Evaluation Of The Cooperation Program For Central And Eastern Europe

Division of Environment and Development

Evaluation of the Cooperation Programme for Central and Eastern Europe

The Research Council of Norway P.O.Box 2700 St. Hanshaugen N-0131 OSLO Phone: +47 22 03 70 00 Fax: +47 22 03 70 01 Internett: [email protected] X.400: S=bibliotek;PRMD=forskningsradet;ADMD=telemax;C=no; Homepage: http://www.forskningsradet.no/ Homepage of the Co-Operation Programme with Central- and Eastern Europe: http://www.program.forskningsradet.no/easterneurope/

Print: GCS Copies printed: 800

Oslo, March 2001 ISBN 82-12- 01564-5 Evaluators’ Preface

In August 2000 the Research Council of Norway commissioned the present working group to evaluate the research component of ‘The Cooperation Programme with Central- and Eastern Europe. Research and Higher Education.’ We were to perform our evaluation in accordance with the Terms of Reference (see appendix). Other than having to comply with the dimensions of the program included in the Terms of Reference, the working group was given a free hand in choosing approaches and methodologies in the evaluation process. We decided on an approach that sees the evaluation as a forward looking and two-way learning process between the evaluators and the evaluated who, to the greatest extent possible, should be involved in the evaluation process. This approach was subsequently implemented by a written survey (questionnaire) distributed to all project participants, interviews with project leaders and feed-back from project leaders on the first drafts of relevant sections of the present report. While the final responsibility for the evaluation obviously rests with the evaluation group, we are indebted to the project participants for their positive responses and very grateful for the active and constructive reactions and comments received from the project leaders. It would have been impossible to make the present report without this positive dialogue. We also gratefully acknowledge the professional advice received on specific research topics in the evaluation from Professors Peter Gundelach and Michael Skou Andersen. Associate Professor Lars Johannsen contributed with his insights into institution building in post-communist countries and Internet based research resources. Ole Hersted Hansen assisted with the technical construction of the questionnaire. The group also benefited from initial advice from The Danish Institute for Studies in Research and Research Policy. Else Løvdal transformed the rather different styles of the working group members into a consistent report. Last, but certainly not least, we want to thank the Research Council of Norway for entrusting this exiting task to us and for the support provided during the working process.

Aarhus, March 2001

Gunna Christiansen Per Strand

Magnus Gulbrandsen Ole Nørgaard (secretary) (Chairman)

Summary

The Norwegian Coorperation Program with Central and Eastern Europe is based on the assumption that scientific collaboration is an excellent vehicle for transfering knowledge and supporting institution building in post communist countries. Transfer of scientific knowledge and institution building are seen as ways to solve knowledge and information problems, thus contributing to the political and economic transition. The overall judgment of the evaluation group is that the research part of the Collaboration Program for Central and Eastern Europe has been a major success. Most program objectives have been met:

 In general, very good research has been produced, and most of the projects have had a positive impact on the transformation processes in the Eastern countries and have met urgent social, medical and environmental concerns. If the relationships created and strengthened by these projects are maintained, the results may spill over into other areas such as business and politics, providing Norway with a competitive edge in dealing with Eastern Europe.  There has been a significant transfer of knowledge from Norway to the East, and to a lesser extent, from the East to Norway. Many of the projects are sustainable because they have created professional networks with great potential for future interaction.  The most successful projects have initiated processes of institution building, although some have focused specifically on transfering knowledge and skills to individuals.  Overall cost-efficiency has been high – an impressive number of publications have been produced, equipment has been transferred to the East, many courses and workshops have been arranged, and substantial large-scale empirical work carried out.  Most projects have been characterized by professional equality or decreasing inequality (also given the constraints of a Norwegian managed and financed program), particularly regarding research implementation, credit for result and access to data.

The program has been well managed by the staff of the Research Council of Norway, and their efforts have received positive comments from all project managers, who mention their professionalism, active interest, and adminitrative support.

The Norwegian Cooperation Program with Central and Eastern Europe also avoided most, although not all, of the hazards that have beset similar programs in the past. There were only isolated cases of Eastern researchers complaining that they had not been granted academic credit due for their contribution to joint research projects. Nor did the Norwegian program, similar to other Western programs, fully recognize the financial constraints that hamper the contributions of Eastern partners. Finally, the Norwegian program has also encountered the well-known dilemma in institution building between strategies prioritizing reform of existing institutions versus construction of new institutions. The Norwegian program has in fact experienced successes and failures in the pursuit of both strategies. Thus, we find no “best” collaboration strategy – successful projects have been aimed at individuals, existing institutions and new institutions, emphasizing the need for prudence when choosing individual and institutional partners in the East. An important lesson learned is that pracatially all collaborations initially showed a variety of asymmetries between Eastern and Norwegian partners, rendering some goals (especially design/financial/managerial equality) and combinations of goals (especially institution building versus good research) difficult to reach. Institution building requires a very long- term perspective, and the current projects spanning two to five years can only be seen as one step of a process that requires mutual and continued commitment from all those involved.

Project assessments We found a number of beneficial effects of having had previous collaboration with the same partners, regardless of scientific area. Scientific motivation was greater in projects founded on existing networks, the transfer of knowledge across national borders was more balanced, and equality between the partners was better, also on financial and project management issues. There are major differences between the three primary focus areas addressed by the program. In the social sciences, we found initial professional asymmetries in disciplines that were banned or underdeveloped under communism. The most successful Norwegian project leaders met this challenge by integrating courses and other scientific training elements in their projects. In addition, the social scientists often faced difficult initial conditions due to weak professional identities, sub-standard training, unfamiliarity with contemporary theory and methodology, and the strong ideologization of many institutions. Conditions that made it very difficult to combine institution building and scientific quality. Project managers who bypassed local institutions and handpicked their collaborators have generally made better research than those who, in loyalty to the program objectives, were assigned sub-standard or unmotivated researchers by Eastern institutions. All social science investigations address important social problems in the Eastern countries, and some of the projects include end-users in various government institutions. In the projects within the medical sciences were based on already existing partnerships, and the output in terms of publications and training exceeds, especially for one group, what might reasonably have been expected during such a short project period. It is expected that international publications from the two other projects will appear later on. When the projects were initiated, Eastern partners were relatively weak in terms of technology, scientific thinking and analytical methods. Reciprocal visits (including formal training) and transfer of equipment have been very useful, although the scientific work was somewhat delayed. In the environmental sciences, there were no initial differences in scientific standards between Eastern and Western scientists, but rather varying strengths and perspectives that proved to be complementary in the work process. The synergy between these two research cultures may explain why projects in environmental sciences on average performed better than those in the other two fields. The combination of the Eastern tradition – more specialized and stronger in basic research and methodology – and the Western tradition – stronger in cross-disciplinary and applied perspectives – was extremely important for achieving such superior scientific results.

Recommendations The evaluation group’s main recommendations are:  It is recommended that program be continued because its major objectives – institution building in the East and creating sustainable networks of scientific cooperation – are long-term processes. A termination of the program render many investments futile and send negative signals to Eastern partners.  If the ambition is to produce high quality scientific research we recommend a continued focus on environmental sciences, as there are excellent opportunities for professional synergies due to the high quality of Russian research and the quality of scientific manpower in the East. The projects target issues of great interest in both Norway and the East.  If the ambition is to assist Eastern countries in narrowing knowledge and information gaps, further concentration on health sciences and social sciences is recommended. Both fields also meet urgent social and political concerns in the transition countries.  It is recommended that future programs provide incentives for including training elements and joint conferences in the Eastern countries.  It is recommended that future programs include additional incentives to increase the funding of Eastern collaborators, be they institutions or individuals.  In future selection processes we recommend that an applicant’s total project portfolio, including participation in other programs, be taken into consideration.  If short-term equality and two-way, balanced transfer of knowledge is desired, we recommend to focus on projects based on already established partnerships.  It is recommended that a written or electronic “guide” about administrative/project management issues be produced for the benefits of future project managers.

Table of contents

Evaluators’ Preface...... 3 Summary ...... 5 Project assessments...... 6 Recommendations...... 7

Part One Chapter 1 ...... 13 Introduction...... 13 References:...... 16

Part Two Chapter 2 ...... 19 Research collaboration, knowledge and institutional reform...... 19 References...... 22 Chapter 3 ...... 23 Individuals as conduits of knowledge and information...... 23 References...... 26 Chapter 4 ...... 27 Institutions as vehicles for reform...... 27 References...... 28

Part Three Chapter 5 ...... 31 Statistical background...... Feil! Bokmerke er ikke definert. Evaluated projects...... Feil! Bokmerke er ikke definert. Chapter 6 ...... 34 Success and failure in knowledge transfer and institution building – the views and experiences of the participants...... 34 Project implementation...... 35 Research collaboration...... 37 Institution building...... 40 Relation to other programs and social relevance...... 42 Project and program management...... 43 Equality...... 44 Sustainability, lessons learned, and suggensions for improvement...... 45 Chapter 7 ...... 48 Project evaluations...... 48 Social sciences...... 49 Summary evaluation of social science projects...... 75 Environmental sciences...... 78 Summary evaluation of the environmental science projects...... 90 Medical sciences...... 92

9 Summary evaluation of medical science projects...... 104 Chapter 8 ...... 105 Lessons Learned...... 105 Chapter 9 ...... 109 Recommendations...... 109 Fundamental recommendations: Implementation and justifications...... 110 Project selection criteria and similar considerations...... 111 Running the projects and the program...... 112 Appendix A: Questionnaire...... 114 Appendix B: List of publications from the 13 evaluated projects...... 129 Appendix C...... 151

10 Part One

Introducing the program and the evaluation

11 12 ‘The quality of any academic programme can be measured in a number of ways: by considering its fitness for the purpose for which is designed; or by considering the fitness – that is to say, the suitability and appropriateness – of that purpose. (Alderman et. al, 1996, p. 15).

Chapter 1

Introduction

In August 2000 the Norwegian Research Council commissioned a working group comprising Professors Gunna Christensen, Århus University, Professor Ole Nørgaard (Chairman), Århus University, Director Per Strand, Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority, and Researcher Magnus Gulbrandsen (secretary), Norwegian Institute for Studies in Research and Higher Education (NIFU) to evaluate the Norwegian Program for Research and higher education within the cooperation program for Central and Eastern Europe running from 1997-2001. The working group was entrusted with the part of the program dealing with research collaboration, while cooperation within higher education is the ubject of a separate evaluation (FAFO, 2000). The overall objective of the evaluation was to examine the experiences, strategies and performance quality of research collaboration with former communist countries in Central and Eastern Europe, including countries of the former Soviet Union (henceforth the East European Countries). On the basis of this assessment the working group has been asked by the Research Council to comment on the merits of the program and to propose possible methods for improving strategies and priorities. The Norwegian government program for higher education and research cooperation with the reformed countries in Central and Eastern Europe under the Cooperation Program for Central and Eastern Europe (running from 1997-2001) is a continuation of the 1992-96 Action Program for Eastern Europe. Thematically the phase one program focused on democracy building and environmental action in all countries in Central and Eastern Europe and primarily focused on establishing contacts and building broadly based networks. The present phase two programs are based on an agreement between the Royal Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Norwegian University Council and the Norwegian Research Council. It is funded by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which has granted a total of NKR 85 million, or NKR 17 million per year. A Program Committee with overall responsibility for the implementation of the program selects concrete projects to be funded. The committee consists of six persons. The University Council elects three and the Research Council three. The higher education and research institution managing a project is responsible for its successful conclusion. In contrast to the first program, the present program is both thematically and geographically specific:

 Environmental protection and environmental technology, with special emphasis on areas in Northern Russia  Social Sciences in the Baltic States  Economics and administration in Russia and the Baltic States, with special emphasis on Russia

The Russian part of the Barents Region including:  Medicine and Health

13  Language and culture  Further development of the Norwegian Pomor University Center

The program is based on the rationale that knowledge is a precondition for institutional change and, in a wider sense, for development towards democracy and a sustainable market economy. In the East European context, this assumption implies that the transfer of knowledge from Norway to the Eastern partners is seen as a vehicle for institutional learning and restructuring in the East European countries. In particular, it is assumed that research collaboration provides an important vehicle for long-term multi-strand relations and hence for institutional learning and change. While recognizing the initial asymmetry between institutions and researchers, the program is also based on the principles of equality and reciprocity where the Norwegian side is expected to gain access to new data and insights that may become an incentive for innovative research and benefit Norwegian interests in other areas. It is, however, also recognized that there is a latent contradiction between the developmental goals, the asymmetric financial (in certain fields also professional) relationship and the principles of equality and reciprocity. Referring to the overall objectives and principles that guide the program, the working group has been asked to focus on particularly the following aspects of the research projects:

 The outcome of the research program in the context of the economic and political restructuring in the countries concerned, in particular the priority regions of Northwestern Russia and the Baltic States  The transfer of knowledge at the individual level of cooperation as measured by the quality of the scientific work in which the eastern partners have been involved  The transfer of knowledge at the institutional level as measured by the effect on institutional learning and restructuring in the collaborating countries and the generation of new knowledge in Norwegian institutions  Cost efficiency in terms of project management, economic cost structure, and synergy or overlap with other programs  Adherence to the basic principles in the cooperation program of professional and economic equality and reciprocity  The role of the program administration: relations with the Research Council and the Program Committee  Sustainability: are there contextual explanations for project performance and did the project have any unintended consequences (positive or negative) for the participants and their institutions?

Of the 53 projects funded by the program, 13 were selected for in-depth evaluation. They represent all the major priority areas thematically and geographically, and were all relatively large in financial terms. The projects were divided into three main thematic sections: social sciences, environment and health. Individual members of the working group carried out the concrete evaluation of each project. The projects were divided in such a way that they reflected the professional background of the members of the evaluation group. Additionally, a few experts were brought in to evaluate projects in fields where the competence of the working group was deemed insufficient, or where there were potential conflicts of interest. Overall, responsibility for the evaluation of the projects was assigned to:

Gunna Christensen:  Acute Lung Injury and the L-Arginine /NO Pathway, located at the University of Tromsø and managed by Lars Bjertnæs

14  Alcohol Drinking and its Impact on Public Helath in the North of Russia, located at the University of Trondheim and managed by Odd Nilssen  Antibitotic Resistance patterns and Molecular Epidemiology of M. Tuberculosis in the Barents region, located at the National Institute of Public health and managed by Dominique Caugant

Ole Nørgaard:  Comparative Living Conditions Research in the Baltic States, located at FAFO and managed by Aadne Aasland  Integration and nation-building in Post-Soviet societies: Part two: the cases of Estonia and Moldova, Located at the University of Oslo and managed by Pål Kolstø  Governance and Economic Development in Post-communist Russia: The Role of the Elites, located at the University of Oslo and managed by Anton Steen  Modern Environmental Strategies and Single Enterprise Towns in Russia and Latvia, located at NIBR and managed by Terje Kleven and Jørn Holm Hansen  Cooperation within Research on Juridical, Political and Administrative Reforms in Russia – A joint Norwegian – Russian Research program, located at NUPI and managed by Iver B. Neuman and Brynjulf Risnæs  Democratization of Transition Societies, located at the University of Bergen and managed by Frank Aarebrot

Per Strand:  Environmental Issues and Agricultural Development in Estonia and Latvia – An Integrated Approach, located at JORDFORSK and managed by Nils Vagstad  PECHORA, located at the University of Bergen and managed by John-Inge Svendsen  The Nansen Fellowship – A Scientific and Educational program for Ecological Studies of North-Western Russia, located at NERSC and managed by Ola M. Johannessen and Lasse M. Pettersson  Arctic Engineering and Environmental Technology Related to petroleum Exploitation in Northwest Russia, located at NTNU and managed by Sveinung Løset

The following instruments have been applied in the process of evaluation:  Annual Reports from the program  Project descriptions and progress reports  Scientific publications submitted by project leaders  Data from a survey carried out by the group and reflecting participants’ experiences  Information and data obtained from interviews with Norwegian and East European partners  Response to draft evaluations from project managers

Based on these sources and reflecting the overall task as described in the Terms of Reference, this report describes the outcome and performance of the 13 projects selected for evaluation, here divided into three main sections: previous experiences with East-West collaboration, evaluation of individual project, and the lessons learned, including recommendations for future action. Chapter two discusses the general experiences and problems related to research collaboration and transfer of knowledge as vehicles for institutional change and economic and political development. Chapter three summarizes and discusses experiences related to individual research collaboration and transfer of knowledge in the East European context, as reflected in previous assessments and evaluations. Chapter four provides the same review

15 with regard to institutional change within research and higher education in Eastern Europe. Chapter six provides basic statistics about the evaluation and summarizes the findings from a survey of the participants’ experiences with research cooperation. Chapter seven evaluates the outcome and performance of individual projects, divided into three thematic sections, while chapter eight summarizes the outcome of the projects and lessons learned. Chapter nine presents the main recommendations for future strategies. We believe that placing the Norwegian experience in the proper international and theoretical perspective will enable us to achieve what all evaluations should aim for: to be part of a cumulative enterprise of gradually improving our understanding of the processes we deal with, and the strengths and weaknesses of the strategies we apply.

References: Report of the EuroFaculty Evaluation Committee by Geoffry Alderman, Sven Caspersen, Bernhard Kempen and Jacques Pertek, November 1996. Evaluation of six projects under the cooperation programme with the reform countries in Central and Eastern Europe – higher education and research. Oslo, FAFO institute of applied social science, August 2000.

16 Part Two

Setting the stage: International experiences with East-West research collaboration, institution building and individual transfer of knowledge

17 18 ‘Poor countries – and poor people – differ from rich ones not only because they have less capital but because they have less knowledge’. (World Bank 1999, p. 1).

Chapter 2

Research collaboration, knowledge and institutional reform

The World Bank Report 1998/1999 featured ‘knowledge for development’. The main argument of the report is that ‘knowledge gaps’ and ‘information problems’ are major factors behind underdevelopment and poverty. ‘Knowledge gaps’ denote the absence of factual, technical and scientific knowledge in developing countries. ‘Information problems’ describe the inability to disseminate knowledge to relevant users and to use it to solve practical problems. ‘Information problems’ are caused by both underdeveloped information infrastructures and by inadequate institutions, broadly defined as governments, private organizations, laws and social norms. The report identifies strategies for overcoming the knowledge gap, focusing in particular on the role of international organizations and the tasks of national governments in helping to solve this problem. However, the World Bank Report only deals with developing countries that simultaneously suffer from knowledge gaps, inadequate information infrastructures and obsolete institutions that impede political and economic development. It does not deal with the current ‘knowledge gaps’ and ‘information problems’ in post-communist countries. In the context of the present evaluation, restructuring problems in the post-communist countries can be approached from the ‘knowledge’ perspective applied by the World Bank, although with some important qualifications. While there certainly were knowledge gaps in the highly ideologized scientific disciplines (social sciences and the humanities), the communist countries also had first-rate scientific and engineering communities and pockets of considerable strength in most basic sciences. Further, scientific institutions in the communist world were characterized by huge differences in research quality. While a few were of international standard, many others fell seriously short and practically had no prospects when they became exposed to global competition following the systemic changes. Finally, research communities were (and remain) much more specialized than we are used to in contemporary Western science. Cross disciplinary projects were rare and reflected a segmentation of institutions that made horizontal collaboration difficult. Following the collapse of the communist regimes a new knowledge gap has, however developed in several fields that used to be at the frontier of global science, because of the financial, institutional and infrastructural collapses and because of the parallel acceleration of scientific development in the West. Second, information problems formed a crucial barrier to development in the East European countries. Under the planned economy, this was particularly prevalent in the failure to apply scientific knowledge to practical purposes, thus gradually hampering growth and reducing welfare. The major problem under communism was thus institutional failure to disseminate information rather than knowledge gaps. Although political changes have removed ideological obstacles to efficient dissemination of knowledge, financial constraints and organizational collapse have created new barriers to many scientists trying to keep up with developments in their field. The organizational turmoil in the scientific community has also destroyed many of the informal networks, what has been termed ‘the invisible university’ (Bronson, Popson, Ruble (2000), which is so essential to active scientists.

19 In particular there existed – and exists – a knowledge gap in disciplines that study and teach about the role of institutions in economic and political development, especially the various branches of the social sciences. Whether the repression of the social sciences constituted a ‘knowledge gap’ or was an instrument of political domination is, of course, open to discussion. Whatever the explanation, people in these disciplines in many of the former communist countries must now deal with the dual legacy of obsolete institutions underpinned by vested interests combined with a lack of knowledge about alternative institutional arrangements and reform strategies. Acquiring whatever knowledge is available elsewhere in the world and adapting it to local circumstances is a potentially important vehicle for narrowing the knowledge gap and promoting institutional change. Research collaboration is an important aspect of knowledge transfer. It can help remedy the knowledge gap by providing access to Western research literature and networks, and promote institutional reforms in the research sector. On the individual level, research collaboration has a significant multiplication effect. The principle of shared knowledge may thus become an important component of the partnerships that are so essential to development. In more practical terms the problem is how realize this idea. As it is phrased in the World Bank Report (138): ‘Knowledge is sticky and tends to stay in peoples heads. In response to this stickiness, communities have always used interactive knowledge-sharing mechanisms – from palavers under the baobab, village square debates, and town meetings to conclaves, professional consultations, workshops and conferences’. The sphere of cultural reproduction, and scientific institutions in particular, is conservative by nature because it is rarely challenged by or exposed to the incentives of practical pursuits (although this may vary among disciplines). In some fields, insulation on the pretext pursuing eternal truths turns scientific institutions into lacunae driven by their own mode of work and ensuing power structure, which in some cases may uphold organizational cultures that were abandoned decades ago by more dynamic and market oriented organizations. On the most general level, this may explain why scientific institutions (and institutions of higher learning) during the all-encompassing reforms in post-communist countries have been so impermeable to the forces of change. Eastern European scientific institutions have for decades been permeated by the mode of governance that was applied to society in toto under communism: centralization of decision-making, hierarchical organization, clientilism and seniority instead of merit. In some (some say most) cases after the changes, we have seen former communist science apparatchiki trying to exchange their positions under the old system by various strategies of adaptation. In particular, they have attempted to block competition and keep potential challengers away from positions in the research institutions. These challengers basically include three groups: former dissidents who are morally less tainted than those currently in power; competent academics, mostly young people who had access to Western scholarship; and lecturers from the West (Tucker, 1995). In many cases, we also see that although intellectuals (and academics – which in Eastern parlance is not the same) played important roles in the reform movements, they have often been more conservative when it came to reforming their own institution, department, faculty or institute. The fundamentally conservative nature of many East European research institutions explains why major funding institutions, after some discouraging initial experiences with official institutions, chose to redirect funding to individual researchers selected on the basis of the quality of their research projects.1 This was, for example, the case with the Soros Foundation and INTAS.

