are some of the "cataclysmic" changes, some background and my 
personal opinion on these issues.

1. The reallocations exercise --as we know it-- has been cancelled. "NSERC 
is now studying the possibility of devising a clearer, simpler process... 
The new process will most likely be driven by more easily measurable 
criteria, such as discipline dynamics (the variation over time in the 
number of researchers applying for funding in a given discipline) and 
possibly on the cost of research".

2. The 3 institutes (CRM, Fields and PIMS) and their funds will be moved 
to a --revised-- MFA envelope (Major Facilities Access) where they will 
compete with new (previously non-funded) proposals for institutes in other 
disciplines.

3.  NSERC has postponed its decision on BIRS till the next MFA meeting in 
April 2006 (15 months after our proposal was submitted and a full year 
after the site visit). The Alberta government, the NSF and Mexico's 
CONACYT have already committed full funding for the next 5 years (See 
below).

========================================

Background:
---------------

1.  While the "cost of research" for other disciplines can be directly 
measured in equipment, laboratories etc...our discipline's focus is 
different and our community-based institutes are part of the equation. Our 
other large-scale initiatives also need to be discussed: NPCDS and LSI 
etc...

What I am advocating:

***The CRM, Fields and PIMS are as much part of the "Math Science envelope 
at NSERC" as the Math Sci. GSCs. This is a well defined term  within the 
realm of the past re-allocation exercise. This linkage should remain and 
should be part of any new restructuring of the Research Grant envelopes.

2. The bulk of the Math institutes funding has been historically earned 
through specific hard and bold choices made by the Canadian mathematical 
community. When all other disciplines opted to roll-over their old 
discipline-linked infrastructure grants into their GSC budgets, 
Mathematics elected to keep the funds for the institutes. When most other 
disciplines were concentrating their requests on their respective GSCs 
budgets --through three consecutive reallocation exercises-- the 
Mathematics and Statistics community were making the hard choices in 
ear-marking some of their requests to the programmes of the institutes.

--With the previous re-allocation exercise, the institutes could not lose 
more than 10% of their funding in any given 4-year cycle. In a competition 
where many new previously non-funded institutes will be applying, our 
institutes can lose up to 50% as early as 2007.

What I am advocating:

***Should the institutes be forced to compete in 2007 within the proposed 
new MFA programme (MRR), then their current funds should be rolled-over 
into the Math GSCs budgets (and the NPCDS into the Stats GSC's) as soon as 
April 1, 2007. All institutes (old and new) will then compete on an equal 
footing for the MRR funds, wherever these funds will be coming from.

3. BIRS has already received full funding for 2006-2010 from the Alberta 
Government ($3,424,000), full funding from the National Science Foundation 
($USD 2,641,500 to be coming directly to Canada-- which is a great 
precedent for this country) and a groundbreaking contribution from Mexico 
($550,000). In contrast to the clear position and  unwavering support of 
the other partners, the decision of NSERC has been postponed till April 
2006. This position of NSERC --which is damaging to BIRS, to the efforts 
of our community, and to Canada's international image-- was directly 
linked to these restructuring plans. Yet these plans will not be ready for 
the 2006 competition, and BIRS is being forced to compete with at least 
two newly proposed institutes (PITP and origins) in an envelope that even 
NSERC staff acknowledges as not suitable for BIRS.

  What I am advocating:

***NSERC is to structure a new  programme/envelope that deals with truly 
collaborative international projects such as BIRS--one that is flexible 
enough to react to international partnerships and to adapt appropriately 
to other countries timetables, evaluation procedures and their willingness 
to invest in scientific research on Canadian soil.

Nassif Ghoussoub, FRSC
Scientific Director, Banff International Research Station
Distinguished University Scholar, University of British Columbia
Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z2
Canada
http://www.pims.math.ca/~nassif/