1 Conservative bureaucrats have been able to circumvent even this strategy. There have been reports that in some major institutions rather far to the East young scholars now must receive the permission of senior scientific councils if they are to enter into collaboration with Western researchers.

20 While institutional power structures in many cases have been upheld, academia lost the support of government power brokers in a situation where public expenditure was in severe distress. The resulting drastic cuts in funding for any kind of research (and higher education) has left many institutions as more or less empty shells. This misfortune befell institutions that at the onset of the reforms were already at a disadvantage because of decades of information control. This control in particular hindered the development of most areas of the social sciences. The institutions were also starved by serious deficiencies in the infrastructure of scientific work: access to books and journals, modern communication facilities, new kinds of information processing and retrieval facilities and computers. These institutional and personal hardships eroded scholarly communities and networks. In this respect, universities (partly because of the schism between Universities and Academia) in many of these countries had never formed an academic community in the Western sense of the word. There were virtually no traditions for Faculty meetings where collective decisions lead to collective and collectively owned decisions. A University is in this sense less a community of scholars than a loose confederation of academic-managerial collectivities. Faculties rarely talk to each other, and within faculties, small inner circles often make the decisions. Institutions are very important vehicles for sharing and disseminating knowledge. But how do we help make organizations change in ways that will improve their ability to perform that function? To answer this question we must make assumptions about what makes an institution survive. Whether institutions are sustained by interests (of the members) or by the culture (of the institution) is a core issue in institutional theory with profound implications for strategies of institutional change. In most cases, it is probably some mixture of the two: an institution (or organization) survives because it serves the interests of its members (or its leadership) and because the members share values and norms. The question is how and why institutions change, and in this context – how can outsiders promote change within an institution or organization? If we, on the one hand, understand the scientific institution as an aggregation of individuals pursuing personal interests we should change the incentive structures of the institution to promote good (in scientific terms) behaviour by individual researchers. If, on the other hand, we understand a scientific institution as being based on shared values and norms, we should focus on the dysfunctional values and norms and imbue the institutions and individual researchers with norms and values that we find to be conducive to good research. These two alternative approaches to institutional change have also characterized the majority of initiatives that have so far attempted to remedy the knowledge gap and information problems in East Europeans institutions of research and higher learning. On the one hand, we find some that operate at the level of individuals and therefore expect that individual cooperation will transfer not only knowledge, but also new values and standards of good research to the partner. One the other, however, we find initiatives that focus at the institutional level, and expect to change the incentive structure and the culture of the research organization through institutional changes. Hence both approaches are based on the assumption that twinning institutions or individuals promotes transfer of knowledge, and that the good practises of Western institutions (and individuals) will be assimilated by Eastern institution (or researchers). The next two sections highlight what we know from previous experience and evaluations about the merits of these alternative strategies in Eastern Europe. This will provide us with a basis for assessing the relative performance of the Norwegian program for Central and Eastern Europe.

21 References ‘Knowledge for development’, Oxford University Press, The World bank, Washington D.C 1999. Aviezer Tucker, ‘Corruption and Greed: Western Academic Aid to Eastern Europe’, Telos, Winter 1995, issue 102, pp. 149-159. Susan Bronson, Nancy Popson and Blair A. Ruble: Sustaining Intellectual Communities: A Strategy for Rebuilding the Social Sciences and Humanities in the Former Soviet Union from Within’, paper (2000).

22 ‘Not all academic staff currently employed in the Baltic Universities are capable of being retrained’ (Alderman et al.,1996).

Chapter 3

Individuals as conduits of knowledge and information

This chapter summarizes the experiences of assistance programs to Central and Eastern Europe in higher education and research that operate at the level of individual cooperation. Such programs assume that by involving individual researchers in a process scientific collaboration, collective knowledge and information problems will be solved when these individuals learn from the cooperation and disseminate their knew knowledge into the broader scientific establishment and society as a whole. In this strategy institutions are (ideally) seen as passive transmitters of individual ideas and preferences. Hence when you train and educate the individual researcher who then transmits her knowledge to the broader community, the institutions of science and higher education will allegedly adapt to the needs and demands of individuals. There are many programs that focus on supporting individual researchers as a means to assist scholars and, by extension, to reform institutions. These programs include research, training and travel grants from public and private research foundations. At one level of analysis, there is some merit in this approach in relation to knowledge and information problems in Eastern Europe. The performance of individual researchers in Central and Eastern Europe is severely hampered by a host of social and economic factors that keep her from research. First, the collapsing infrastructure makes it very difficult/impossible for individuals to pursue serious research. Second, eroded salaries accompanied by impoverishment and a sharp decline in status has led to brain drain in that the best and brightest have left the sciences for other, more profitable job opportunities. Third, personal belief systems have collapsed, initial optimism has turned to disillusionment, and wrenching social change has undermined career strategies. In practically all fields, collaboration with Western researchers may alleviate the personal difficulties and frustrations of individual Eastern researchers and encourage them to remain in the business. Still, one should also realize that because of initial incompentence, some researchers are simply incapable of being retrained or of benefiting from cooperation with Western researchers. This is especially the case in fields where ideological control was very strong and the knowledge gap therefore the widest. From the perspective of the donor country, exchange programs may also have the positive outcome that personal networks are established and spill over into other fields, thus becoming an important factor in institution building. This was, for example, the case when increased mobility between Western Europe and the USA after World War Two later became a strong asset for European universities that were now able to benefit from connections with their compatriots on the other side of the Atlantic. A similar picture is emerging today as top researchers from the post-communist countries maintain links with their home countries while working in Western Universities. On the level of junior scholars, there are many examples that contacts and experience obtained in youth become important assets when scholars have risen to prominence later in life. The combined effect of these initial conditions was that when the changes began (from 1989 in Central and Eastern Europe and from 1991 in the Soviet Union), science and research were exposed to the dual forces of liberalization and budgetary collapse. In consequence,

23 major sources of funding (in the FSU the major funding) now came from the West. In the social sciences in particular, this produced a double asymmetry when researchers from the East engaged in collaborative projects with researchers from the West. One was related to initial professional competence, research culture and familiarity with modern sources of information and data-analysis. The other was related to funding and the time the individual could afford to spend on research. This fundamental asymmetry between Western and Eastern partners in collaborative research projects ex ante made the quest for equality (financial and professional) very difficult. On the professional level, it required sensitivity on the part of the Westerners towards the potentials of eastern participants who were not – and could not possibly be – up to date on the most recent scientific accomplishments. On the level of finance it is evident that Eastern partners (institutions or individuals) were inevitably at the mercy of Western financing agencies and Western project managers who, in those partnerships, were always entrusted with administering the funds. In the social sciences, native social scientists were often limited to roles 'on the one hand of data collectors and, on the other hand, of data suppliers' (Caspelli et. al, 1996). In such capacities native social scientists became what may be described as employees of 'data export companies' supplying Western social scientists with data, first, in order to enhance their scholarly prestige, and second, to prove their unique status in the eyes of funding agencies in their home countries. Thus, 'the relationship between Western and Eastern scholars was based on asymmetry dominated by an unequal distribution of symbolic and financial powers’ (ibid.). In some of the more advanced countries (in terms of social development) there were cases of renowned scientists (with a western publishing record) being demoted to mere data gatherers. They were sometimes even denied access to the data produced in programs they initially believed to be collaborative enterprises. It should, however, be emphasized that this was predominantly a problem within the social sciences. In the natural sciences, the self-confidence of the researchers prevented such ‘scientific abuse’, and scientists received the credits due them in collaborative projects. It is important to note that asymmetries, in particular in the social sciences, were not engendered by the rational choices of individual western scientists who used unscrupulous methods for the sake of merit and careers. They should rather be perceived as the result of institutional strategies on the part of western funding agencies. These strategies provided Western researchers with grants and travel money, while the funding available to Eastern researchers was much more limited. Only INTAS applied the opposite strategy – where the lion’s share of funding (80 per cent) was channeled to (post) Soviet partners. These institutional constraints obviously did not ex ante prevent Western scientist from producing excellent research. The only reservation one might have is of a more general methodological nature. Large-scale comparative projects in which local researchers are demoted to research assistants collecting data but are not included in the final analytical synthetic enterprise, may deprive the final result of the contextual understanding and interpretation of data that comes from an intimate knowledge about local circumstances and codes. This also implies that if you are a mere 'data exporter', the Western researcher will learn very little from collaborating with the Eastern colleague. He will take his data and leave without further contact with the local environment. This approach certainly has its advantages, and it is, to some extent, probably unavoidable in large-scale comparative projects. The cost of this approach is, however, that Western researchers do not benefit from the analytical competence of their Eastern colleagues, and may not, in particular, understand the importance of contextual factors. Those hazards did not mean that encounters with Western researchers did not generate productive results for individual researchers in the East. In some cases, the projects have been collaborative in the best sense of the word, where both sides of the East-West divide

24 contributed to a joint enterprise and produced excellent research. Here engagement in a Western managed project might be the Eastern researcher's first encounter with a modern research culture characterized by discussion rather than hierarchy, by generous funding that allowed the participants to concentrate on research rather than odd jobs, and to participate in international networks. There have also been cases where Eastern researchers working on the same topic, but in insulated research hierarchies, only became aware of each other because the mediation of Westerners brought them aboard the same project. To the extent that the Eastern researcher brought such experiences back to his/her home organization, they also had the potential to generate institutional learning and building. Still, while it may have been an exciting experience for the individual, it could also negatively impact local institutions, where researchers remained beset by the suspicion and distrust that grew out of decades of authoritarian rule. The disintegration of Eastern research communities is sometimes even augmented by Western intrusion when local scholars compete for external funding and contacts. In that sense, Western academic aid may, as an unintended consequence, result in de-institutionalization rather than the institutional learning process that was intended. In summary, assistance programs that focus on individual researchers have number of possible negative implications. First, competition for foreign funds and collaborators may hamper collaboration within institutions, whose collaborative networks were already strained by the turmoil of transition. Second, scholars who engaged in such collaborative programs, who have maybe even been afforded the opportunity to spend time in the West, will at times encounter professional jealousy and resentment from those who did not have the luck or skill to engage in such collaboration. This resentment may make it difficult for a researcher to return to her home environment and make use of the knowledge obtained through cooperation. Finally, although individual grants or research collaboration may keep the scholar alive during hard times, they do not address the underlying structural problems. What happens when the scholarship expires or the Western research collaborator leaves for new frontiers? To address this problem we need strategies focusing on the institutional level.

References. Georgy Csepeli, Antal Orkneny and Kim Lane Schepele: ‘Acquired immune deficiency syndrome in social science in Eastern Europe. (Central and Eastern Europe: Gains and Losses in the transition to Democracy), Social Research, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 487-510, 1996. Susan Bronson, Nancy Popson and Blair A. Ruble: Sustaining Intellectual Communities: A Strategy for Rebuilding the Social Sciences and Humanities in the Former Soviet Union from Within’, paper August 1999. Report of the EuroFaculty Evaluation Committee by Geoffry Alderman, Sven Caspersen, Bernhard Kempen and Jacques Pertek, November 1996.

25 ‘ Learning organizations’, that is, organizations with well designed feed-back mechanisms that produce a history of diminishing mistakes [-] are viewed as the answer to rapidly changing, more competitive and less benign environments’ (Olsen and Peters, 1996, p. 2).

Chapter 4

Institutions as vehicles for reform

The strategies focusing on institutional change have gone in two directions: a radical strategy focusing on support for entirely new institutions of higher education and research, and a second, more gradual and step-by-step strategy where efforts are directed towards reforming existing institutions. The first approach is based on the (implicit or explicit) assumption that, just like some persons are incapable of being retrained, certain institutions are incapable of reforming. What matters in this perspective is – in a fast and comprehensive approach – to establish new institutions to which individuals are expected to adapt their behaviour. The latter approach is based on the belief that it is possible, in a consensual and participatory process, to change the embedded norms, organizational cultures and incentive structures of incumbent institutions. It will be recalled that the divide in the prescribed roles of institutions in a reform process is identical to the much-celebrated distinction between radical and gradual approaches in economic policy strategies. Yet, regardless of the differences, both approaches seek to establish sustainable institutions in the field of research and higher learning, and therefore operate with a long-term perspective. The is a wide range of Western assistance programs within research and higher education that focus on supporting entirely new institutions: Central European University in Budapest, Moscow School of Social and Economic Sciences, The European University in St. Petersburg, The American University of Armenia, the Humanitarian University in Minsk – just to mention but a few of the most renowned examples. In the Scandinavian context, the best-known examples are the Department of Political Science at Tartu University, the Stockholm School of Economics in Riga, and the Norwegian University Centre in St. Petersburg. The advantages of the radical or new-institutions approach is, of course, that it means starting from scratch and designing institutional structures and incentives to match objectives, and the ability to hire and fire personnel at will. This approach nevertheless has some negative implications. The most important negative side effect is that new institutions established with foreign funding often create problems of perception and image. Such institutions (whether universities or departments) are often seen as Western and not indigenous institutions. This will also often earn the jealousy of less fortunate scholars who are insulated at indigenous institutions. The ensuing ‘us-versus-them’ problem can in turn create difficulties for graduates, and hence threaten the long-term sustainability of such institutions. The second, more gradual and consensual approach conveys a belief that it is possible to reform existing institutions and staff. Programs based on this strategy are preoccupied with faculty training, development of curricula, secondment of Western teachers to East European institutions, and supporting scholars trained in the West when they return to their home institution. Research programs working from this perspective collaborate through existing institutions, respect local hierarchies and designs, and implement research programs in close collaboration with local researchers. Most of these programs build on university (or department) partnerships and use long-term contracts to facilitate structural reforms in the

26 recipient institution. One recent example is the program for Cooperation between the Faculties of Social Science at the Vytautas Magnus University (in Kaunas, Lithuania) and the University of Bergen, Faculty of Social Sciences. Experience shows that the success of such partnership programs is contingent upon collaborative efforts between the Eastern and the Western institution, that partners own cross-cultural skills, that the program has a strong element of strategic planning, and that programs work at departmental rather than university level. One negative aspect of this approach is that it is very difficult, when engaging with Eastern institutions, to maintain control over funds. Basic institutional flaws such as accounting practices, negligence or outright misuse can undermine any investment. It was exactly such instances, where institutional managements siphoned off funds intended for research or training to extravagant infrastructural purposes that compelled a number of Western institutions to redirect their funding towards selected individuals. There are, of course also mid-range solutions, where reforms of existing institutions are combined with the establishment of a new coordinating organization. The clearest example from the Baltic region is the Eurofaculty program, where a coordinating centre in Riga oversees institutional reforms in the social sciences at a number of Baltic Universities. When assessing the outcome of national academic assistance programs and individual collaborative research projects all these hazards and opportunities must be examined. In particular, we should focus on the institutional incentives and constraints inherent in the overall program. We must also look at the local institutional context in which the program and/or the individual research project is to take place. These two parameters, exogenous to the efforts of the individual project, must be taken into consideration if our ambition is to be able to make a fair and balanced appraisal of the performance of the individual project, the project leader and other participants.

References. Olsen, Johan P. and B. Guy Peters: ‘Learning from experience’’ in . Olsen, Johan P. and B. Guy Peters. Lessons from experience. Experimental Learning in Administrative Reforms in Eight Democracies. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press; 1996; pp. 1-35. 1999 Five-year assessment related to the specific program INCO, The European Commission, 31 May 2000.

27 Part Three

The particiants’ experiences and project evaluations

28 29 Chapter 5

Statistical background

This chapter presents some statistical background on the projects based on the survey and interviews carried out by the evaluation group.

Evaluated projects Table 1 lists the projects we were asked to evaluate.

Table 1. Background information on the evaluated projects. Project no. Title Project manager, institution, Program funds country of partners (NOK) 120461/730 Integration and nation building in post- Pål Kolstø, UiO 2 075 670 soviet societies Latvia, Kazakhstan, Estonia, Moldova, Russia 123995/730 Comparative living conditions in the Aadne Aasland, FaFa 1 450 000 Baltic States Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia 120469/730 Modern environmental strategies and Terje Kleven and Jørn Holm- 3 330 000 single enterprise towns in Russia and Hansen, NIBR Latvia Russia, Latvia 123388/730 Cooperation within research on Iver B. Neumann and Brynjulf 1 302 000 judicial, political and administrative Risnes, NUPI reforms in Russia – a joint Norwegian- Russia Russian research program 120356/730 Governance and economic Anton Steen, UiO 1 302 000 development in Russia: The role of the Russia elites 123403/730 Democratisation of transitional Frank Aarebrot, UiB 900 000 societies in Central and Eastern Europe 120473/730 Acute lung injury and the L- Lars Bjertnæs, UiT 996 861 Arginine/NO pathway Russia 128076/730 Alcohol drinking and the impact on Odd Nilssen, UiT 1 465 000 health in the North of Russia Russia 128083/730 Antibiotic resistance and molecular Dominique Caugant, National 331 000 epidemiology of M. tuberculosis in the institute of public health, Russia Barents region 120471/730 Environmental issues and agricultural Nils Vagstad, JORDFORSK 899 197 development in Estonia and Latvia Estonia, Latvia 120362/730 PECHORA (Palaeo Environment and John-Inge Svendsen, UiB 2 055 000 Climate History of the Russian Arctic) Russia 120398/730 The Nansen Fellowship – a scientific Ola M. Johannessen and Lasse Not in the and educational program for ecological H. Pettersson documentation studies in Northwest Russia Russia For all these projects, the evaluation group has examined publications, applications, various reports to the Research Council, etc. In addition, a questionnaire survey was carried out in November/December 2000. A little over 90 questionnaires (cf. Appendix A) were sent to all Norwegian and Eastern participants (in the largest project, only one-third of the doctoral students were selected). However, several partners had only taken part in workshops, participated in other projects than the one we were evaluating, or otherwise felt that their involvement had been too minor to answer the questionnaire. In three cases, two researchers

30 completed the questionnaire together. Two questionnaires were returned due to unknown address, and we have indications that several disappeared in the mail. Adjusting for those with little or no involvement and those who answered together, we get a population of 79 relevant participants. After several reminders, we have received responses from 51 of these – a response rate of 65%. For two of the projects, we have information only from the Norwegian project leader. Important background data from the survey are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2. The background of the survey respondents. Characteristics Number Share (%) Total number of respondents 51 100 Sex: 13 26 Female 38 75 Male Field: Environmental/natural sciences (treated together in the 17 33 analysis Medical sciences 9 18 Social sciences 25 49 Nationality: Norwegian/other Western 14 27 Russian 27 53 Latvian 5 10 Estonian, other Eastern country 5 10 Role: Project leader 13 26 Partner in Eastern country 25 49 PhD student 8 16 Research assistant 5 10

It should be noted that a few (three or less) participants were listed in all three medical projects, in two of the four environmental projects, and in one of the six social sciences projects. More than one-third of the respondents come from two projects (one environmental and one social sciences). A methodological comment is in order. Among the Eastern respondents, we found what could be termed an “extreme choice tendency.” Many of them, particularly senior personnel participating in the projects, consistently responded using only the best score on most questions and sub-questions (i.e. 1 or 5 on a scale of 1-5). The second best choices were ticked (2 or 4) only a few times. This, as later interviews showed, often indicated a cooperation problem that the Norwegians would have judged more severely than a “second best” score. The evaluation group carried out personal interviews (in two cases by phone, otherwise face-to-face) in Oslo, Bergen and Tromsø, St. Petersburg and Riga. A total of 28 people were interviewed (all project leaders except one, plus partners), and approximately one-third of these had not returned questionnaires. The main purpose of the interviews was to elaborate on aspects of the survey and thereby “complete the picture” of each project. In addition, the informal setting allowed us to touch on problems and issues that some participants perceived as sensitive. The interviews lasted between 30 minutes and two hours. The distribution of interviewees is shown in Table 3.

31 Table 3. The background of the interviewees Field/Country Number Social sciences 11 Natural/medical sciences 17 Norwegian researchers 16 Russian/Latvian researchers 12

Besides providing additional information, the interviews proved useful for validating the survey. The overall very positive picture emerging from the survey was largely confirmed. Follow-up questions were asked wherever a “second best” score (cf. methodological comment on previous page) had been used by Eastern participants (who had also taken part in the survey). It turned out that perceptions of collaboration problems and the issue of equality were slightly less positive than indicated by the survey results. We have taken these comments into account in the evaluation of the projects in chapter seven, and we note that the results of the survey reported in chapter six may be slightly biased in favor of describing a well-functioning and unproblematic collaboration process.

32 Exchange is an assymetrical process in principle. The analysis of the assymmetries provides the analyst with access to underlying dynamics in each concrete case. What is expected by whom, and why? Which systems are evolving? What is being transformed, and what is communicated in the process of interaction? (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 1997, p. 161).

Chapter 6

Success and failure in knowledge transfer and institution building – the views and experiences of the participants

In this chapter, the experiences of the program participants are analyzed in general. The chapter is mainly based on the mail/e-mail survey described in the previous chapter. We also use some information from the personal interviews. The survey questionnaire (see Appendix A), was also used as the point of departure for the interviews. It aimed to reflect the terms of reference of the evaluation under twelve headings:

 Background information (name, home organization, academic degree and position, role in project, etc.)  Project implementation (initiation, time consumption, etc.)  Research collaboration (benefits, contributions by the partners (regarding theory, empirical work and methodology), problems, motivation)  Institution building (impact, contribution from home organization, learning effects)  Finances and publications  Relation to other programs  Social relevance of the project  Project and program management (meeting objectives, obstacles, the administrative process)  Equality  Sustainability  Lessons learned (project design, implementation)  Recommendations for future programs

These headings describe the main sections of this chapter, except finances and publications, which are analysed in other chapters. As stated in the background information in the previous chapter, the total number of respondents was 51, representing a response rate of 65 percent. Around one half of the respondents come from the social sciences and the other half from the medical and natural sciences. Between one-third and one-fourth are Norwegian, while the majority of the remaining respondents are Russians (slightly more than 50 percent of the total).

33 Project implementation Figure 1 shows the primary source of the project’s initiation, while Figure 2 depicts the distribution of the participants’ time spent on different activities.

Figure 1. Answers to the question “How was the project initiated (indicate primary source)”

10%

Previous scientific collaboration 45% Initial contact by partners Other

45%

Most of the participants knew each other, either from other collaborative projects or from conferences, seminars and workshops. The “Other” category primarily includes a few participants found through advertisements in professional journals or electronic billboards, and recommendations from colleagues. In the interviews, the benefits of previous scientific collaboration was claimed a tremendous advantage, because this frequently meant that a good level of trust had already been established between the partners, which makes it easier to attain a fair sharing of work and a higher level of equality. Building trust is otherwise a process that may take many years. A closer inspection of the data reveals that previous scientific collaboration has a major impact on a number of project outputs. The theoretical contributions by Eastern partners, equality regarding research design, implementation and management, and the scientific motivation behind the collaboration (as opposed to financial and other motivations) all score significantly higher in projects based on previous cooperation. As expected, project leaders spent more time on project management (24 percent compared to 12 percent for the rest) and less time on data collection and analysis. The main geographical difference is that Eastern participants spent more time on data collection and analysis than the Norwegians (34 versus 27 percent) who, on the other hand, spent more time writing and editing manuscripts (36 versus 29 percent). Given that all doctoral students and assistants are from Eastern countries, it is perhaps surprising that the differences are not greater. The main subject area difference is that social scientists spent more time writing and editing manuscripts (39 versus 24 percent), while the natural and medical scientists spent more time on project management and data collection and analysis (19 versus 12 percent and 36 versus 28 percent). As shown in Figure 2, the data indicate the centrality of writing and editing manuscripts in research work. One frequently encountered recommendation, especially from the Eastern participants, is to spend more time on the design phase and to see to it that all partners are more involved in this work.

34 Figure 2. Answers to the question “Approximately how much time did you spend within the project on (in percent):

8% 13% Project design-/preparation

16% Project management 31% Data collect. / analysis

Writing and editing

Congresses / workshops 32%

In general, the question about the share of salary covered seemed difficult to answer; many cases are missing and many answered 0 (and two more than 100 percent!). The interviews indicate that Eastern participants have received money from the project while staying in Norway, for other trips (to international seminars), and e.g. when doing fieldwork. Most doctoral students involved full-time have received their entire salary from the project, and some of the Eastern partners have been paid for participating, according to the interviews, in order “to insure their continuous commitment”. This is particularly prevalent in the social science projects. In the natural/medical science projects, it was more common for Eastern partners to receive equipment (experimental, computers etc.) in return for their involvement. The number of man months worked on the project was also missing in some cases. It varies from 0.5 to 72, averaging a little less than 20. This seems due to the nature of the project, varying from co-authoring scientific publications and participation in seminars to large-scale empirical work. In most of the cases, the collaboration has been substantial. More than one half of the Eastern partners have worked full-time on the projects, particularly those from the natural and medical sciences. 71 percent of the survey respondents have previous experience with this type of collaboration, and those that do not are often PhD students and assistants. It can be rightfully claimed that the projects contribute as much to strengthening existing networks as to creating new ones. The total number of researchers involved varies from 0(!) to 26, with mean value of around 5. The mean value for number of women is considerably lower – 2.0 – but fewer answered this question. Few researchers appear to have been employed specifically for the project in question (mean value less than one, if the largest environmental project with many doctoral students is excluded). The most likely explanation is that the size of the projects is, after all, not so very large, and the funding source is perceived as neither very long-term nor stable. The Eastern participants spent an average of 15 percent of their time in Norway, while the Norwegian participants spent an average of 14 percent of their time in the East. The standard deviation for both of these numbers is high (two of the Eastern participants were in Norway full-time, and two of the Norwegian project leaders spent no time in the Eastern country). Most of the projects, especially the environmental/medical ones, have prioritized that partners from Russia and the other countries spend some time (one to three months, sometimes more) in Norway. In our interviews, social and medical scientists emphasized that

35 these stays allow the Eastern partners to extend their personal professional networks, while the natural scientists to a larger extent stressed that this encourages knowledge transfer from Eastern to Norwegian partners.

Research collaboration The benefits from research collaboration are summarized in Table 4. Score is measured on a five-point scale (1 = low benefit, 5 = high benefit). Both partners have evidently received major personal benefits from the project. As can be expected from the goal/nature of most of the projects (e.g. mapping social and environmental factors in the East), the Norwegian partners indicate that their greatest benefits lie in the empirical work. The largest difference is in methodology where many interviewees claimed that there is a lack of analytical (as opposed to descriptive, documentation-oriented) tradition in the East. This was particularly emphasized in the social and medical sciences, but much less so by the natural scientists. Still, also the Norwegian participants report a relatively high level of methodological benefit. This may also be due to the nature of the projects (international comparative studies, fieldwork in challenging settings etc.).

Table 4. Personal benefit of the project. Personal benefit Norwegian partner Eastern partner Theoretical development 3.7 4.1 Empirical work 4.3 4.2 Methodology 3.6 4.3

Contributions from the partners are summarized in Table 5 (where score is measured from 1 = minor contribution, to 5 = major contribution) (all participants gave a score). This confirms the picture from the previous table – the partners provide equal input when it comes to the empirical work, while the Norwegian partners’ theoretical and methodological input is valued higher. The only significant difference in the Eastern/Norwegian answers is that Eastern respondents did in fact judge their own empirical contributions lower than the Norwegians (score 3.8 versus 4.5). The only significant field difference is that the Norwegian partners’ empirical contributions are valued higher in the environmental and medical projects, while reverse is true of the social science projects.

Table 5. Who made the most important contributions to the project? Contribution/input Score N partner Score E partner Theoretical development 4.3 3.4 Empirical work 4.0 4.0 Scientific methodology 4.3 3.3

The problems encountered in the collaboration were also judged on a scale from 1 to 5 (5 representing the most serious end of the scale), and the results are summarized in Figure 3. Problems were generally judged a bit more severely by the Norwegian partners, with the greatest differences in the answers pertaining to research culture, language, and lack of commitment and respect for assumed obligations. Most problems are not judged very severely, even the most serious problems score on the lower end of the scale on average. In several of the interviews, the Eastern informants claimed that the cultural differences in the East (e.g. between the Baltic countries and the Baltic institutions involved) were perceived as greater and/or more problematic than the differences between Norwegian and Eastern researchers in general.

36 Funding is perceived as the most serious problems by the Norwegians, and they comment that Figure 3. Answers to the question “Assess the problems you encountered in the collaboration (1 indicating the least serious problem, 5 the most serious problem.”

4 N partner E partner 3

1 Different Inadeq. Lack of research infrastr. committment cultures and respect it is expensive to design and implement an international collaborative project. On the other hand, several also commented that the program was flexible and allowed them to spend funds in the ways they found most appropriate in the course of the project. The difference in research cultures is mainly the aforementioned lack of Eastern traditions for analytical work. A few also stated that the social organization of research work is more ’authoritarian’ and ’less democratic’ in the East. Some Eastern participants complained about poor infrastructure, particularly access to scientific literature and (good) computers. The projects often contributed to improving the infrastructure by transfer of literature and equipment. Infrastructure and funding were seen as more serious problems in the natural/medical sciences. Apart from that we found no significant field differences. A few Norwegians stated that it was difficult to make their partners respect deadlines and agreements on the contents of work, while the figure also shows that some Eastern participants felt a slight lack of respect. Some interviewees indicated that this might be due to different ‘scientific traditions’, probably reflecting a clear distinction between basic and applied research in the East and a more hybrid mix of a variety of research types in Norway. One of the Russian researchers stressed the need for the Norwegians to respect the Russian tradition, in his words described as more ’Continental’ as opposed to ’Anglo-American’. Still, the informants generally emphasized that researchers from Norway and the Baltic States and Russia collaborate well and much better than e.g. Russians and Germans/Americans do. A few respondents mentioned other primary problems. Two Norwegian social scientists stated that they had experienced competition with other commitments on the Eastern side (mainly due to a difficult financial situation), and the transfer of money and equipment was problematic in all projects.

37 Personal motivations for entering the projects are summarized in Figure 4 (5 represents the most important end of the scale). It is evident that the research topic itself is the main motivation for collaboration, and that many Eastern participants have seen this as an opportunity to strengthen (or indeed, keeping) their scientific career. The prospects of travel and financial benefits are greater for the Eastern participants. 12 respondents listed other motivations. The main ones include concerns about social problems in the Eastern nations, and the need for cross-country collaboration on important environmental issues in the Arctic. There are no significant field differences regarding motivations.

Institution building Figure 4. Answers to the question “Assess your personal motivation for entering this project (rank from 1-5 on each item, 1 indicating the least important, 5 the most important).

3 N partner 2 E partner

1 Research topic Benefit Benefit career Travel Financial scientific other prospects benefits career professions

Institution building in the East was one of the primary goals of the program, and several questions touched on this issue. Views on the impact of the projects are shown in Figure 5. In the social sciences projects, and to some extent in the medical projects, it is feasible to make a relatively clear distinction between institution building and individual transfer of knowledge. In the natural sciences projects this distinction is much less clear.

38 Figure 5. Answers to the question “Assess the impact of the research collaboration on your home institution5 (1 indicating low impact, 5 indicating high impact).

3 N partner 2 E partner

1 f t e f o s e g n m o r u t e

e d u u e d l b w e u g w t m l g e a e n u p n a l p n c a w l a N n i r N i i a o y e r h u t s h n r i q C l k u e C c

The main impact on the Norwegian research units appears to be new knowledge input, while the Eastern participants also benefited from new equipment and literature. Changes in curriculum and syllabus are slightly higher in the East than in Norway, but still very modest. This is most likely because many of the collaborating institutions are not universities, and thus do not have educational activities. Institution building obviously depends upon the characteristics of the institutions involved. It must be noted that the impact on curriculum and new equipment is significantly higher in the environmental/ medical sciences than in the social sciences. We also asked whether the respondents had received various kinds of support from their home institution, and the results are summarized in Table 6. We saw this support as indicative of the possibilities for (or of actual) institution-building.

Table 6. Support from the respondents’ home institution. Activity N (yes/total) E (yes/total) Signed the application/letter of intent 11/14 18/37 Supplementary financial support 10/14 7/37 Logistic support 12/14 26/37 Additional scientific work 10/14 22/37

The table shows that these different types of support are much more common in Norway, which is in part due to some project leaders’ preference for organizing their work through individuals rather than institutions. All medical scientists and all but one of the natural scientists indicated that they have received support for additional scientific work from their home institution, while only seven (out of 25) of the social scientists had received such support. Many of the Eastern participants appear to have stated that they have received logistic support, but without their institution necessarily contributing new equipment etc. In addition to receiving supplementary financial support for receiving foreign guests and organizing workshops, several of the Norwegian scientists have used other sources of funding to strengthen the project. One example is a medical professor who used revenues from a contract research project for a pharmaceutical company to buy equipment for his partners in Arkhangelsk. Approximately one-third of the sample indicated that the project differed from their previous work. The Eastern participants mainly stated that they had enjoyed improved quality standards, peer review and methodological accuracy, better equipment, and unusually high levels of trust and equality. Norwegian respondents tended to emphasize the challenges of project management when embarking on large-scale international collaboration. A few also

39 mentioned the encouragements derived from collaborating with very talented Russian graduate students. We also asked whether the projects had produced any learning effects, and the responses are summarized in Figure 6. It is evident that both sides have experienced beneficial effects, particularly concerning scientific teamwork and writing/presentation of results. It is also interesting to note that the learning seems to be quite evenly distributed. A few respondents mentioned other effects that were mostly related to the adoption of more stringent scientific methodologies in the Eastern research units.

Figure 6. Answers to the question “Assess on a scale from 1 to 5 whether the scientific collaboration in this project has had a learning/teaching effect on:

3 N partner E partner 2

1 Funding methods Scient. teamwork Present./writing

Relation to other programs and social relevance 18 out of 37 Eastern researchers participated in other international research projects. 11 out of 14 Norwegian researchers did likewise. Participation in assistance programs is rarer, and only four Eastern and four Norwegian respondents reported such activities. Some are involved in other research/assistance programs with the same partners, and a few of the Norwegian project leaders said that they were strongly involved in developing new program areas in organizations such as the EU and INTAS. In the largest projects in the natural sciences, the informants stressed that they needed several sources of funding in order to be able to focus on the scientific problems in question at all. In the social sciences, other projects were often said to result from the professional network emerging from the project being examined here (or the reverse). The main additional sources of funding are INTAS, special EU programs (including the Fifth Framwork Program), and the Nordic Council of Ministers. All respondents believed that their project is relevant to the needs and current problems of the East European country. A look at the project titles confirms this. In one way or another, all projects target important social, medical and environmental problems in the East (and sometimes also Norway). Although this may not have been a selection criterion of the program, it appears that the researchers are as much motivated by “social relevance” as by the possibility of generating scientifically interesting results. Almost all respondents also believed that their project has contributed or will contribute to the solution of current problems experienced by the Eastern nation involved. The four who did not all questioned the practical utility of a (basic) research project. Many of the others stressed that the lack of support for scientific work in Russia and the other countries involved is itself an important social problem that is (partly and/or temporarily) solved through the collaborative project. It was emphasized that despite their fairly modest size the projects had contributed to keeping a research field alive in the East. For instance, one respondent working on an environmental project said that the collaboration had made it

40 possible to accumulate and utilize a lot of important empirical (geological) data gathered in the communist era that otherwise probably would have slowly disintegrated in the archives. Some informants noted that their links to relevant users (mainly in ministries and other government agencies) made it easier to solve practical problems. In the most successful projects in this respect, we see that the collaborative network extends beyond researchers and their institutions.

Project and program management The respondents were asked to estimate whether their project has met its overall objectives (again on a scale from 1 to 5, 5 indicating that all objectives have been achieved). A few emphasized that it is too soon to make a final judgement. No one gave a score worse than 3, and the average is 4.4. The score is slightly higher (but not statistically significant) among the Eastern respondents. The major obstacles to efficient implementation are summarized in Figure 7. The most noteworthy point may be the relative absence of high scores – there seem to be no Figure 7. Answers to the question “From your perspective, what were the major obstacles to efficient implementation of the project.”

3 N partner E partner

1 Budget Unclear goals Lack of Communic. Bureaucr. N Bureaucr. E constraints qualifications insurmountable obstacles to this type of international research collaboration. As mentioned above, many interviewees nevertheless talked at length about bureaucratic obstacles, especially concerning the transfer of money and equipment (including samples and other material from the East), as well as poorly functioning banks and postal services. Frustrating as they may have been for the participants, however, these problems do not seem to have seriously impeded the implementation and success of the projects. As expected, such problems gain greater prominence in projects involving transfer of equipment and samples, than they do in many of the social science projects, where data have largely been transferred by e-mail. Norwegian social scientist, on the other hand, stated that the “lack of qualifications among researchers involved” was a more central obstacle than did the medical/natural scientists. Interviews indicate that this may be due to the shortage of relevant political science education in the Eastern countries. Another interesting feature of the responses to these questions is that the problems in the project are perceived relatively similarly by participants from “both sides”. The budget constraints have weighed more heavily on the Norwegians (who had control of the budgets and the allocation of financial resources in all projects). A few project leaders complained about having to spend so much time finding money from additional sources that it impaired

41 their ability to carry out the projects successfully. Respondents from the East place greater emphasis on Eastern bureaucracy because they probably experienced the effects of this more frequently. The higher score for “unclear goals” given by Eastern participants probably reflect that they in many cases have become involved after the project design is completed. It must be emphasized that in general, the respondents and informants had experienced (more or less) positive developments in Central and Eastern Europe in recent years. Some said that students with more relevant backgrounds have now emerged; others emphasized an improved climate for collaboration. One said, “The situation for scientists in Russia is still very bad, but at least it has stabilized now.” Few of the respondents were in touch with the Research Council during the project (besides formal reporting/application for additional funds). Those who were, express satisfaction with the program’s administrative staff in the Environment and Development Division of the Research Council. There are no negative comments on the evaluation process, which is perhaps natural given that the interviewees are successful applicants. There is one exception, however, project no. 123403/730, which gave rise to a serious conflict between the project manager and the Research Council (described in greater detail in the project evaluation in chapter seven). As already mentioned, several expressed that the relatively large size of the funds, and the flexibility and freedom of the program managers in allocate funds, was a major strength of this particular program compared to others.

Equality The issue of equal opportunities and equality between the partners is summarized in Figure 8. Figure 8. Answers to the question “Was the collaboration on this project characterized by equal opportunities and equality between Norwegian and Eastern partners regarding:”.

As expected, the lowest level of equality is related to project management, access to

3 N partner E partner

1 Res. Design Implement. Credit for Managmt Access to Data access results resources resources, and project design. The two former aspects score significantly higher (i.e. more equality) in the medical/natural science projects than in the social sciences projects. The reason may be that fewer of the social science projects are rooted in well established collaboration networks between individuals and institutions. For all three “least equal” aspects, the Eastern partners give higher ratings to the degree of equality than do their

42 Norwegian collaborators. Apart from methodological difficulties (several respondents gave all aspects a score of 5, although our interviews did reveal nuances), this may be due to the fact that some management and financial decision were not revealed to the Eastern partners. It is equally interesting to note that Eastern participants generally score equality lower than the Norwegians on the issues of “credit for results” and “access to data.” The most important reason is perhaps that these two issues were given very low scores by almost all the doctoral students from Eastern institutions. If these are removed from the data set, the difference almost disappears (although not completely). Some interviewees stressed that total equality may be impossible to attain, while others emphasized that equality has gradually increased through the project’s lifetime. Once networks are established and trust has been built up, it becomes much easier to achieve equality, some commented.

Sustainability, lessons learned, and suggensions for improvement All Eastern and all but one Norwegian partners claim that the present project will lead to further joint research or other forms of co-operation (the exception was negative mainly because of a lack of funding in the field in Norway, making further co-operation impossible for financial reasons). The comments indicate that the Eastern partners are more optimistic than their Norwegian counterparts in their expectations that network building will continue. But also the Norwegians emphasize that it is not very efficient to spend a lot of time building an international network if you are not going to continue co-operation. The different expectations can be illustrated by the comments of a social sciences professor. He doubted that he would collaborate with the same partners again because he wished to move into other problems area, and new partners would therefore be needed. Still, he did add that the Eastern partners would be more likely to co-operate with other Western researchers in the future: “As a result of participation in this project, all the Eastern European project members can present themselves to future grant givers as more experienced researchers than they could have otherwise.” All his partners wanted to continue the collaboration. Another project leader, having had negative experiences with the administrative level of his collaborating institution in the East, said he would only continue co-operation if he were able to choose his partners freely and not be obliged to “build institutions”. All other project leaders wanted to continue the partnerships, at least given relevant sources of sufficient funding. “The goal is, of course, that in the future, equally many Norwegian scientists and PhD students will go to Russia to learn as the number coming here,” remarked a respondent from environmental science in his interview. All respondents were asked about “Lessons learned”. The comments are frequently long and elaborate, although the general message is that the participants are pleased with the program, their project and the interaction between the two. It is interesting to note that there is a tendency among the Norwegians to emphasize learning about teamwork, and about organizing and managing an international study. “Large- scale project management is extremely time-consuming. Do not expect to get much else done during the project period,” a professor remarked, and then added, “In spite of all this, it is definitely worth it.” Others talked about enforcing strict deadlines, being prepared for bureaucratic problems and aiming for several sources of funding. “One should learn not to expect goodwill and assistance from Russian officials,” said a researcher from environmental science. The Eastern respondents, on the other hand, more frequently described their professional/scholarly learning. A Russian medical scientist talked about improved “theoretical development, empirical knowledge and scientific methodology,” while a social scientist from Estonia stated that, “I personally have learned very much about project

43 management, international teamwork, sociology, how to design questionnaires, international definitions and indicators, research implementation, survey methodology, and so on.” There are, of course, several exceptions – the Eastern partners have also learned about project organization and management, and several of the Norwegians talked about empirical and methodological learning. Comments about improvements also reflect these answers. The Norwegians generally talked/wrote much about e.g. the need for a “handbook” describing how to carry out such projects (even a list of well-functioning financial institutions would be very helpful), and the need for more clearly defined selection criteria in the program. Some wanted to focus on academic criteria only, because the starting point for collaboration is always a common interest in a scientific problem (as Figure 4 above illustrates). Others wanted the program to also focus on socially relevant problems and the transfer of knowledge to policy-makers and other possible end-users. The need for a long-term commitment to the same geographical region and problem areas was unanimously emphasized. An almost universal suggestion from the Eastern respondents was increased participation in the earliest phases of the scientific work. More participation by all partners in the design phase would benefit motivation, equality, commitment and the implementation of the work (e.g., collecting empirical data). Some also stressed the need for clarifications about competencies, knowledge, status, etc. before the actual project is carried out. A Russian geology professor wrote, “At the start of a new project the research routine established in Norway is normally taken for granted by both sides, which does not guarantee that the Russian counterparts fully understand its meaning and consequences, or wholeheartedly agree with it. After many years of collaboration with Norwegians, I have learnt how to defend my methodological idiosyncrasies. Many Russian collaborators would not do so for fear of losing the financial support.” Another common suggestion from respondents from all countries was the need for financial rewards to the Eastern partners. This can increase project efficiency by increasing the commitment, and by avoiding that important researchers and students leave the project due to the troublesome financial situation in the East. Paying at least a part of the participants’ salaries and/or transferring equipment are also seen as ways of building institutions indirectly. The asymmetries connected to the fields of learning are also mirrored in the comments on lessons learned and future recommendations. Eastern participants in social sciences projects emphasize their professional learning. As one Baltic senior researcher enthusiastically put it, “This has really been a research school for us.” Similar comments were heard from the medical sciences, Eastern participants stressing that they have come a long way in incorporating Western methodology and experimental standards. In the natural sciences, where the initial asymmetries were less related to lower quality standards and knowledge levels in the East, the participants largely talked about a mutual learning process. A common recommendation was to allow for flexibility in project implementation to give room for mutual learning to take place.

44 Chapter 7

Project evaluations

This chapter evaluates the individual projects and falls into three sections, representing the major professional themes addressed by the program: the social sciences, environmental protection and technology, and medicine and health. Each project is assessed according to the parameters outlined in the overall terms of reference. First, we review the initial objectives of each project in terms of general objectives and evaluation criteria. Second, based on submitted publications we assess the professional level of the project output. Third, we examine whether the project activities have achieved the anticipated transfer of knowledge between Eastern and Western researchers. Fourth, we try to determine whether the projects have had any effect on institutions – in the East and in Norway. Fifth, we examine the cost-efficiency of each individual project – were the objectives reached in a cost efficient manner? Sixth, we look into the equity dimension – were Eastern and Western participants equal partners in professional and financial terms? Finally, we discuss the sustainability and the broader societal outcome of each project in view of the overall program objectives. In the conclusion of each section, we give summary assessment of the projects in relation to the 5 major program objectives by applying the standards listed in the following table:

Objective: Professional level of Individual transfer of Institution Cost- Issues of publications knowledge building efficiency equality Score

All projects are ranked on a scale from 1 –5. 1 – denotes little success in meeting program objectives; 2 – success below average; 3 – average success; 4 – above average success; 5 – has successfully met program objectives.

45 ‘ Historically, the greatest leaps in social theory have come from times of great social transformation’. Csepeli, Orkeny, Schepple (1996).

‘ … the research agenda generated by the post-soviet transition offers an opportunity to study some of the most fundamental issues of many social science and humanities disciplines’. Bronson, Popson and Ruble, 2000.

Social sciences The rigorous information control under communism led to a situation in which entire disciplines were either totally absent or so strongly ideologized that they had little in common with the same disciplines as they developed in the West. This applied in particular to disciplines that potentially challenged the legitimacy and policies of the ruling systems, especially political science, international relations, law and – except for abstract modeling and basic data gathering – economics and sociology. Only in a few countries, namely those that initiated liberalization earlier (Poland, Hungary, and the republics of Former Yugoslavia) had a social science tradition that was broadly compatible with Western practices and standards when the changes started. Yet even in those cases, visiting Western researchers often mistook the poverty of the social sciences as a sign of intellectual backwardness. The 6 social science projects evaluated below represent the major investments that have been made in that field by the Norwegian program for collaboration and research with Central and Eastern Europe. They cover major areas in the broad field of social sciences: sociology, political science, political science and law, and two interdisciplinary policy studies focusing on environmental strategies and nationality policies. They also cover collaborative projects in a broad spectrum of countries in the post-communist world: the Baltic States, Russia (both regional and central institutions) and two post-Soviet republics: Kazakhstan and Moldova. The only bias that must be anticipated ex ante is that the absence of the more advanced Central European countries may amplify the hazards of collaboration described in chapters 2-4.

Project (110191/730 and 120461/730): Integration and nation building in post- soviet societies. Pål Kolstø, Project leader.

Project design and objectives. This project consists of three phases and focuses on problems related to national/ethnic conflicts in post-Soviet republics. The first phase of the project, a comparison of Latvia and Kazakhstan, is technically not part of the present evaluation, but is included to provide a dynamic perspective on an on-going project. The large groups of ‘Soviet people’ who suddenly found themselves as unwelcome immigrants in the new countries that came into existence after the collapse of the Soviet Union pose a serious problem for political stability and for democracy. Applying comparative case study methods, a first project, which ran from 1992 to 1997, compared Latvia and Kazakhstan. Despite having very large (about 50 per cent) groups of non-titular populations, both countries have been able to maintain political stability and escape the violent ethnic confrontations that occurred in other parts of the post-communist world. While the dependent variable, broadly speaking (stability or non-violence), is identical, the argument for the choice of countries is that there are significant differences between independent variables. In other words: the project compares two different countries where the outcome (stability, non- violence) is identical, but where the factors that explain this outcome are different. It is argued that these differences are found not only on the level of societal structures, but also in the

46 policies pursued by political leaders in the two countries. In methodological terms, it is a so- called macro ‘most-different systems design’. The second project compares Estonia and Moldova as two countries having approximately the same share of non-titular citizens (30 per cent), and who share a number of similarities concerning the positions and locations of non-titular populations. It is further argued that leadership policies toward the ethnic minorities in both countries have been broadly similar, alternating between confrontation and accommodation. The major research question is why the conflict in Moldova escalated to the level of violent confrontation (the Dnistr conflict), while Estonia escaped any bloodshed. Compared to the phase one project we are here dealing with a ‘most-similar systems design’ where it is argued that the countries on most dimensions are broadly comparable, but where the outcomes (violence/non-violence) have nevertheless been different. The third project, initiated in the spring of 2000, focuses on nation building in Russia. The intention is to use large-scale surveys in six Russian regions to identify and assess the role of common values in the construction of a post-soviet Russian national identity. The project descriptions for the two first phases refer to anticipated broader societal outcomes of the research (contribution to ‘…a long-needed clarification of this crucial question which may be of immediate benefit to political and social actors in these countries’). In another context the project leader is even more cautious when he states that ‘..there is scant reason to believe that our research will upset the ethno-political stability in Latvia and at the same time we may nourish the hope that this kind of research may contribute positively, however modestly, to the consolidation of Latvian society and Latvian democracy’. In particular, it is hoped that the dissemination of the research results generated by this project may contribute over time to replacing the previous ethnocentric understanding of the Latvian nation with a civic understanding. There are no deliberations about the achievements of the projects in terms of transfer of knowledge, institutional learning (East/West) or equity between Eastern and Western collaborators. The institutional partners and individual Eastern researchers described in all three projects prove, however, that the project from the very beginning was conceived as a collaborative enterprise, where Eastern researchers (and institutions?) were assigned active roles. Project output: publications. The present project has resulted in an impressive array of publications. A total of 11 publications is described as the direct output of the project, and a further 24 articles and reports are ‘to a significant degree buildt on the work in the project’. The difference between these two categories of literature is not evident as all the titles listed are related to the overall theme. While there is obviously a certain amount of overlap between individual publications, they also demonstrate the required progression and culminate in two major works: one international publication on ‘Nation building and ethnic integration in post-Soviet societies. An investigation of Latvia and Kazakhstan’ (1999), and one edited volume on ‘Nation- building, integration and ethnic conflict in Estonia and Moldova’ (forthcoming). The comparison of Latvia and Kazakhstan shows that Horowitch’s classical dictum, that societies characterized by ethnically bipolar cleavages have the greatest proclivity for violent confrontation, does not hold for these two countries. That Latvia and Kazakhstan have been able to escape violent confrontations is explained by the nation-building strategies of the leadership in the two countries. The essence of their strategies is called a policy of ‘re- ethnification’, the essence of which is a sort of divide-and-rule policy. By awakening long- forgotten ethnic identities, the leaderships replace ethnic bipolarity with multipolarity, thus increasing the political weight of the titular population. It is hence also a strategy that prioritizes stability over democracy. In the case of Estonia and Moldova, it is argued that the violence that erupted in Moldova was caused by a weak ethnic identity among the Moldavian

47 elite. This weak identity tempts the leadership to demonize the opponents (the Russians). At the same time, however, the Russian elite has a very low level of cultural respect for the Moldavians. In Estonia, in contrast, a strong national identity among the titular population made it unnecessary to vilify the Russian population, who also had a certain amount of cultural respect for the Estonians. Additionally, the deployment of the 14th Russian army on the Russian side of the Dniestr River encouraged the Russian leadership to pursue a policy beyond the resources available, based on a belief that they would be bailed out by army intervention in any event. In addition to these core findings, the two books cited and the other publications contain a wealth of empirical material and hard data not previously accessible to Western audiences, all supplemented by meticulous reviews and assessment of relevant theories. Hence, although one may have certain reservations regarding the selection of cases and the approaches used in the data analyses, this project has undoubtedly made an important contribution to our understanding of ethnic conflicts in post-communist countries. Based on the empirical evidence from this part of the world, it has also contributed to the theoretical development in the field. Individual transfer of knowledge While the project design and application did not explicitly pay attention to institution building and transfer of knowledge, there is little doubt that this project had the potential for significant contributions in both respects. The project was designed and also implemented as a truly collaborative venture, with Eastern partners working on a permanent basis on the project. The collaborative nature of the project is also confirmed by the high fraction of publications that are co-authored by Norwegian and Eastern collaborators, or are produced by participants in the Eastern countries under the editorship of the Norwegian project manager. Of 25 publications cited as output of the project, 4 have joint Norwegian-Eastern authors and 12 have one or more Eastern author(s). On the assumumption that conducting joint research and, in particular, writing joint research papers furthers this objective, this project has very successfully transferred knowledge between the partners. Hence, it is obvious from reading the publications and the progress reports that the present project has benefited from the competencies of local collaborators, and successfully escaped the hazards posed by the initial asymmetry between the partners. The survey of project participants shows that both Norwegian and Eastern participants have high opinions about the learning effect of the project. There is also general agreement that the major theoretical and methodological input has come from the Norwegian partners, whereas the Eastern participants are credited with the empirical research. Institution building It was clear from the outset that this is primarily a research project that aims to produce good science and, in the process, educate the Eastern participants in Western social theory and methodology. The ambition was not to build institutions, and the project leader explicitly states that he would find it detrimental to the attainment of the program objectives if he allowed local institutions to interfere in the selection of local partners. The survey data show that the project has had some impact on curricula in the home organization of the Eastern participants, but very little impact in Norwegian institutions. Cost efficiency. 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Grant/commitment from RCN 145695 529975 471099 528901 400000 Total per year Total from RCN 2 075 670

48 In view of the output this seems to have been a very cost efficient project. The surveys have been relatively cheap, travel and equipment costs reasonable, and the contribution of the Norwegian home organization high. The only reservation is that some local salaries paid by the project appear to exceed the standard local level. It must be recognized, however, that it is often very difficult to ascertain what could be considered a reasonable level of payment to local participants. Equality No secret was made of the fact that the Norwegian project leader is the ‘project owner’. This is reflected in the interviews as well as in the survey responses. It is he who makes all major decisions on research design and research implementation, while also controlling all financial flows, because there are only minor contributions from local institutions. From the surveys and from the interviews it nevertheless also became clear that this was considered a normal state of affairs, and we have only found few complaints from Eastern participants who feel they have been deprived of what they see as credit due for research results or access to the data produced by the project. Program administration and goal achievement The partners in this project have all given positive assessments about their collaboration with the persons in charge in the RCN: ‘We could relate to the same people in RCN all the time, and call or e-mail them whenever a question or problem arose’ – as it was phrased by one participant. Almost all participants consider that goal achievement was very high (4 on the 1- 5 scale), some explaining that rating by the fact that the project is to run for another year. Sustainability Not surprisingly, most Eastern participants expect (or rather hope) that the present project will lead to new forms of cooperation. The Norwegian project leader is perhaps more realistic when he to the question of continuation of collaboration responds: ‘if you mean further joint research between exactly the same partners, no. If you mean further joint research in which the EE partners are involved with other Western partners, definitely yes.’ The evaluators support this statement: in the present project design it would not be realistic to expect that the patterns of collaboration would provide for a future permanent relationship. Summary assessment This has been a very successful research project in terms of the research produced. It has also been successful in achieving individual transfer of knowledge (East-West and West-East) as a natural byproduct of successful research collaboration. It has been less successful in terms of institution building and in respecting the principle of equality among partners. This, however, was the conscious choice of the project leader, who from the outset seems to have recognized the necessary trade-off between institution building, equality and effective and innovative research. The project is sustainable in the sense that it has provided the Norwegian participants with experiences that can – and will – be applied to future projects in the region.

Project 123995: Comparative living conditions in the Baltic States, Aadne Aasland, FaFo, Project leader

Project design and objectives This project is a follow-up to and an extension of the NORBALT-project which, from 1994 to 1997, surveyed living conditions in the Baltic States (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania) and the two Russian regions of St. Petersburg and Kaliningrad. This first part of the project is

49 technically not part of the present evaluation, but is included to provide a dynamic perspective on a still developing project. The continuation of the project is reflected in new surveys that were carried out in 1999 in the Baltic States in cooperation with the national authorities. The extension of the project is represented by a related project on comparative survey methodology undertaken in collaboration between FaFo and Baltic researchers using the living condition surveys from 1994 and 1999 as the empirical basis. This extension is intended to improve the theoretical basis for the living condition studies by linking them more strongly to theories of social change. In this context, ‘living conditions research can provide a playground for researchers – indeed it can add to our scientific understanding of the process of social change’ (democracy and cultural identity). One ambition of the project is to develop the cooperation between Nordic and Baltic researchers, thus implicitly contributing to the transfer of knowledge that was described as an important outcome of the first NORBALT program. Further, the project is seen as having important policy implications when the results of the survey are disseminated to policy- makers and statisticians. In another context, it is emphasized that it is considered ‘very important to promote a research-policy dialogue where researchers produce facts – sometimes unpleasant facts – about society, and present the results in a form which make them relevant to policy-planners for their decision-making’ (democracy and cultural identity). In the Baltics, this contributes to elite awareness about real social problems, reducing the scope for ideological or moralistic explanations. Such information may be especially important concerning ethnic conflicts, where rumors about unjustifiable inequalities between ethnic groups may boost political tensions. The focus on problems of poverty and social exclusion may also challenge the cynicism towards social problems that characterizes some of the elites in transitional societies. It is understood, as also emphasized by the project leader, that such outcomes are only possible if the scientific work is of ‘unquestionable high quality’. The progress reports document that the program largely has progressed according to the original plan. The survey was carried out in the autumn of 1999, and the first (preliminary) tabulations were presented at public meetings in the three capitals, first in Riga in May 2000. National teams are presently analyzing the data. The NORBALT project has also drawn the Norwegian and Baltic researches into broader European research collaboration. They now, for example, participate in the Euromodule, a European research network working with comparative living condition studies.

The NORBALT II surveys in particular show the following trends:  While there were few differences between living conditions in the Baltic States in 1994, Estonia currently fares significantly better than the two others, and especially Lithuania is falling behind  Although incomes are significantly lower in rural than in urban areas, these differences are not reflected in subjective perceptions of living conditions. Alternative (not monetarized) incomes are larger in rural areas, as is social solidarity  Social polarization is greater in urban than in rural areas, but is alleviated by a better functioning social system  Ethnic affiliation is not reflected in living conditions. While ethnic Russians on average have higher incomes than the titular populations in Estonia and Latvia, the differences disappear when controlled for major background variables such as geographical region, level of urbanization, etc.  In all three countries mental health has improved in the late 1990s, a trend that can probably be explained by increasing institutional stability and predictability in all three countries

50 Project output: publications The NORBALT project is a comparative survey of living conditions in the Baltic countries. The surveys were carried out in 1994 and in 1999 using comparable questionnaires, allowing for cross-national as well as dynamic analyses. The analysis includes information on economic resources, housing and residential environment, education, the labor market (unemployment, working conditions), social integration, health (contact with health institutions, medical insurance, private caretakers, etc.), crime and security. The theoretical concept behind the surveys is anchored in the Nordic tradition for studies of welfare / social indicators. Some of the important elements in this tradition emphasize so-called objective indicators for the level of living (the so-called individual resources), the inclusion of various variables from different spheres in each individual’s life, and a belief in “piecemeal social engineering” (cf. Aasland et al. 1997: 12). The close relation between the studies in the Baltic countries and the existing data from the Nordic countries makes it possible to conduct comparisons between the Baltic and the Nordic countries too. Some studies carried out in the St.Peterburg and Kaliningrad areas even make it possible to include analyses of Russia in the comparisons. In spite of the (at times) somewhat complex conditions for data collection, the work was done thoroughly, and the data analysis meets international standards for survey analysis. Rooted in well-established Nordic welfare research, the quality of the NORBALT project is not to be found in theoretical innovations, but rather in the fact that the project provides accurate information about the living conditions in the Baltic countries at two points in time. This careful data analysis makes the NORBALT studies very valuable. It makes it possible to study countries undergoing transition, and to evaluate differences between the countries. It also improves the standard Nordic welfare study tradition in interesting ways. One point is that the researches have gradually included various subjective measures that make it possible to compare the individual’s perception of his/her living conditions with personal resources. Another point is that the NORBALT studies include information which has played a minor role in earlier Nordic studies, namely in relation to ethnicity. Special emphasis is put on the analysis of ethnic minorities, especially the situation of Russians. Three country reports and a combined analysis have been submitted (Estonia by Grøgaard et al.; Latvia by Aasland et al.; Lithuania by Knudsen; all three countries by Aasland et al.). The reports on Estonia and Latvia as well as the combined report are written by both Norwegian and Baltic researchers. These comprehensive publications present the survey results from each country. They also give some basic statistical evidence from each country. The review of the living conditions in each country shows that the populations in the Baltic countries have experienced serious welfare losses in many areas. This is documented in various articles in the books. The book on all three countries includes articles on various aspects of living conditions. There are several nuanced analyses. One example is Aasland’s article on the situation of the Russians in which he demonstrates that the differences in unemployment between Russians and Balts vary, and that the inequalities mostly affect women. The book also contains chapters on the possibilities and problems inherent in comparative methods. A number of other papers concern citizenship, poverty and social exclusion. They present rather complex results showing considerable variation between the Baltic countries. Generally, ethnicity does not appear to be a substantial explanatory factor for inequalities in the Baltic countries, but the ethnic minorities may feel more exposed and less integrated in society than ethnic Balts do. The submitted publications include only one contribution to refereed journals.

51 In conclusion, the NORBALT publications document a fruitful research environment. The data collection is unique. The combination of researchers from Norway and other Nordic countries with researchers from the Baltic countries has resulted in nuanced analyses of living conditions. The project is firmly rooted in the Nordic welfare research tradition, which means that the value of the projects and the publications is more related to the interesting data than to a broadening of social science theory. The general quality of the publications is satisfactory, and some of them are of high quality. One might wish, however, that the researcher would make an extra effort to have their papers published in refereed journals. This is indeed also intended to be the next step in the project, and the evaluation committee has been informed that one article (see list of publications in appendix 2) has been accepted for publication in Social Indicators Research, and two articles have been submitted to Europe Asia Studies and Journal of Baltic Studies. Individual transfer of knowledge This project has undoubtedly been highly successful in terms of individual transfer of knowledge. The long term visits by Baltic researchers to FaFo, a training seminar (not part of, but related to the project) and the collaborative reseach project itself has significantly improved the theoretical and, in particular, the methodological competences of the Baltic collaborators. In a long term perspective it is also important that, through their affiliation with institutions of higher education, the Baltic participants seem to be determined to use the data and methodologies generated by this project in education programs, thus transferring knowledge to a whole new generation of scholars and civil servants. In addition, some Baltic participants told the evaluators that they have learned from the working process, having for the first time been introduced to cross-institutional teamwork. The only problems seem to have developed not between Norwegian and Baltic researchers, but between Baltic researchers from different countries and from different kinds of institution. Institution building Having worked with and through established public institutions, this project has also had a relatively high institution building effect. Collaboration with high ranking individuals inside public institutions (statistical bureaus, ministries) has – to a greater or lesser extent – spilled over into increased capacities in these institutions in terms methodologies applied, the use of empirical research in political decision making, and administrative routines. It should nevertheless be emphasized that we are here faced with a long-term process where ingrained bureaucratic habits, vested interests and fear of competition burden public institutions with numerous obstacles to change. But if we want to change existing institutions (rather than build anew), the approach applied in this project, a commitment to long-term practical collaboration, seems to be the only feasible way forward. Cost efficiency 1998 1999 2000 2001 Grant/Commitment from RCN 300000 300000 550000 300000 Baltic share of financing 50000 450000 100000 Royal Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs 1200000 2500000 500000 Nordic Council of Ministers 50000 50000 220000 Total per year 1 600 000 3 300 000 1 370 000 300 000 Total from RCN 1 450 000

Surveys are costly undertakings, and this project is no exception. Still, the project has been very cost effective. In particular, co-financing with other donors and substantial contributions

52 from the Baltic authorities made this a very cheap project for the Research Council in view of the overall achievements. Equality There were significant financial contributions from the Baltic authorities. The Baltic participants seem also to have played significant and increasingly equal roles in the working process. The Balts themselves (in Estonia), for example, initiated the project – and only at a later stage contacted FaFo for assistance with the questionnaire. In this respect the questionnaires reflect a process in which the Baltic participants have gradually grown to full scale and equal partners in a joint research venture. In this perspective it should also, however, be added that compared to other social science disciplines, the present project was able to take advantage of the small group of qualified researchers in social statistics that existed before independence, in particular in Estonia. Program administration The program management is very positive in assessing its relationship with the Research Council, which ‘… has always taken an interest in the project.’ Sustainability There is no doubt that this is a highly sustainable project. The relationship been the Norwegian and the Baltic partners has developed over many years and is now characterized by a high degree of mutual personal confidence and commitment. All partners who were heard during the evaluation process express a keen interest in continuing the collaboration. Also the strong public interests and social benefits from this type of research have contributed to the expected long term sustainability. Summary assessment This project has been very successful in terms of most program objectives. The transfer of individual knowledge has been remarkable, the project has – as far this is possible – contributed to capacity building in public institutions, applying the theoretical and methodological skills offered by the Norwegian partner. The collaboration has also developed into a sustainable relationship between the Norwegian and Baltic partners. The only, and probably inevitable, deficiency has been that the theoretical development and – in a strict sense – the scientific standard has been lower that it would have been had the Norwegian side engaged in a purely scientific venture with equal partners from the outset. This deficiency is reflected in the small number of refereed research articles. The project management is, however, aware of this deficiency and has now assigned ‘articles to refereed journals’ a higher priority on the project agenda.

Project (120469 Modern Environmental Strategies and Single Enterprise Towns in Russia and Latvia). Jørn-Holm Hansen, NIBR, Project leader

Project design and objectives This is the continuation of an earlier project on the role of environmental knowledge and data in two case studies on the establishment of national parks in Latvia and in the Archangelsk region in Russia. The present project is based on the experiences of this earlier project and collaborates with the same local institutions. The ambition is to examine what happens when environmental institutions and instruments, designed in Western type system, are introduced into post-communist system. In effect, it is a test of the rational choice/neo-liberal idea that actors will respond uniformly to institutional change in different contexts and change their behavior appropriately. In contrast,

53 the assumption of the present project, using the insights form evolutionary economics and a version of historical institutionalism, is that past experiences and informal institutions will affect the performance of new institutions. In effect, such policy instruments might show ‘significant malfunctions when introduced in contexts and under conditions very much different from those originally underlying them’. The present project examines this thesis against the consequences of new environmental institutions in two post-communist countries, Russia and Latvia. The initial intention was to produce two sets of focused case studies: two cities in Russia (Koryazhma and Novodvinsk), and two in Latvia (Roja and Preili). This plan was reduced to one city in each country following budget savings, only to be reinstated in the original format when funding was increased in 1999. The different qualities of the cases permit inter-state as well as intra-state comparisons. The case studies focus on the interactions of three actors in each local community: representatives of the industrial sector, the environmental administration and the local administration. The ambition is to find out how these actors respond to the dual challenge of economic and environmental change. All the cases selected are so-called ‘single-enterprise towns’ where one industrial enterprise dominates the economic and – in the socialist context – the social and political life of a community. It is argued that the problem at hand is especially discernible in this setting because each actor has a clear profile. The project was to have been implemented in three faces, each concentrating on one major actor, in phase one the new environmental agencies, in phase two the local authorities and local politics, and in phase three the dominant enterprise in the community. An additional ambition is, through collaboration with local scholars and institutions, to contribute to the development in the two countries. The project aimed to introduce the Russian and Latvian partners to the use of case study methodology and qualitative research methods. The project has the explicit intention of contributing to the transfer of knowledge and institution building in the collaborating countries. In particular, it was expected that the research project would contribute to capacity building in the partner institutions in Russia (Institute for Northern Ecological Problems, Russian Academy of Sciences, Archangelsk) and Latvia (Center for Environmental Science and Management Studies at the University of Riga). A special feature in this respect is that it is envisaged that one outcome of this project will be the production of two doctorates – one in each country – financed by the project and with the support of Norwegian advisers. Finally, it appears to be an implicit argument that the application of policy instruments unsuitable for local circumstances is only partly due to ideology. Another important explanation is the lack of factual (particularly social science based) knowledge about the post- communist countries. It is thus expected that the knowledge generated by this project can increase the efficiency of future assistance programs. In addition, the completion of a Norwegian doctorate in the context of this project is expected to provide tangible documentation of the Norwegian side of the learning process. Project output: Publications The project examines an important issue, namely the possible mismatch between Western perceptions of environmental policy and the context of application in Eastern countries. For donors this issue may even appear to be crucial. The project design is ambitious, and the networking among Western and Eastern scholars promising and potentially more rewarding than one-sided Western missions to the Eastern countries. In the original application and subsequent reporting, the project purports to “focus on the context into which the modern environmental instruments and institutions of Russia and Latvia are introduced. The principal objective of the project is to provide research-based insight into the preconditions for a successful interplay between environmental instruments

54 and institutions and the local actors”. A hypothesis of a ‘mismatch’ between western style institutions and implementation in Russia/Latvia is put forward. The project now enters its final year (2001) and the reports cover the period 1997- 2000. A substantial amount of the time and money available has been spent, so there is every reason to expect the reporting to reflect a research project mature for sound conclusions. The material presented for evaluation is not entirely convincing in this respect. Overall, the material is extremely descriptive as regards the situation in the ‘single enterprise towns’ (SET). Several of the research notes do not go beyond basic (trivial) geographical features of the SET and, even more disappointingly, they cover the environmental aspects cursorily. Conventional Eastern problems of under-dimensioned sewage plants, arcane landfills and powerless institutions are listed, often in very general terms, but these phenomena are not connected to the social and economic crisis in SET towns in a way that offers analytical explanations for the state of affairs. Despite the inclusion of four different case studies, analysis that systematically explores the implications of the differences in settings, surroundings and institutions is absent in the documents. In particular, there is no theoretically informed analysis of policy-making and conflicts in the environmental field in the research notes, except in the work by Jørn Holm Hansen (JHH). But also his publications are wanting with respect to the level of theoretical orientation. While JHH seems to have oriented himself towards the transition literature, we find, apart from references to Klok, hardly any reflections on the international policy instrument literature which is particularly rich as regards the interplay between environmental policy instruments and context of application (Vogel’s and Richardson’s work on policy styles, Lundqvist, Knoepfel and others). Birgit Jacobsen is listed as the second Norwegian researcher on the project, but her production is very limited compared to JHH’s output, and hardly relates to environmental issues. It rather seems to focus on the general issues of local municipalities in Russia in a way that is not clearly mandated in the project outline. Two Russian PhD students from Arkangelsk have been enrolled in the project from 2000 with an additional grant, but the report for the period 1 August 1999 – 31 August 2000 does not provide any information about specific PhD research training, nor about delays. A substantial share of the additional grant (more substantial than salaries for to two PhD students) was allocated to PhD supervision, but because the Russian PhDs did not spend the anticipated time in Norway (despite having been invited to do so), supervision has not been practically possible. Based on the disappointing quality of the ‘Eastern’ research notes we are even tempted to conclude that supervision has been virtually nil. One of the previous reviewers mentioned that the project could not be expected to be scientifically innovative, but that its merits lay in the careful and original research of new cases in an Eastern context. We share this expectation, but the analysis could have been methodologically more rigorous. Going through the enclosed manuscripts, the reader is left puzzled as regards the basic research question. Exactly which ‘Western instruments’ have been introduced into Russian and Latvian environmental policies? Surely they must differ quite a lot between the two countries in view of the fact that Latvia has involved itself in EU approximation. And, perhaps more crucially, in which ways can studies of SETs improve our understanding of the possible mismatch between instruments and contexts? What have we learned from the study that can help support a more successful interplay in the future? The answers are by no means clear to the reader. Individual transfer of knowledge While the Eastern participants claim to have leaned a lot about theory and scientific methodology in this project, this learning effect is barely noticeable in the submitted material.

55 The 7 papers submitted by Eastern participants are highly descriptive and make negligible use of Western social science theory or concepts. They are, typically, the product of natural scientists and engineers turned social scientists, and as yet unable to apply the approaches of social science to the phenomena under study. While there may be some merit to the claim that collaboration between social and natural scientists/engineers can produce interesting perspectives (as was claimed by one Eastern participant), this was not the objective of this project. Institution building The argument presented by the project manager, that he has become a captive of his own ‘Protestantism’ when he attempted to pursue all program objectives simultaneously in an environment where this has proven impossible, is probably correct. The incompatibility of program objectives has in the present project become very clear, when the program manager – true to the ambitions of the program – has run the project through established institutions. Yet these institutions have neither the competence nor – it seems – the will to pursue such research. The result has been that the Eastern collaborators assigned to the project have been without the necessary qualifications and ambitions to pursue the objectives set forth in the initial project description. Cost efficiency 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Grant/commitment from RCN 480000 600000 574752 1075248 600000 Total per year Total from RCN 3 330 000

In terms of output this has, of course, been an expensive project. The project leadership cannot be faulted for this, which is rather the consequence of running the project through institutions unable to cope with the task in hand. In this perspective it is more likely a consequence of competing objectives within the overall program (institution building and research) that cannot be implemented simultaneously in the context at hand. Equality It has been impossible to obtain local financial resources for this type of research because of the low priority assigned to the area in the recipient counties. This economic one-sidedness is also reflected in the professional management, where the result was that local participants were used for concrete and well-defined tasks on the basis of contracts with the local institutions. This also implies a certain degree of equality in the implementation of the research on the institutional level. From the vantage point of this evaluation, however, this institutional equality has been part of the problem. Program administration There have been no complaints as regards the collaboration with the research council. One Norwegian participant provided the following comment: ‘It is easy to communicate with people in the Research Council’. Sustainability The project is not sustainable. Despite wishes from the Eastern participants to continue the collaboration, the Norwegian participants have a more realistic attitude when declaring that they can only pursue this type of research if they can work with individual researchers in the institutions.

56 Summary Assessment This project is innovative and ambitious in that it made an initial attempt to incorporate the overall program objectives into the research design. However, the loyal adherence to program objectives turned out to be incompatible in the local context because it caught the project leaders in a dilemma between effective research and collaboration with local institution. Effective research would in the existing context require that they choose their local collaborators independently of local hierarchies and institutions. Institution building demanded that collaboration was channeled through existing institutions. They could not pursue both objectives simultaneously. Their initial choice of the latter option, to work through the local institutions, directly caused the problems encountered in the implementation of the project. There are, however, indications that the project management is dealing with the problem and that the eventual project output will be improved compared to the status reflected in this evaluation.

Project 123388/730. Cooperation within Research on Judicial, Political and Administrative Reforms in Russia – A joint Norwegian – Russian Research Program. Brynjulf Risnes, NUPI, Project leader.

Project design and objectives This project attempted to integrate the overall ambitions of the East European program into its own design in that it combines a research program with ideas about transfer of knowledge between East and West (and visa versa) and institution building in the East. The project is described as a second phase initiative in the establishment of a Center For Russian Studies (CRS) at the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI). It is argued that the project will permit the CRS to broaden its contacts and improve access to data in Russia, and that it will provide support for the Russian partner IHPR (The International Institute of Humanitarian and Political Research in the Russian Federation). The project is organized in a two-tier structure. The first tier consists of four research projects in which Norwegian researchers are to collaborate with Russian partners and benefit from the Russians’ networks and access to local data:

 A research project on the development of a legal and administrative infrastructure in Russia  A project on center-periphery relations in the Russian Federation  A project on the emergence of Russian political parties related to the discourse about a Russian national identity  A project on Russia and the other post-Soviet republics

Only the first of these projects is an integral part of the project that finances about 14 percent of the project leader’s salary. It focuses in particular on the basic structure of Russian constitutional law and legal and administrative relations between the federal level and the regions. The other projects are based at the CRS, but funded from other sources. The second objective is to promote West-East transfer of knowledge and to strengthen the Russian institution by sharing NUPI’s international network and by introducing the Russian staff to Western research and research methodologies. This transfer of knowledge is to take place by organizing joint conferences and by inviting Russian guest researchers to NUPI. Among the projects encompassed by this evaluation, this project comes the closest in design and intention to the overall objectives of the cooperation program.

57 Project output: Publications The project was developed on the assumption that the resources and the subsequent approaches of the two partners are complementary, and that the integration of these two approaches will produce a synergy in the implementation of the research projects. The Center for Russian Studies at NUPI has emphasized a broad approach and made an effort to develop a broad and general understanding of legal and administrative development in the Russian region. The IGPI has, in contrast, focused on more specialized studies, both thematically and regionally. The project has been somewhat modest in quantative terms, producing publications mostly focusing on in-house research reports. This relatively low productivity is perhaps caused by two factors. First, the project has a large institution-building element that is also reflected in the idea of complementary resources. Second, while the previous work focused on the development of infrastructure and institution building, the finalizing of publications is described as the major activity in the present phase. Thus, following this priority of tasks, the full range of published output will only be available when the project has been completed in the summer of 2001. In particular, it is foreseen that a major anthology, Moscow vs. the regions – main trends in the contemporary legal and administrative developments of relations between the federal center and the Russian regions, will be published next year. It is presently under review. In the present context, the project has submitted one paper and a summary of the anthology under review. The paper by Gololobov and Overland, ‘Us Russian versus We Russians – Patriotic discourse and electoral support in Krasnodar kray’ (NUPI Working paper) analyses the linkage between community identities and electoral outcomes in the Krasnodar kray (region). This region is renowned for the strong position of Russian nationalists. As its point of departure the paper distinguishes between a ‘civil-patriotic’ and a ‘national-patriotic’ political discourse. Concerning electoral policies in the Krasnodar kray, it is concluded that national patriotism with its emphasis on a customary Russian identity and a political we–them mythology has had the strongest appeal for local voters. Skyner and Risnes’ (eds.) volume, Moscow versus the regions – main trends in the contemporary legal and administrative developments of relations between the federal center and the Russian regions must be seen as the major output of project. It is presently under review at an international publishing house, and a summary of the book chapters has been submitted for the present review. The book consists of 5 chapters focusing on different aspects of the center-periphery relationships within the Russian federation. The general conclusion of the five contributions is that the failure to clearly delimit the institutional competences of the major institutional actors – the presidency, the legislature (the Duma) and the federal units (the regions) – is a major cause of the conflicts that have erupted over the last ten years. The de jure (and even more de facto) concentration of powers in the executive (the presidency) since the adoption of the present constitution in late 1993 has further weakened the democratic legitimacy of the legislature and made it difficult for this institution to act as a democratic counterweight to the increasing independence of the regional units in the federation. These constitutional dilemmas are then explored in the individual chapters. In his article on ‘The emerging legal framework of Russian federalism’, Brynjulf Risnes describes the legal vacuum at the center as the major factor behind the increased legal diversities and inconsistencies in the overall legal system of the Russian Federation. The only encouraging sign at this point is that the Federal constitution, despite the legal inconsistencies at the local level, has been acknowledged as the supreme source of law in the whole country. This overall analysis is then applied to specific themes, first in Luis Skyner’s article on the conflicts that arose in the attempts to establish a federal land code that will make it

58 possible to proceed with the privatization of land. The article describes the present failure as the outcome of the Center’s fear of letting the regions regulate economic activity, and a shared (between the center and most regions) resentment against private profiteering from land privatization. Vladimir Slatinov demonstrates in his article on the Russian civil service that the political elite has been completely unable (or unwilling) to make any sensible administrative reforms. In particular, he shows that in a situation where the old Soviet types of control have vanished without being replaced by new social forms of control, the state bureaucracy has gone completely out of control. The result is a deeply embedded corruption where so-called ‘shadow norms’ determine the way in which the administration interacts with society. These ideas are further elaborated in Vladimir Nechaev’s chapter on local government. He argues that we must examine the interface between central guidelines and local traditions and ways of doing things if we are to understand how local government develops. Finally, also Ekaterina Rozina’s case study of developments in the Svedlov region shows that in a situation where traditional institutions have disintegrated and new ones are still not in place, informal networks and institutions become fundamental for understanding present developments. In particular, it is shown how emerging financial groups and private industrial conglomerates become very important players in the development of relations with the federal center. The book summary leaves the impression of an admirable effort to combine the competencies of the Norwegian and Russian institutions. Yet, the Russian contributions remain characterized by being very descriptive and having only a few references to the general comparative and theoretical literature in the field of enquiry. Individual transfer of knowledge Individual transfer of knowledge has been a core motivation for the project. But it remains difficult to say anything about the extent to which this has happened. In the survey the Russian participants rate the individual learning effect of the project very high, in particular with regard to theory and methodology. In their contributions, however, the Russian scientists have only few references to the general literature in their field – and it is difficult to asses how much the Norwegian researchers have benefited from the Russian researchers. This is somewhat surprising in view of the fact that the Russian scientists have spent 1-2 months at the Norwegian institution. The Russians’ familiarity with relevant Western research remains inadequate – at least as it is reflected in the publications made available for this evaluation. The Russians in this project seem capable of elementary empirical description or purely abstract theorizing – but at the present stage unable to engage in middle range theory building. The Russian partners seem so preoccupied with following current affairs and the turbulent institutional changes that broader comparative conceptualization is neglected. Institution building In the questionnaires it is acknowledged that the anticipated institution building effect of the project has failed to materialize to the extent expected, basically because the project was conceived as a pilot project in which it was seen as important that the practical work was done in Norway, thus providing the best infrastructure. It is belived that this is the best starting point for a future cooperation that will to a greater extent be located in the Russian institutions. There has been no major impact on curricula, while the major benefit for the institutions involved has been acquiring new knowledge for research. The Norwegian institution has also benefited from the relationship with the Russian institution as a gateway to other research related resources in the Russian context. Cost-efficiency 1997 1998 1999 2000

59 Grant/commitment from RCN 252000 301093 525619 223288 Total per year Total from RCN 1 302 000

In view of the present output, in particular the amount of publications and the more diffuse benefits from individual transfer of knowledge, this seems to have been a rather expensive project so far. However, the evaluators are convinced that the publications that are presently under preparation/review will eventually make the costs reasonable. Equality The Russian partners have only received economic compensation from the project while on study trips to Norway. Hence the Russian institution has provided salaries and office space for the Russian participants while they worked in Moscow. Although this approaches the program objective of financial equality, it may neverthelss also present a problem. Russian research institutions are, as described in previous chapters, working under very tough financial constraints. This implies that they must prioritize the partnerships they can engage in and favor those that provide economic benefit for the institution. The present Norwegian project, working from an equality position with no financial benefits for the Russian institution, is in this context not as interesting a partner as other programs that cover some of the overhead costs. On the level of professional partnership there has been no critique from either the Russian or the Norwegian partners. Program administration and goal achievement The relationship with the Research Council has worked without problems. Sustainability There is a strong wish from both the Norwegian and Russian partners to continue the collaboration established through this project. Whether such cooperation materializes probably hinges on the availability of the necessary financial resources. In particular the Russian motivation for choosing the Norwegians as partners will, under the present circumstances, also depend on the extent to which the Norwegian side is able and prepared to contribute to the running costs of the Russian institution. Summary assessment This project was very ambitious and wanted to cover practically all objectives of the program. It has produced some interesting research, although the writing process was not finalized at the time of the evaluation. The Russian researchers have on the individual level benefited from the collaboration, although it would have been desirable if the introduction to mainstream Western theories and literature had been more evident in the Russian contributions. It is also clear that the Norwegian institution has benefited from the collaboration, both in terms of new empirical knowledge and because of the eased access to other Russian research resources provided by the Russian partner institution. The impact (institution building effect) on the Russian institution has been negligible in the present phase of collaboration.

Project 120356/730, Governance and Economic Development in Russia: The role of the elites, Anton Steen, Project leader

1. Project design and objectives This project wants to study the formation and composition of Russian elites, their attitudes and policy orientation, in order to see how this influences economic reforms and democratic

60 consolidation. Another ambition is to outline recommendations for improvements in the policy-making process on the basis of the lessons learned. A central hypothesis of the study is that new elite networks, whether central or regional, and distributional coalitions compete for control over state resources. In broad terms, the dependent variable here is democratic consolidation and economic reform, while a further ambition is to assess the relevance of center-periphery on the consequences of economic reform. Methodologically speaking this makes the quality of the independent variable - the characteristics and attitudes of the political and economic elites in Russia as portrayed through surveys – all-important and the central asset of the project. It was chosen, quite correctly as the only feasible way, to subcontract with a market research company to carry out the survey. While the principal objective of the project is clearly stated to be scientific, four sub- goals with reference to institution building and transfer of knowledge are listed in the project application, which also refers specifically to the state of social science research in Russia and the problems associated with it. Thus the project aims to 1) contribute to a more empirically founded discussion about political organization and effects in Russia, 2) contribute to the development of political science research in Russia, 3) engage younger Russian researchers in a larger project to provide them with a basic understanding of the problems and possibilities of social science research, and 4) help the younger researchers to qualify for permanent positions in their institutions. 2. Project output: publications 2 publications (one of which is a research report) and 5 draft conference papers (one in the Norwegian language) have been made available to the evaluation. A further 2 conference papers could be made available for evaluation. In addition, 1 monograph and 1 seminar report – collecting the papers from a conference – are in the process of completion. The research report lists the frequencies from the survey. The survey data are used in the conferences papers, illuminating and analyzing various aspects of the composition of the Russian elite. The conference papers do not show much cumulative progression from one to another, as they are in fact early drafts for chapters in the forthcoming monograph. Steen (2000f) demonstrates a higher degree of elite trust in representative and executive institutions than in the new institutions of business and political parties. He concludes that as these new institutions form the basis of a functioning market economy and pluralistic policy, this can lead to increasing support for a centralization of political power and state involvement in the economic sector. Then again, as Steen also documents, there is a high degree of inter-elite distrust, hence it is difficult to see why elites would voluntarily give up power to the elites of other institutions. More importantly, the conclusion is countered in Steen (2000b), where evidence of a call for decentralization among the elite is brought forward. The subject is further examined in Steen (2000e), where individualist vs. collectivist orientations among and between different elite groups are examined. The findings show that collectivist values remain prominent, but there is also an undercurrent of support for the market and individualist values among the Russian elite. These patterns suggest that Russia will neither develop into a neo-liberal market economy nor return to the planned economy, but become a mixed economy in which the market is regulated and there is a strong state presence in certain economic sectors. This overall conclusion is qualified in an innovative and fruitful breakdown along regional divides. The findings demonstrate a more individualistic orientation in the reformist regions than in the periphery and in stagnating regions, suggesting that economic performance influences orientation. In Steen (2000c and it appendage 2000d), patterns of inter-elite contact are detected, suggesting that in a context of weak institutions patterns of inter-elite bargaining are the glue that keeps society together.

61 Steen (2000a) uses his data from (idem. 2000f) and previous research to examine the orientations of elites in the Baltic States and Russia towards democratic practices and the market under the influence of the simultaneous change of economic and political systems. He find that countries can be differentiated with respect to the legitimacy of institutions as seen through elite confidence in institutions and the degree of elite trust in the leaders of these institutions. While the result is useful and illustrates a deep crisis of legitimacy in Russia compared to the Baltic States, little effort is made to explain this variance. The author also demonstrates that while the elites in all four countries are open to mass participation in politics, the Latvian, Lithuanian and Russian elites remain dominated by authoritarian leadership attitudes. It is also shown that political participation promotes democratic values. Theoretically, this is an important finding because it impinges on the discussion about old and new social capital, i.e. whether social capital can be created or is path dependent, and the question about political learning and socialization. In sum, the research in this project shows that elite-networks, values, attitudes and bargaining have a large impact on political and economic developments in Russia (and the Baltic states). In addition, the research should also be credited with providing new empirical evidence on the Russian elite. Project output: Individual transfer of knowledge Despite having the sub-goal of strengthening political science research in Russia, both through transfer of knowledge and assistance to younger Russian researchers to qualify for permanent positions at their institutions, little is reported on this issue. The East European partners have all reached ‘Western levels’ and have established careers within the scientific community. The primary scientific asset of the project is the data collected through the questionnaire. In reviewing the material and judging from the survey results, the impression is that the project, irrespective of academic merit, is designed and prepared by the Norwegian manager, with Eastern and other Western partners participating in data collection, analysis and workshops. No Eastern partner is featured as co-author of the research report (Steen, 1999) containing the frequencies from the questionnaire. According to the foreword of the research report, the Eastern partners (besides the contracted market research company) have: ‘provided useful contributions to the formulation of some (evaluator’s italics) of the questions and in the selection of regions for the study’.2 While the participants have clearly not been equal in all phases of the research program, the project has also contributed to individual transfer of knowledge. Two conferences/seminars have been arranged. At the first conference, held in Norway in 1999 and organized as a doctoral seminar, 9 presentations were given by established faculty, in addition to a presentation of doctoral work in progress. Of the 9 presentations, an East European scholar gave one. No data on the participation of doctoral students has been provided. In the second conference, held in Russia in 2000 and organized as a research seminar, 13 papers were presented. 7 of the papers where given by Western scholars, 5 by Eastern scholars and one paper had multiple (East and West) authors. The most recent and as yet unpublished publications (Steen and Gelman (ed), 2001) and (Timofeev (2001)) are co-authored by Western and Eastern researchers. The former, which is currently under publication, illustrates a broad and inclusive effort involving Norwegian, Russian and American scholars, including a number of doctoral students. In addition, two of the Eastern partners have been on research visits to Oslo. It is, however not clear from the material made available to the evaluators whether these cost are covered by the project or come from other sources. Judging from the survey, partners in both Norway and Russia have benefited from the collaboration, in particular with respect to theoretical development and empirical work.

2 Item IV in the contract enclosed ‘Framdriftsrapport for 1998, Tillægsopplysninger.

62 Institution building The project manager clearly sees a trade-off between institution building and good research. As a researcher it is impossible to overcome both aspects, and when questioned about his approach to institution building, he supports a ‘middle of the road approach’, that is, initiatives creating networks of Eastern and Western scholars and providing fora for discussion such as conferences and seminars. In this respect, individuals as mediators of institutional reform, the project has met with some success. But the survey also indicates that the primary result with respect to institution building has been to provide new knowledge for further research, whereas curricula, syllabi and new equipment and scientific literature have been less impacted. Cost efficiency 1997 1998 1999 2000 Grant/commitment from RCN 252000 301093 525619 223288 Total per year Total from RCN 1 302 000

The project has been cost efficient. Elite surveys are expensive and the survey conducted for this project is no exception. In fact, it proved to be more expensive than initially expected, and the number of interviews therefore had to be reduced. It is hence no surprise that the project manager perceive budget constraints as a major obstacle to the efficient implementation of the project. Furthermore, the amounts spent on travel etc. seem moderate and propably have do with the outsourcing of the survey. In addition, the expenses related to the two conferences/seminars as well as project participants’ participation in other international conferences are reasonable. Equality Financially, the home institutions of the Eastern partners have made no significant contributions towards the project apart from basic logistic support. Whereas the survey indicates that the participants (both Norwegian and East European) perceives a high degree of equality on most aspects, the foreword of the research report (Steen, 1999) credits the Eastern partners with little participation in project formulation, design and preparation (see above). Furthermore, in the letter of intent one of the Eastern partners writes to Anton Steen (Golosov, 23rd April, 1997) to ´… confirm that I am willing to participate in your research project…’, indicating that the project leader is initially perceived as the project manager at this stage, defining the context and strategy of the project. These patterns indicate a research community in which a ready-made (in Norway) research project gradually becomes more of a joint program. It must nevertheless be emphasized that the latest publications (Steen and Gelman, forthcoming 2001) and (Steen and Timoteev, 2001), suggest increasingly equal participation by Norwegian and Eastern (Russian) researchers. Program administration Judging from the survey the RCN receives a positive evaluation in as far as the partners have been in contact with them. Due to the project manager’s ‘owner rights’ to the program and control of financial flows, the goal achievement and implementation of the original design is judged as being high. Sustainability The database produced in the course of the project, in possible conjunction with earlier surveys of elites in the Baltic states, carries the promise of fruitful comparisons, as witnessed by Steen (2000a). From a scientific standpoint the program offers new avenues of research to

63 be explored. New elite surveys, either at later stages or in covering other political systems, will thus enhance possibilities for comparisons across time and space. The survey implies an expectation from the Eastern partners to participate in new research projects utilizing existing ties, also because the partners in Norway and Russia have similar research interests. The project manager confirms these expectations, explaining that ‘steps have already been taken to develop further projects’. Summary assessment This project has been successful in terms of meeting the scientific ambitions presented in the original description. The careful design has also resulted in publications and a database that can be used in cumulative comparative research. The project has been less successful in terms of institution building. This reflects the trade-off between institution building and good research and the adherence to the ‘middle of the road approach’, where research rather than institution building takes priority. Institution building and transfer of knowledge is, in this context, seen as positive side effects of the research process. The project has been characterized by in increasing involvement of the Eastern partners.

Project 123403/730) Democratisation of transitional societies in Central and Eastern Europe. Project leader, Frank Aarebrot

Project design and objectives The ambition of this project is to systematize and disseminate data collected by a Swedish funded project on democratization in Central and Eastern Europe using modern information technology (Internet and CD-ROM). In addition to the dissemination of knowledge through the Internet, the project manager has concurrently been active in a number of educational programs involving institution building in Baltic Universities. On the basis of supplementary funding the project has also arranged a workshop for younger Baltic researchers and MA students in 1998, a network meeting between established researchers from Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland, travel expenses for one project participant to the Baltic states to examine the possibilities for further cooperation in a Nordic-Baltic network of researchers and, finally, a research stipend for the ZA-EUROLAB to prepare empirical material for another Norwegian-Swedish research project (The Conditions of European Democracy). This research stipend, however, also gave him the opportunity to collect material for the main project. The original project description explicitly states that the Norwegian funded project thus complements activities funded from other sources and only meets the overall objectives of the Cooperation Program (research, individual transfer of knowledge and institution building) in conjunction with these activities. To fully grasp the potential impact of this project it is necessary to distinguish between, a) the project ‘in a narrow sense’ focusing exclusively on the activities funded by the Cooperation Program; b) the project ‘in a broad sense’ involving all the activities in which the project manager is involved during the project period. It is a matter of principle whether the merits of this project should be assessed on the basis of the broad or narrow conception. On the one hand, in its initial approval of the project the Research Council apparently sanctioned the project ‘in the broad sense’ when it supported a project that explicitly had neither Eastern individual participants nor institutional partners. This endorsement, however, was apparently withdrawn when the project was not selected for additional funding because of the absence of Eastern institutional partners. From that perspective, it would be fair to evaluate the project ‘in the broad sense’. On the other hand, it can be argued that it would be unfair to the other projects in this evaluation to apply the broad definition because we do not know which projects the other project managers have been involved in during their project periods. With these reservations in mind we have decided to

64 apply the narrow definition of the project for two reasons: 1) the project manager never submitted research papers from the complementary projects; 2) the evaluation committee does not have access to the necessary information on the complementary institution building and educational projects that were funded from other sources. Based on these premises, according to the project description the main activity of the project has been to construct a database, accessible on the Internet, documenting changes in democratic frameworks, emphasizing institutions and electoral behavior in the Baltic States since independence. While there is no specific reference to institution building and transfer of knowledge in the project description, there is an obvious relevance along these dimensions when the project makes documentation accessible to Eastern researchers. The database is presently available at the URL: www.democratisation.org. The site is shared with a course for election observers. Publications The final report registers 1 anthology, 1 undergraduate reader and 3 conference papers as the outcome of the project. A number of unpublished activities are also registered, including a report published on the Internet. This report is unfortunately not available at the URL provided. The anthology is mainly the outcome of the Swedish funded project. The undergraduate reader is partly the outcome of the 1998 workshop. None of the publications was enclosed for evaluation. As stipulated in the original application, the main project output is the database at www.democratisation.org. According to the introduction at the site the database contains documentation on 1) the constitutions of the Baltic countries, 2) other constitutional documents available, 3) election laws at both national, regional and municipal level, 4) election results of all elections since 1989, 5) information on all political regimes and governments since 1989, 6) Information about all political parties and coalitions that have participated in national elections since 1989, and 7) an introduction to each country; geography, history, population, economy, etc. Other than the information about the Baltic States, information about the Czech Republic (constitution and election results 1996 and 1998), Russia, Poland and the Slovak Republic (Constitution) is also available at the site. The final report does not provide for an evaluation of the database and the site, except for the statement ‘… today it is used at several universities from University of California in the west to the Baltic universities in the East…’ No systematic evaluation has thus been made with respect to the usefulness of the documentation available – compared to scientific purposes and compared to other sites on the Internet. There is no information about the functionality of the search engine and no specification of the unique number of hits or a breakdown of the IP-codes. When testing the site the evaluation committee found that the search engine is cumbersome and that relevant direct searches are difficult. The engine is constructed in such a way that a more general search on ‘government and Lithuania’ lists all entries contained in the database for Lithuania. It is possible to click through to the specific information required from there. This list will also show that information about the political parties in Lithuania (and Latvia) is missing. Information about the political parties is available for Estonia, however, where a search for Isamaaliit (a leading conservative party) leads to a general entry on ‘parties’. Using this entry to find Isamaaliit, a hyperlink leads to the homepage of the party in Estonia. For other entries, it appears that some editing has been made – and the information is stored on a server at the University of Bergen. Generally, however, the original sources are not listed and where membership numbers for political parties are given, there is no information about when these numbers were collected. Hence, the site still needs some updating and editing.

65 The Internet is developing at an incredible rate, making still more information accessible to researchers. It seems fair to say that the present project has been overtaken by these developments, unforeseeable when the project was launched. Today, all of the information available at the site can easily be found on other established and more efficient Internet sites. If the web site is to maintain its value, the project management must consider these changes. These developments should have resulted in adjustments of the original design as they have become clear to the project management. Project output: individual transfer of knowledge The project leader and other participants have (applying the broad project concept) been active in relation to other research and training activities. There is no doubt that these activities have contributed to the transfer of knowledge to the East. But since no Eastern partner has been identified specifically for this project (in the narrow sense), it has been impossible to assess both the direction and the content of the individual transfer of knowledge. The Norwegian project manager considers level the of new knowledge for further research to have been high at the home organization of the project. With respect to the transfer of knowledge through the nodal infrastructure, the development of the Internet has overtaken the relevance of the database. Institution building In the evaluation survey of the project (in the broad sense) the manager lists activities of unquestionable social relevance for the Eastern countries: ‘Developing doctoral and Master programs, supporting summer schools, supporting computer laboratories, and developing teaching material freely available on the Internet’. These activities are indeed related to institution building. With respect to teaching material, the necessary information about unique hits, a breakdown on IP-codes, and a survey about which types of information are sought at the web-site are missing, making it impossible to trace the actual use of the site. The usefulness of the site for institution building could be increased dramatically if actual syllabi together with class readings were made available. With respect to support for computer laboratories, summer schools and the development of Doctoral and Master programs, no material has been submitted for evaluation, nor are these activities listed in the original (narrow) project description. With respect to institution building in Norway the project manager thinks that the project has had an average impact on syllabus development. Cost efficiency (Copied from final report) 1998 1999 Grant/commitment from RCN 500000 400000 SiU 35957 NorFa 29500 International Office, UiB 8500 2A Cologne 10000 10000 SV Faculty UiB1 6000 Total per year 583 957 416 000 Total from RCN 900 000

Of the approximately one million NOK budget, 90 percent was granted by the RCN for the development of the nodal infrastructure. This nodal infrastructure (www.democratisation.org) is operative. The project did not receive additional funds in a later round of extension applications. However, from the vantage point of present day cost structures and compared with the information available at the site, the search engine costs seem high. It is not possible

66 to say if this is also the case if the cost were measured against the cost structures at the time when the project was launched. Equality At the outset the project (in the narrow sense) had no institutional partners in the Baltic States, and the project was designed at the Norwegian home institution. It is thus meaningless to assess the level of equality in the project. Form another perspective, equality concerning access to data is of course very high, given the character of the Internet. Program administration The idea of utilizing the Internet for institutional development by disseminating information about the Baltic States for researchers and students was well conceived. Initially the project manager evaluates the RCN process of evaluation and selection as satisfactory, and likewise the day-to-day communication and follow-up with the RCN representative. However, given the initial approval of the project, the decision of the RCN to not provide additional funds for prolonging the project came ‘totally unexpected’, and the project manager sees the refusal as a major hindrance for future collaboration with the research council. This is so not only because it resulted in insufficient funds, but also because of the ‘lack of predictability … since the NFR proved to be an unreliable partner ‘, and that ‘the process surrounding the application for prolongation was not transparent.’ In the eyes of the project manager the NRC failed to meet their obligations, and the University of Bergen had to step in and partially fund planned activities in ‘order to avoid embarrassment vis-à-vis Baltic partners.’ The exact identity of those Baltic partners is, however, not clear as they are specified neither in the original proposal nor in the final report. From our perspective as outside observers, it is difficult for the evaluation committee to understand why the project was selected for funding in the first round of applications, but then excluded from extension because of the absence of formalized institutional cooperation. This absence of institutionalized cooperation within the project (in the narrow sense) was an explicit feature of the project all along. It is therefore understandable that the project leader reacts critically to the strict adherence to the program rules in the second round of applications, when they had not been applied in the first round. Sustainability: Whereas the database in its present form and structure is not sustainable, as potential users will find easier and better documented information elsewhere, the other activities related to institution building such as development of Doctoral and Master’s programs and computer laboratories are sustainable. Such activities require systematic funding and commitment both in time and by persons. Without this, only piecemeal institutional reform and development is possible. The staff of the evaluated project and the people with whom they work in East and West undoubtedly have this commitment. Summary assessment If all activities relating to this project (the broad definition) are considered, this has been a successful project with a well-designed combination of high-level research, well-designed institution building and educational activities. In this context the construction of the Internet site designed to disseminate information about democratization in the East has been but one activity that complements the other activities in which the project manager has been involved during the project period. In a narrow sense, the project has produced the web-site anticipated in the application: The costs related to the establishment of the site seem quite high, and the rapid development of the Internet has rendered the information available and the search engine at the site less useful compared to other sites currently available on the Internet. The conflicts between the research council and the manager that have characterized this project

67 originate in the original decision to fund a project that, in a narrow sense, obviously failed to meet the major program criteria, in particular an element of institutionalized collaboration with Eastern partners. It is thus understandable that the program manager was surprised by the subsequent decision not to extend the project.

Summary evaluation of social science projects. The achievements of the social science projects are summarized in the table below. Some of the projects have not yet been finalized and may receive a higher rating when completed.

Summary evaluation of social science projects. Objective: Professional Individual Institution Cost- Issues of level of transfer of building efficiency equality Project publications knowledge 120461/730 (10/97) 5 3 2 4 3 123995/730 (44/98) 3 5 5 4 4 120469/730 (11/97) 2 3 4 3 4 123388/790 (24/98) 3 3 2 3 3 120356/730 (02/97) 4 3 2 4 3 123403/730 (28/98) N/A 3 N/A 2 N/A

1: little success in meeting objective 2: below average success in meeting objective 3: average success in meeting objective 4: above average success in meeting objective 5: successfully met objectives N/A: Not Applicable

The summary scores lead to the following 7 observations regarding the preconditions for the success of social science projects within the Cooperation program:

 There is definitely a short-term trade-off between high quality research on the one hand and success in individual transfer of knowledge (training, education) and institution building on the other. If the project manager chooses to prioritize high-level research he (they are all male!) cannot expect to achieve high scores in meting the program objectives of individual transfer of knowledge or institution building. If he chooses to focus on institution building and individual transfer of knowledge, it will have negative consequences for the quality of research. Consequently, the best research has been produced by projects that have chosen the best possible partners and bypassed local institutions  Those who have paid more attention to institution building and channelled project management and funding through local institutions have not always been provided the best local partners, with subsequent negative consequences for the quality of the research. Experience also demonstrates that the initial choice of collaborating institution in the East is crucial for the outcome of the project. Some institutions are mutable and permeable to new ideas, others are not. Institutional collaboration and institution building are also long-term affairs and it is unreasonable to expect measurable results within the life span of one single project. Finally, it should also be recognized that in cases where we are dealing with Eastern institutions in financial

68 distress, financial support (overhead) to that institution may be a precondition for sustainable cooperation  Individual transfer of knowledge in the form of training and educating Eastern partners is an important precondition for the capacity of a project to meet the overall objectives of the Cooperation Program. The projects that reach the highest overall level of success have integrated training elements into their research program (courses, seminars, conferences), thus simultaneously transferring knowledge and increasing the quality of future research  It should be recognized that there is an element of chance in meeting the program objectives. The most successful projects have worked in fields (or in countries or regions) where qualified partners or partners motivated for change already existed as specific legacies of the communist system  Issues of equity in research and sustainability of cooperation should be looked at in the context of the first three points: When you have a qualified partner, equality is an asset in the research process. If your partner is less qualified, equality may easily turn into a liability. If the collaboration has succeeded it has obviously produced fertile ground for sustainable future cooperation  Synergy with other activities in which the manager is involved add to the cost effectiveness of a project. The activities should, however, be explicated and documented in the application  It is important for effective management that the Research Council apply identical criteria for evaluation and selection of projects at all stages of the program

69 Environmental sciences

The scientific world too was divided by the old ‘iron curtain’. Applied aspects have been very much in focus in Western science during the last decades, whereas a more fundamental approach was often taken in the East. One consequence of this philosophy and the entire political system in the former communist countries was that environmental sciences and environmental protection were neglected. Information on environmental problems in Eastern Europe only became public in the 1990s. A number of Western countries began to involve themselves in environmental projects by way of assisting the former communist countries, not only in the form of acute aid but also as a way to help build academic institutions and networks to augment local knowledge about environmental issues. In the course of some of these projects, it turned out that co-operation between Eastern and Western scientists with differing backgrounds and philosophies also benefited Western scientists. If such mutual benefits are to acrue, however, projects must be perceived as a co-operation between equal partners. The four environmental science projects in Estonia, Latvia and North-West Russia evaluated here cover a broad range of environmental issues such as agricultural practices, transport engineering, climate change and remote sensing techniques. Application of results was an important factor in all projects, and in two of them, the transfer of knowledge to end- users such as national authorities and industry was an explicitly stated goal, whereas the building of scientific institutions and networks were high on the agenda for the other two. All four projects have generated new knowledge, which has been documented in reviewed journals.

120471/730 (06/98) Environmental Issues and Agricultural Development in Estonia and Latvia, Vagstad, Project leader

Project design and objectives This project is based on an already established cooperation and is to some extent a follow-up of an earlier Baltic-Nordic project. It is not very large in term of funding, but its scope is nevertheless broad, consisting of relevant research, transfer of knowledge, and practical application of the results obtained by Baltic authorities. The project addresses environmental issues related to the development of Estonian and Latvian agriculture and is divided into two major sub-projects. The first sub-project consists mainly of applied work, the objective being to address the planning and development of privatized agriculture in relation to environmental aspects. Economic issues related to crop management and viable farm practises are integral subjects. The work is carried out in a dialogue between national authorities (Ministry of environment and Agriculture) and educational and research institutes. The aim is to support the development of national codes on sound agricultural practises. Furthermore, the educational aspect focuses on the issue of agricultural and environmental protection. Master’s degree level students formed an integral part of the project, thus expanding the research base into university courses on the topic and creating a scientific base for Baltic participation in international cooperative research efforts. The second aspect of the project consists of research on nutrient runoffs into agricultural water catchments areas and investigations of the runoff processes. This work is an essential aspect of furthering the development of international models, and will help improve already established methods in this area. The research combines access to study areas made available by the Balts with Norwegian methods. The project has also worked to consolidate

70 the recently established nutrient runoff measurement programs as benchmarks for future national programs on environmental monitoring in agriculture. Project output: publications The three year project period produced four scientific articles in refereed journals. Three books/reports (parts of a master’s degree) and seven articles for international meetings/congresses were published as well. The work presented for evaluation shows that the there is considerable variation in Baltic environmental conditions, some areas exhibiting runoffs well below average for the Nordic region, while other areas show considerably higher levels. The loss of nutrients from “normal” agricultural production is moderate, while high losses are observed in intensive domestic animal production, primarily on former state farms. However, hydrological conditions in the precipitation fields were also shown to have a major impact on the runoff of nutrients. Changes in the hydrological conditions in precipitation fields may be as important as traditional agricultural changes (e.g. change in fertilization practices) for the transport of nitrogen to water catchments areas. In view of the funding available, the scientific output is good and all the papers are highly indicative of a joint project. Overall, the scientific output can be characterized as very good. Individual transfer of knowledge and Institution building The very nature of the project sends strong signals of co-operation. It combines the obvious needs for development on environmental issues in Baltic agriculture with joint research interests. The strong involvement of the Baltic authorities in the project and the rapid implementation of results in their work indicate a strong linkage with national not only authorities but also end users. One of objective of the project was to integrate environmental aspects and concerns into the planning and development of privatization in the agricultural sector. A seminar on sustainable agricultural and environmental protection was organized in Estonia in 1999 in cooperation with Baltic agricultural governmental bodies. Among the participants were representatives from the authorities, scientists and various agricultural advisory services. The project has furthermore supported participation in a HELCOM workshop (Task force Agriculture). The Latvian Agricultural department has published a “Codes of Good Agricultural practices”. Baltic project partners authored this material and the results reached during the project formed an important basis for their work. The results of the project have also been integrated into the syllabus at the Agricultural University in Latvia (LUA) and the Technical University of Tallinn (TTU). One master’s degree from the TTU was finalized on the basis of results generated by the project. This is also reported to have been the case for a master’s degree from the LUA. This graduate is currently working towards a PhD degree at the same university. The project has produced several joint papers co-authored by Balts and Norwegians. The research field is of great interest to all the research institutes involved and has hence provided much new input. The main areas of interest for the Norwegians were new knowledge input for research, access to new data, and a study area with conditions not normally observed in the Nordic countries. The Baltic research institutes have also benefited from the research, mainly because the Norwegians introduced new methods, and especially from donations of new equipment. Additionally, the project has introduced the Baltic partners to international co-operation and afforded them the opportunity to become involved in other international research projects. Overall, institution building was shown to be very good, considering the size of the project. Cost efficiency 1998 1999 2000

71 Grant/commitment by NRF 299197 249054 350946 Own institution 70000 70000 70000 Total per year 369 197 319 054 420 946 Total grant from NRF 899 197

The project is relatively small with an annual budget of about NOK 400 000. For a cooperation project with the Baltic countries that includes travel and fieldwork, in addition to more applied work and institution building, this cannot be considered major funding. Funding of salaries has therefore been very modest, especially in the Baltic countries, and the project has hence been dependent on funding from other sources. All in all, cost efficiency is quite high, and results are evident in publication production, implementation and institution building. Overall, this leads to a rating of good to very good. Equality The joint publications and the information obtained through interviews and questionnaires indicate a high degree of mutual respect and understanding between the partners. It seems that both parties have made gains, even if one aspect of the projects was the transfer of knowledge from Norway to the two Baltic countries; other parts of the projects clearly benefited the Norwegian partners. The lack of funding for Baltic participants’ salaries may have had a negative impact on equality. This was also signalled in questionnaires and interviews. The Baltic participants were in a difficult economical situation and this may have reduced their perception of equality. Overall equality was nevertheless good to very good. Program management Contacts with the research council were good. Sustainability The project has demonstrated the benefit of cooperation also to the Baltic authorities. Future cooperation, however, depends on funding the Baltic institutions either from Norwegian, domestic or international sources. Summary This project addresses all program objectives. The project combines research of relevance for Norwegian as well as Russian scientists, in a field where both parties benefit from the new knowledge obtained. The project also has a clear aspect of institution building, especially in connection with agricultural services and domestic knowledge about dealing with the environmental aspects of agricultural practises.

120362/730 (07/97) PECHORA (Palaeo Environment and Climate History of the Russian Arctic), Svendsen, Project leader

Project design and objectives The scope of this project is wide, addressing climate change and its impact on environment and humans during the interglacial cycle (130,000-10,000 years before present, (BP)). The area of interest includes major parts of the Russian Barents Sea coast and adjacent areas in the county of Archangelsk and the republic of Komi. The project is divided into three main subject areas.

 Geology: Reconstruction of the Barents and Kara Sea ice sheets through time  Zoology/botany/geology: Reconstruction of fauna, vegetation, and climate history  Archaeology: History of human settlements during last ice age

72 Among the main reasons for initiating the project are current uncertainties about several topics concerning the last interglacial-glacial cycle. Especially the extent and timing of the Barents and Kara Sea ice sheets has been much disputed, and widely different ice sheet reconstructions have been presented during the last decades. The last interglacial-glacial cycle is the period mostly used when testing General Circulation Models (GCMs), which are used to predict climate change. The geographical positions of the arctic ice sheets in Russia during the last interglacial-glacial cycle were challenging and important problems to address, and a solution could contribute to a better understanding of natural climatic variability. Paleoclimatic records and models indicate that the Arctic is sensitive to climatic changes. The majority of the work consisted of gathering data trough fieldwork, and the ambition was to establish the extent of the ice sheets that covered the Barents-Kara Sea region during the last Ice Age. The results obtained so far indicate that during the Last Glacial Maximum (18-20,000 BP), the Barents-Kara Ice Sheets were much smaller than shown in the reconstruction hitherto used by the GCM modelling community. In contrast to the Scandinavian Ice Sheet, the ice sheet centred on the continental shelf of the Barents-Kara attained its maximum extent during a quite early stage of the Ice Age (prior to 90,000 BP) and advanced far south on the Russian mainland. The research was based on fieldwork undertaken by joint Russian-Norwegian expeditions. The dating methods were obviously extremely important for success, and they proved resource demanding. However, access to Russian knowledge of the Arctic and expertise in the area made it possible to achieve the aims of the fieldwork, and a variety of different methods were used. The two other parts of the project were initially to estimate, 1) how climatic changes impacted changes in the environment, and 2) human occupation. The longer-term glacial and environmental history of this region was not well described, and the topics of reconstructing fauna, vegetation and climate history were therefore addressed together with a reconstruction of the history of human settlements during the last ice age. In addition to being important for the environment and human occupation, the opportunity to test GCM turned out to be salient. It seems that the project was not initially aware of the importance of these two latter aspects, and the findings were a positive surprise, but even so, it was possible to address this topic due to the structure and design of the project as new knowledge was unfolded as the work proceeded. The project description and stated goals reveal careful planning involving both Norwegian and Russian institutions. The project has benefited from previous cooperation between the main institutions. Project output: publications The project has produced 15 papers in refereed journals and about 35 other papers published in journals, proceedings and anthologies. The majority concern deal with estimating the extent of the Barents and Kara Sea ice sheets, but there are also articles on the other two parts of the project. As these topics were addressed fairly late in the process, further publications are now being produced. The publications on the extent of the Barents and Kara Sea ice sheets describe the reconstruction of the ice sheets’ maximum area, which not only occurred earlier than expected but also demonstrates that the northbound Russian rivers that channel most of the freshwater that runs into the Arctic Ocean were blocked by the expanding Barents-Kara Ice Sheets 90,000 years ago. The rivers were diverted in a southerly direction, changing the hydrology of much of the Eurasian continent, and hence the water budget of the Arctic Ocean, the Caspian and Black seas, and probably even the Mediterranean. However, during most of the last ice age there were no glaciers in this area and the Barents and Kara Sea ice sheets were therefore of lesser extent than previously estimated, and most of the study area had no ice cover during

73 maximum ice cover in Scandinavia. Finds of mammalian bones reflect a rich and varied Ice Age fauna that includes e.g. woolly mammoth, woolly rhinoceros, musk ox, horse, reindeer, and cave lion. Pollen analyses reveal a treeless tundra-steppe environment dominated by herbs and grasses during the last part of the Ice Age (30-12,000 BP), whereas during the climatic optimum 8-10,000 years BP, the Russian mainland was covered by forest all the way to the Barents Sea coast. The result of the project also provides new knowledge about human presence in the European Arctic. It was believed that this area remained uncolonized by man prior to 14,000 years BP. However, evidence of nearly 40,000 year-old artefacts and bones show that humans colonized the Russian Arctic only a few thousand years after modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens) entered SE Europe, well before the last Neanderthals vanished from the continent 30,000 years BP. This is an exceptionally interesting find, as neither Neanderthals nor modern humans were known to have moved that far north at that time. The results of some if the finds are awaiting publication in an article submitted to “Nature”. Final decision on publication has not yet been taken, but referees are currently processing it. The research results seem to be of import not only for the region under scrutiny, but also globally, in part because of the improved ice sheet models, which are so essential for understanding global climate change, and for our understanding of man’s early history. Overall, the scientific output of the projects is excellent. Individual transfer of knowledge and Institution building Institution building was not listed as an explicit goal in the project description. The nature of the project, however, both the design and the way in which it was carried out, supports institution building on both the Norwegian and the Russian side. The types of institution building are nevertheless somewhat different in the two countries. The project shows a clear joint commitment by both the Russian and Norwegian groups, and their joint efforts in the research is evident in their publications because Russians and Norwegians are listed as co- authors and there is an equal share of first authorship. There is an obvious transfer of knowledge which will benefit the institutions involved. It has also been essential for further development that the different institutions, having somewhat disparate backgrounds concerning methods used or availability of methods and scientific philosophy, had the opportunity to work together and exchange views. Standards and philosophies in the natural sciences have become quite homogenous in the Western scientific community, and it is important to exchange views with the Russian scientists. It also demonstrates the benefits of combining Russian and Norwegian institutions. The Norwegians were able to acquire knowledge relevant for furthering their own research on one of the most outstanding problems in this scientific area by gaining access to archives containing unpublished Russian observations, air photos and satellite images from the land areas, shallow seismic profiles from the Barents Sea, and by enabling them to participate in field work and collaboration with Russian scientists. The project enabled the Russians to fund fieldwork in remote northern areas for Russian scientists and students, which would have been impossible in the 1990s without the support of the Norwegians. The Russians also established broad international contacts through their Norwegian collaborators and found new contacts in Europe and America. It also afforded them access to sophisticated types equipment not available in Russia, e.g accelerator mass spectrometry radiocarbon dating, optical stimulated luminescence dating, and cosmic nuclide exposure dating. All of this gave the Norwegian and Russian institutions a competitive edge both nationally and internationally, although for different reasons, as described above. Overall institution building was very good. Cost efficiency 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

74 Grant/commitment from RCN 255000 550000 550000 500000 200000 Own institution/EU project 350000 350000 350000 Total per year 255 000 900 000 900 000 850 000 200 000 Total from RCN 2 055 000 This project receives substantial funding and the main costs are associated with field work and subsequent analyses. The cost is reasonable, especially in view of the scientific output. Other projects have been created around the PECHORA projects that also contribute financially. This is not considered a problem but is seen as strengthening the initial project. The funding provided to the Russian partners is very reasonable, perhaps too modest rather than too high. The project has obviously benefited the Russian infrastructure and expertise in organizing and managing field work in the Arctic region. There are examples of much greater expenses for field work in other international projects in Russia. Interviews with the participants in the project reveal that the financial situation was perceived as being good. Overall cost efficiency is very good. Equality The information collated from questionnaires and interviews indicates a very high level of mutual respect and feeling of equality. This project was based on earlier cooperation between the partners and on their common interests and understanding of the scientific problem and challenge under scrutiny. Equality was explicit in the scientific work as demonstrated by the high number of joint papers having both Norwegians and Russians as first authors. The interviews confirmed the joint feeling of equality. The Russian side indicated that the search for equality both in principle and in practise was considered very positive when cooperating with Norwegian scientists. This has not always been so with other nations, where Russian institutes were regarded as mere data suppliers. The Norwegians did not perceive this as a special effort since the Russian scientists were of a highly professional standard. Differences in the ways in which scientific work was conducted were recognized by both sides, but this was in fact looked upon as a strength in their joint work rather than a hindrance, or something that made for equality problems. Some differences were nevertheless observed that may have influenced the level of equality. This was fist of all the fact that the money was Norwegian and was managed by Norwegian institutes. In the PECHORA project, information about the degree of funding was not revealed to the Russians. The Russians, however, did not identify this as a problem. This is clearly one aspect that does not contribute to equality, but it probably kept down expenses. Overall, the equality level is good or very good. Program management The participants have no comments about the organization and feel very comfortable with the Research Council. Sustainability The project has strengthened joint Norwegian-Russian cooperation in this field and created the foundation for a possible long-term commitment by both parties. It has contributed to the survival of institutes and scientific topics in Russia, and has opened up new channels of international cooperation and funding, thus paving the way for sustainable cooperation. Summary This is a very good project and it has produced excellent scientific achievements in an area with high international profile. Cooperative efforts have benefited both Russians and Norwegians. It has given rise to a synergetic effect between the partners and achieved results that might have been out of reach without such cooperation. This has been beneficial to all objectives of the program.

75 127658/730 and 120398/730 (08/97) The Nansen Fellowship scientific and educational program for ecological studies in Northwest Russia, Ola M. Johannessen, Project leader

Project design and objectives The aim of this project is to develop competence in higher university education and research on issues associated with environmental and climate problems in North West Russia. The aim was to integrate the use of satellite earth observation techniques with other types of observations and numerical models. 16 PhD students formed the core of the project. They have both Norwegian and Russian supervisors and carry out their research in Russia and Norway. In addition, Norwegian and Russian scientists are involved in the project. The project partners are the Norwegian Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center, the joint Russian – Norwegian Nansen International Environmental and Remote Sensing Centre (NIERSC) in St. Petersburg, and the University of St. Petersburg. The project has thus achieved a high level of cooperation since one of the partners was already a joint Russian- Norwegian institute (i.e. partly international with German and US co-funding). The scientific activity of the program did, of course, depend on the activities of each PhD student, but their work was related to the main topic addressed by the project. The work to improve the infrastructure and availability of relevant technology for Russian students has been carried out trough the NIERSC in St. Petersburg and by hosting Russian students in Norway. In addition, the project supported further joint research work by scientific personnel in Norway and Russia. Project output: publications The project has generated eight refereed publications, three contributions to scientific anthologies, 41 conference proceedings and five technical documents. Sixteen PhD students were associated with the project. Actual research work depended partly on the topics chosen by the PhD students. These included developing techniques to improve remote sensing, studies of climate change by remote sensing, and developing and using new methods for applying microwave satellite radar monitoring of forest conditions in heavily polluted areas. This is essential for monitoring the Siberian boreal forests, where traditional monitoring using optical satellite earth observations is hampered by cloud cover and winter darkness. The topic of retrieving biological (phytoplankton/algae concentration) and other optical water quality parameters from optical satellite earth observation data, so-called ocean color sensors, has been further developed and the results obtained will impact the applications and algorithms for a wide range of new satellites planned by the major space agencies. It will especially improve applications in coastal and inland waters where optical conditions are more complex than in open ocean areas. The methods developed are evaluated as quite innovative in an international context. The spatial and temporal variability of a wide range of atmospheric chemical (including trace gases) and physical parameters have been mapped in various regions in Europe and Russia using infared interferometry. The work has resulted in a new method for applying such atmospheric measurements in trace gas variability studies. Space borne Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) sensors are becoming important for monitoring sea ice conditions in the Arctic region, both in support of maritime navigation facilities and sea ice studies. The neural network approach was used in order to improve the methods for quantifying and classifying sea ice information in SAR images, and this may significantly improve applications of this type of observation both for navigation and sea ice change studies of the Arctic region. Other studies focused on the use of the neural networks approach for retrieving meteorological and ocean parameters from passive microwave earth observation data. The

76 results show significant discrepancies in the methods used for operational retrieval of wind speed measurements from these data and may results in a revision of the algorithms used by meteorological services. Studies of using acoustic temometry for large scale ocean monitoring is a field within which the European and American science communities have launched several new research projects. In Europe, the emphasis has been on applications in the Arctic Oceans. For this study, several sensitivity studies were carried out to measure the influence of bathymetry and boundary conditions (ice cover and bottom) on changes (seasonal and inter decade) in the sound speed field in water and their impact on acoustic propagation properties in the Fram Strait. These results will be used for the scientific development and practical implementation of future monitoring concepts for the Arctic Oceans. It should also be noted that microwave satellite remote sensing data were very successfully used to investigate area changes and ice cover composition in the Arctic sea ice cover during the 80s and 90s. This work was reported last year in an article in “Science” as part of this project. Individual transfer of knowledge and Institute building The project had a clear goal of institution building. The approach differs somewhat from the traditional one of building on existing institutes. The project has put a lot of effort into further developing the joint Russian – Norwegian institute NIERSC, and through this institute also contribute to the further development of traditional Russian institutes at the University of St Petersburg and other institutions such as the Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute and Khlopin Radium Institute. The research carried out in the projects shows many signs of joint work performed by Russian and Norwegian authors, and provided important inputs for both Russian and Norwegian institutes.The standard is high and has broadened the field of knowledge for both parties. For the Russians, access to literature, equipment and infrastructure through the NIERSC, and visits to Norway where computer capability was available, has improved their situation considerably. For the Norwegian partner, the involvement of highly skilled Russian scientists and students has moved the science forward, and the cooperative efforts have proven to be a very strong combination, also internationally, having led to one article in “Science”. The work has given the Russian participants an opportunity to reach out to other international cooperation programs and funding possibilities. New projects have also been initiated, last year through the EU programs INTAS and INCO Copernicus. Overall, institution building has been excellent. Cost efficiency 1997 1998 1999 2000 Grant/commitment from RCN Not included Own institution 200000 200000 200000 200000 External ”Nansen Foundation” funds 20000 25000 32000 32000 Nordic Council 150000 150000 Total per year 220 000 225 000 382 000 382 000 Total from RCN 0

The project has received a high level of funding, but it addresses a wide spectrum from high level international research to long term institution building commitments. Considering the high costs of building a good infrastructure in Russia for this type of education and research, and in view of the scienctific output that benefits both Norwegian and Russian institutes, cost efficiency is very good.

77 Equality This project has focused on education improvements for Russian students. It is therefore not comparable to a similar Norwegian program, but equality is evident in the science surrounding the planning and management of the Nansen fellowship program. Several publications co-authored by Russian and Norwegian scientists have been produced. Cooperation is evident in the education program through the system of joint supervision by Norwegian and Russian supervisors, and there is also considerable involvement and insight into the financial and administrative management of the project on the Russian side. Overall, equality in the project is very good. Sustainability This project is associated with a very strong, and most probably sustainable, cooperation between Norwegian and Russian institutes. Increased competitiveness for the involved institutes due to their high-class research contributes to the possibility for funding future research projects. Summary The main goals of this project were institution building and the transfer of knowledge, both of which have been achieved successfully, but the scientific achievements within the project have still been excellent. The project was based on an existing Norwegian-Russian cooperation, which was further strengthened through this project, both terms of institutions and cooperation.

123433/730 (35/98) Arctic Engineering and Environmental Technology Related to Petroleum Exploitation in Northwest Russia, Løset, Project leader

Project design and objectives The project is based on a 1995 pre-project initiated by the Central and East-European Program and dedicated to network building. The present project addresses network building in Arctic Technology with Russian research institutions related to offshore development in the Russian Arctic Offshore (RAO). The development of technology for these waters, and how such technology can be made available to relevant industries, is emphasized. The objective is to contribute to sound petroleum onshore and offshore development in Northwest Russia. In the years to come, Russia is likely to undergo significant developments towards becoming a highly industrialized nation. In consequence of this development, export and import volumes will increase markedly. In view of the size of the economy and the population, developing the European part of Russia will determine whether Russia succeeds in reaching her goals. The capacity and the quality of the means of transportation between Russia and her major partners will hence come to play an important role. This will require port and sea access for ships involved in general cargo traffic and for tankers exporting oil. A successful development of the infrastructure in Northwest Russia will require access to engineers who are well-qualified in port planning and engineering. This project addresses some of these needs by helping to prepare for such an institution, and hence contribute to safe management, by creating a cooperation/network between the University studies on Svalbard (UNIS), the University of Science and Technology in Trondheim (NTNU), St. Petersburg State Technical University (SPTU), and the Norwegian, and partly Russian, oil industries. A major part of the project is educational, focusing on educating Russian students in both Norway and Russia. There is a strong link to the industry and Statoil participates actively in the project.

78 Project output: publications The project has produced one book, published in both English and Russian, which addresses the basis for offshore petroleum engineering and the development of maritime facilities. Furthermore, two compendia, two articles in refereed journals and seven articles in proceedings, several refereed, have been produced. The scientific work addresses environmental conditions in order to understand ice conditions and compare the physical environment of some of the arctic seas, but has also investigated the optimum forms of offshore structures, for example in view of wave and ice loads. The project, and the students connected to the project, have addressed the following topics: submarine pipelines in the Arctic, ice loads on arctic structures, oil production structures for Varandey More, and the reliability of offshore structures. Sustainable industrial development and exploitation of biological and mineral resources requires tailored technology and knowledge of the region, and much work is required to upgrade well-proven technology to suit the Arctic climate, or in some cases, to develop completely different and specialized technology suited to the harsh environment. For instance, oil and gas production in the Arctic presents great engineering challenges due to the impediments of ice offshore and permafrost on land. The intrusion of ice offshore is of the utmost concern in the design and operation of offshore production and transport systems. It may well affect the feasibility of the production, storage and transportation concepts used by the RAO. Further, it may have consequences for environmentally safe operations. Therefore, operators in the RAO should have appropriate knowledge about how to design for these waters, regarding both load levels and environmental response systems. Individual transfer of knowledge and Institution building There has been a clear and positive institution building effect on both the Norwegian and Russian side. A high degree of individual transfer of knowledge was achieved through students, both graduate and PhD, visiting Norwegian institutes and Norwegian PhD students visiting Russia. The joint work has given the Norwegians access to important information, and it was exploited jointly in articles and books. The work is also integrated in further planning and has also been noticed and used by the industry. The industrial linkage may be very important for further developments in this area, and early contact with the industry will facilitate further developments for the institutes involved in a positive way. The project has also introduced the Russian institutes to international research cooperation and, through EU projects, facilitated additional funding. Cost efficiency 1998 1999 2000 Grant/commitment from RCN 400000 360000 200000 Total per year Total from RCN 960 000

The project has a high level of cost efficiency. It shows a good output of publications acompanied by very good individual transfer of knowledge and high level of institution building, both in Norway and Russia. Equality Equality is clearly visible in the joint publications and feedback from the questionnaire. Even if most of the exchange of student go from Russia to Norway, we have also seen examples of the opposite.

79 Sustainability This project addresses an area of inquiry with many future challenges and possibilities. In that sense it has a high degree of sustainability. The combination of the need for environmental protection and technical development for exploring the arctic indicates future needs for cooperation between Norway and Russia. Summary The project meets all of the objectivies set forth in the program and combines them in an efficient and productive way. Another clear benefit is that industries both in Norway (Statoil) and Russia (Gasprom) have been involved in the project.

Summary evaluation of the environmental science projects All four projects under the environmental sciences area have successfully met the goals of the program with an above average or high level of success. The projects have varied in terms of which aspect was the most successful, research, individual transfer, contact with end-users and industry, or institution building (Table 1). This is due to the objectives and designs of each individual project. By analyzing project descriptions, the weight and the priorities assigned to the aspects from research to institution building was evident. Projects which combined scientific and other goals, such as institution building or individual transfer of knowledge, dit not experience conflicts between their goals, and success within one area did not preclude success within others. All four projects show that experiences gained from previous cooperation or existing contacts was important. In the area of research, co-operation has demonstrated the great potential of high-level international research, benefiting Eastern European and Norwegian scientists alike. There are probably numerous causal factors, but cross-fertilization between the Russian/Baltic scientific culture and the Norwegian research tradition is undoubtedly essential. In environmental sciences, the projects evaluated here have also been able to quite successfully combine scientific problems of relevance for the different countries and to gain access to existing unpublished data, thereby increasing available knowledge in each relevant area. It is clear that these partnerships possess the potential for future excellent scientific work, and this option should certainly be utilized.

Table 1. Summary evaluation of environmental sciences projects Objective: Professional Individual Institution Cost-efficiency Issues of level of transfer of building equality Project publications knowledge 120471/730 (06/98) 4 4 5 4 4 120362/730 (07/97) 5 4 4 4 4 127658/730 5 5 5 4 4 120398/730 (08/97) 123433/730 (35/98) 4 5 4 4 3

1: little success in meeting objective 2: below average success in meeting objective 3: average success in meeting objective 4: above average success in meeting objective 5: high success in meeting objective N/A: Not Applicable

80 Medical sciences Collaboration was organized in a variety of ways in the three projcts evaluated here. Acute Lung Injury and the L-Arginine /NO pathway Two researchers from Arkangelsk were trained in Tromsø. Dr. Evgenev has essentially carried out his research in Tromsø, while a part of the project was located in Arkangelsk as a collaboration with the Tromsø researchers. Dr. Kirov performed the first (clinical) part in Arkangelsk, while the second part dealing with the animal model was performed in Tromsø. The key investigator has not visited Arkangelsk but has received visitors from Arkangelsk and discussed the projects. Communications were channelled through Doctors Evgenov and Kirov, who frequently traveled between the countries. The quality of the research institution in Arkangelsk has improved during the period of collaboration, and the Medical Academy has now obtained University status. The cultural differences caused many problems in the beginning. Traditional Russian research was based on descriptive studies, and critical data analysis was not used. The treatment of patients was based on written rules and the quality of treatment went unquestioned. Very little interest was taken in performing laboratory tests, and the standard of the tests performed was not validated. It is quite evident that many problems occurred during the early phases of the collaboration. Alcohol Drinking and its Impact on Public Health in the North of Russia Epidemiology did not exist as a field of inquiry in Arkangelsk when this project was started, and it appears that there was no tradition for analyzing problems related to alcoholism. The researchers therefore did not speak a common scientific language when the collaboration started, and great efforts have been made to address this issue by organizing courses in statistics, and training the Russians in accuracy and consistency in sample collection and analysis. The Tromsø researchers made numerous visits to Arkangelsk to control that the guidelines were followed (which they were not, in several cases with severe implications for the outcome of the study). It was not suggested that the lack of consistency was due to ignorance, but rather to cultural differences and lack of a common language and common definitions of even simple topics. In general, all participants were positive and willing to see through the project correctly, but Russian failure to understand the importance of stability in the analyses, precise registration, and the fact that it was essensial to perform all tests, created many problems. It is clear that this project would never have succeeded without the enthusiasm of the Norwegian researchers. The reluctancy of especially older researchers to change habits, treatments and understanding further hindered the process. Much time was spent addressing just some of these problems. The program nevertheless seems to be performing well now, and its impact may hence have profound effects on the understanding and prevention of public health problems. Antibiotic Resistance Patterns and Molecular Epidemiology Tuberculosis is a growing problem in Arkangelsk, and the observation that more re-infected patients were infected with multiresistant bacteria caused doctors to ask whether this was due to insufficient first treatments, or if other causes could explain this phenomenon. Based on the description of the outcome of the collaboration in this project it is clear that training standards were rather different. It is stated that the main improvement was that laboratory workers are no longer infected by tuberculosis while working. This answer is perhaps to be understood as reflecting language problems and the fact that the researchers from Arkangelsk were unaware of the specific program being evaluated. A previous program had transferred safety cabinets to Arkangelsk, thus preventing laboratory infections. The researchers from Oslo have visited Arkangelsk a number of times, and instructed their collegues in Arkangelsk in diagnostics,

81 sample collection and how to ship samples safely. New and better microscopes were provided (by a different program). It appears that formal training did not take place, and the first PhD student from Arkangelsk is going to start training in Norway later in 2001. The training situation is therefore still very different at the two places. It is also likely that there was no tradition for critical examination of routine laboratory proceedures. By training a PhD student in Norway it is hoped that the knowledge gap is diminished and the understanding of the value of research increased. The quality of the Norwegian researchers and research laboratories is of international standard. It is also quite clear, however, that more modern molecular technologies have yet to be implemented in Arkangelsk. The actual quality of the research institutions, differences in tradition and exactly where to perform research are just some of the major sources of variation that must be taken into account when evaluating this program. A three-year program cannot possibly close the gap between these two cultures. More effort should be spent on training, and the institutions involved should commit themselves to the programs in such a way that proper training and understanding of the values of basic research for implementing new and rational treatment of patients are included. The topics being researched should also be evaluated and the most urgent topics selected for future programs. It is possible to very successfully train individual researchers from different cultures, and it may have great effects on the receiving country's research development. This will probably be the case for the first two projects described in the present evaluation. But some of the projects are perhaps too ambitious and some may not be successfully implemented due to reluctancy on the part of older researchers to change their habits over a very short period.

Project (120473/730) Acute Lung Injury and the L-Arginine/NO pathway, Lars Bjertnaes, Project leader

Project design and objectives The original objectives were to study acute lung injury in chronically instrumented endotoxemic sheep subjected to blockade of the L-arginine/nitric oxide pathway and, as a sub-goal, to study the consequences for pulmonary hemodynamics, lung fluid balance and gas exchange. The project was formally initiated in 1997 in collaboration between Professor, Chairman Lars J. Bjertnaes, Department of Anesthesiology, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Tromsø, and Professor, Chairman Eduard V. Nedashkovsky, Department of Anesthesiology, Arkhangelsk State Medical Academy. Doctors Bjertnæs and Nedashkovsky have been the active partners, judging from the list of publications. In addition, two Russian scientists received grants (Doctors Evgenov and Kirov). The project design included the introduction of a new experimental model of Acute Lung Injury (ALI), a modified version of the one established by doctors Staub & Brigham, and used by Dr. Bjertnaes for studies of lung fluid filtration on fully awake sheep at the Center for Pulmonary Research, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee 1993/94 (Director, Professor Kenneth Brigham). From the first application in 1993, it took almost three years before Doctors Bjertnaes and Evgenov could begin experiments on awake chronically instrumented sheep in Tromsø. ALI is a common complication of severe infections (septic shock caused by Gram- negative bacteria and trauma). It is characterized by deranged lung fluid balance and gas exchange, combined with increments in pulmonary microvascular pressure and permeability, and it has a high level of mortality. Endotoxins released from Gram-negative bacteria activate the humoral and cellular immune systems, leading to excessive release of cytokines. In septic shock, it is expected that the L-Arginine/NO pathway plays a pivotal role in the pathogenesis. The study was designed to analyze acute lung injury in chronically instrumented endotoxemic

82 sheep subjected to blockade of the L-arginine/nitric oxide pathway by employing either methylene blue, or the more specific inhibitor of inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS), aminoguanidine. A sub-goal was to study the consequences of the inhibitors for pulmonary hemodynamics, lung fluid balance and gas exchange. In addition, clinical studies involving treatment of patients with septic shock with methylene blue were initiated in order to reduce the activity of NO during septic shock. Dr. Kirov performed the treatments and collected clinical specimens for the study in Arkhangelsk. The project was approved by the Regional committees on human research ethics of the universities of Tromsø and Arkhangelsk. Dr. Evgenov made site visits and monitored the study to confirm that the data entered into the study were obtained in accordance with the original notes. The animal studies used the same model that was designed to study the effect of inhaled NO on lung fluid filtration after application of endotoxin to awake sheep. In addition, treatments with methylene blue were used to study the pathophysiology of ALI in the sheep model. This animal model makes it possible to gain an understanding of not only the pathophysiological factors involved in ALI, but also the effects of the treatment. Project output: publications The activity level has been high within this project. Some publications have already been published and several have either been submitted or are under preparation. Six papers have been published so far (the first paper listed is from 1996, and was thus probably written before the program began), and 9 have either been submitted or are under preparation. The journals are of high international standard. Additionally, 24 abstracts have been published and 5 abstracts accepted for publication. This is a high output from a single project, and the quality of the research is at a high international level. Ten publications or manuscripts were submitted for this evaluation and an additional manuscript was obtained at the review in Tromsø. Only papers published during this program are evaluated: The paper Effect of Aminoguanidine on Lung Fluid Filtration after Endotoxin in Awake Sheep by O.V. Evgenov, O. Hevrøy, K.E. Bremnes, and L.J. Bjertnaes (2000), Am J Respir Crit Care Med 162, 465-70, describes the effect of aminoguanidine (AG) on lung fluid filtration after endotoxin in awake sheep. It was hypothesized that AG, a proposed selective inhibitor of iNOS, would alter pulmonary hemodynamics, fluid filtration, and gas exchange after application of endotoxin in chronically instrumented sheep. The authors conclude that AG improves gas exchange in endotoxemic sheep and that apparently increased lymphatic drainage prevents EVLW from increasing after AG is administered. One published paper (O.V. Evgenov, G. Sager, L.J. Bjertnaes (2001) Methylene blue reduces lung fluid filtration during the early phase of endotoxemia in awake sheep. Crit Care Med 29, 374-9), and 4 manuscripts to be submitted, deal with the administration of methylene blue to endotoxemic sheep. The projects provide the theoretical basis for understanding the function of methylene blue on lung fluid filtration, modulation of cardio-pulmonary response, improvement of hemodynamics and reduction of vasorepression. In addition, one paper (L.J. Bjertnaes, T. Koizumi, and J.H. Newman (1998), Inhaled Nitric Oxide reduces Lung Fluid Filtration after Endotoxin in Awake Sheep. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 158, 1416-23) and one manuscript to be submitted deal with the effect of inhaled NO or the effect of a combination of NO and methylene blue administration. The animal model has thus proven to be a valuable tool for studying many pathophysiological factors. The experimental work is of high standard and the experimental set-up is well designed. Many parameters are determined and data analyses have yielded up solid conclusions. The publications describing the animal model are of high international

83 standard and may provide knowledge that can be of importance for treatment of the very severe and critical condition of human patients suffering from ALI. One paper ready for resubmission to Critical Care Medicine and two papers published in the Russian language describe the treatment of humans suffering from septic shock with methylene blue. Dr. Kirov was the key investigator and performed these studies. These papers demonstrate some improvement of these patients' conditions after administration of methylene blue. In addition to the publications and manuscripts to be submitted, the International Sepsis Forum (USA) awarded Dr. Evgenov a Traveling Fellowship Award, and his abstract has been submitted to the 54th Postgraduate Assembly of the New York State Society of Anesthesiologists as one of five individuals nominated for the Residents Award. Dr. Evgenov was also awarded the year 2000 Poster Prize by the Norwegian Society of Anesthesiologists. The research performed in this project is thus of a high international standard. Individual transfer of knowledge There is no doubt that the Russians have received a substantial amount of know-how during the program. The collaboration was planned when Dr. Evgenov made a study visit to Tromsø in 1993. Collaboration was begun and Dr. Evgenov obtained a grant to continue his studies in Norway from 1995. During this time he has frequently been back in Arkhangelsk. He has deciced, however, to qualify to work permanently in Norway. Dr. Kirov is currently working part time in Arkhangelsk and part time in Tromsø (scholar's stipend). Dr. Bjertnaes has never visited Arkhangelsk in person, but has received many visitors from there. Doctors Evgenov and Kirov, working part-time in Arkhangelsk, have presented the project to the visitors and contributed to the transfer of knowledge. There were numerous cultural differences between the two research groups when the project began. One major difference was that the doctors in Arkhangelsk focused on treating patients according to schemes, without trying to understand the biological mechanisms of disease. Their research was descriptive and empirical and not critical as in Norway. Intensive care monitoring equipment was also very different. Tromsø transferred equipment to the Arkhangelsk Medical Academy, now Medical University, and the monitoring of data can therefore become more similar to the way in which data are monitored in Tromsø. The transfer of equipment has improved treatment and enabled invasive monitoring in critically ill patients. The lack of a 70 degree freezer unfortunately meant that a great number of blood samples from the clinical study, which had been maintained in a  20 degree freezer, could not be used for the purpose for which they were intended. Further funds would be needed for analyzing the blood samples for sepsis mediators and other activation products. Dr. Bjertnaes has therefore decided to discontinue the clinical part of the project after many unsuccessful grant applications. The infrastructure in Arkhangelsk has been improved during the program and e-mail, computers and access to Medline with internationally published titles and abstracts are now available. International literature, however, remains very difficult to obtain. The quality of the research has also improved because of the Tromsø collaboration, but the economy at Arkhangelsk University is very tight. The collaboration has also been fruitful in other respects and contributed to bridging the cultural gaps between Northwest Russia and Norway. In his capacity as president of the 26th Congress of the Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, June 13  17, 2001, Dr. Bjertnaes has financed travel and hotel accommodations for five invited colleagues from Russia, using grants from the NFR. Furthermore, as of March 20, five other Russians have found private funding to cover their participation.

84 Institution building There is no evidence that formal institution building has taken place, but this was not part of the original purpose of the collaboration. The initial expectation was that this program would be the first part of an extensive array of capacity building and research training between Norway and Russia. The program was never extended, however, and major support was not forthcoming. The project will from now on focus only on animal experiments and continue to train a few students. It was also mentioned that the cultural and scientific gaps were perhaps too wide and the research program too ambitious for the present time.

85 Cost efficiency 1997 1998 1999 2000 From the program 146861 308675 291325 250000 Own institution 140000 40000 45000 70000 Glaxo Wellcome (private funds) 15000 15000 Tromsø Regional Hospital 100000 50000 10000 120000 Sparebanken Nord-Norge (a bank) 30000 Total per year 401 861 398 675 361 325 470 000 Total from the Research Council 996 861

The project has received NRK 996,861 from Norges Forskningsråd over a period of 4 years (97-00). In view of the the amount of work performed, the newly developed animal model and the future perspectives, this has been a cost-effective study. Other donors have sponsored the project as well, but the conclusion remains valid. A sum of NRK 30,000 from the Glaxo-Welcome study was used to cover expenses incurred inside Russia. Furthermore, four used Servo 900 C respirators, three Kone monitoring units for hemodynamic monitoring (intravascular blood pressure measurement equipment) of critically ill patients and several computers have been transferred from the Department of Anesthesiology, Tromsø University Hospital, to the Intensive Care Unit of Arkangelsk University Hospital. Equality The papers published and submitted, the places where the work is performed (Tromsø and Arkhangelsk), and the number of bilateral co-authors indicate a rather good equity in this project. This was confirmed during interviews in Tromsø, February 19–20, 2001. Answers to this question in the questionnaire do not indicate full agreement on this question. There is overall agreement that there was equality concerning credits due for results and access to data (rated 4 to 5), whereas equality in research design and access to financial resources were rated from 1 to 4 in the individual questionnaires. It is thus demonstrated that Dr. Kirov, who performed most of his research at Arkhangelsk University, has found a high level of equality in the collaboration, whereas Dr. Evgenov, who was the first person to collaborate with Dr. Bjertnaes and thus felt the cultural and scientific differences most strongly, and Dr. Bjertnaes find equality to be more variable. This reflects how the situation has changed over a very limited time span. Program administration and goal achievement Overall, this project seems to have been well managed. Dr. Bjertnaes has been very active, also in administrative terms, and has tried to find additional financial support. Unfortunately he was not very successful. Dr. Bjertnaes is hence rather pessimistic for the future of the project. He found that both institutions were quite supportive, but that the financial situation was such that very limited economical support was available, and none from Arkhangelsk University except part of Dr. Kirov's salary while he worked in Arkhangelsk. The enthusiasm in Arkhangelsk was, however, substantial as reflected in the goals achieved. The budget was far too tight. When funding was obtained it covered only a small share of expenses. A much larger program was supposed to have been instituted, but this never became a reality. Only a fraction of the research originally planned for has therefore been performed, and the number of publications is lower than the applicant had expected. The budget constraints were thus the major obstacle during the project, and it was sometimes difficult to obtain clear answers from the RCN. The spin off of the program is that Western culture has been introduced, technical communication equipment installed,

86 and local teaching gained new inspiration. The medical doctors from Arkhangelsk University have also profited from participating in the program. This was not the case for the researchers from Tromsø University. Sustainability This project is just beginning to pay off. There is no doubt that a continuation of this collaboration will provide even more fruitful results, provided that grant support is continued. Both of the interviewed medical doctors from Arkhangelsk University, Doctors Kirov and Evgenov, are positive that the research collaboration will continue. Dr. Bjertnaes is however quite skeptical due to financial problems. Summary and assessment This project is well managed and has generated many international publications of high quality. A graduate from Arkhangelsk University was trained during the project, and is now seeking to become qualified to continue to work as an MD in Norway. A second graduate has begun research training. He will return to Arkhangelsk University and continue his research there. The program has afforded Arkhangelsk University access to Western research, patient monitoring and treatment methods. These, combined with training in Western critical research, were major achievements of the project.

Project (128076/730), Alcohol Drinking and the impact on health in the north of Russia, Odd Ragnar Nilssen, Project leader

Project design and objectives This project was initiated in 1999 and has hence just started. The objective is to make a cross-sectional health survey study on workers who are to be examined for alcohol use, volume of alcohol consumption, drinking frequency, degree of abuse and dependency. There were 4.008 participants per 1 December 2000. Blood lipids and gamma-GT will be measured, and GGT and responses to special alcohol questionnaires will be used to identify alcohol misuse. In addition, blood sample analyses will be performed in order to analyze for vitamin B deficiency. Brief intervention programs will be performed. These data will be used for further analyses in cooperation between Norwegian and Russian researchers and medical students. The project is a collaboration between Doctors Odd Nilssen (University of Tromsø) and V. Archipovski, M. Averina, A. Kalinin, E. Bojko and K. Anuifriev (all Arkhangelsk). Further Norwegian participants are Jan Brox and Maja Lisa Løchen. The questionnaire has been constructed and distributed, and the aim is to also identify persons having high risk for coronary disease and persons with a risk level of alchohol consumption. Project output: publications No international scientific publications have been published yet. A questionnaire has been worked out, translated into Russian and implemented at Arkangelsk University. One article has been published in Russian and a further two are included in the work of Russian PhD students, and eight presentations have been made using data from the investigation. Individual transfer of knowledge. The interviews made it clear that a substantial amount of work has been put into training personnel in Arkangelsk. Both Doctors Nilssen and Brenn, who participated in the interview, had been to Arkangelsk several times to monitor project performance. This form of training has revealed substantial problems. Epidemiology did not exist in Arkangelsk and communication problems were therefore rife in the early stages of the program. The

87 Russian researchers visited Tromsø to learn how to perform in the collaboration, both in terms of handling blood sample analyses and questionnaires. The training included how to design a set-up for testing participants, and hence the use of several separate rooms. This is important when measuring blood pressure, where a quiet environment is essential. It was therefore disappointing for the Norwegian researchers visiting Arkangelsk to find that this stricture was not adhered to, illustrating the cultural differences. These problems have now been solved, and data collection was finished on 1 December 2000. The project is now entering the final analysis phase. A similar problem occurred with blood sample analysis, where an old method was used instead of the newly established method. All the samples tested using the old method therefore had to be re-tested. Such problems were only discovered because of the frequent site visits. A lot of resources are hence invested in teaching epidemiology to the Russian participants. Institution building The frequent visits and intensive training will doubtless be of great help in institution building. As part of the training, all blood samples are analyzed in both Tromsø and in Arkangelsk. This makes the training very intensive and a University position has been set up in Tromsø to coordinate the program, which has generated a great deal of interest in the Arkangelsk institution. Communication problems nonetheless remain, and the older researchers still have difficulties understanding epidemiology, even though several courses have been held over the years. It is therefore imperative that the program continue until young researchers have been trained and can take over teaching responsibilities in Arkangelsk. Cost efficiency 1999 2000 2001 From the program (RCN) 745959 529041 190000 Total per year Total from the Research Council 1 465 000

This is a rather large budget of NKR 1.465.000. A lot of equipment has been purchased (a major share of the funds have been allocated for this), and been transferred to Arkangelsk. This includes analysis equipment, centrifuge, freezers, equipment for transporting blood samples, and all the kits that were used. The transfer from Norway to Arkangelsk has generated problems as custom taxes are high (particularly the so-called “import tax” at 58 percent). All transports are therefore effected by personal transportation. Equality The questionnaire indicates general agreement that this project is based on equality. Program management and goal achievement The program is well managed, but it is too soon to learn what has been achieved. The plan is, however, to continue with three additional projects of great importance for population studies: Smoking intervention, intervention against heavy alcohol drinking, and intervention against ischemic heart and blood vessel diseases. Sustainability Both parties agree that this program is sustainable. Summary and assessment The program is based on intensive training of researchers from Arkangelsk in epidemiology. This topic did not exist in Arkangelsk prior the start of this program. The

88 training is extensive and the follow-up efficient. Although nothing has yet been published in English, the project is judged to be well conducted and important for the Arkangelsk region. The reason for the lack of publications is that all samples have to be collected and analyzed before the data can be analyzed by using statistical methods. We are confident that important publications with implications for the local population will be available by the end of this period of the program. An extension of the program is, however, required if a substantial effect is to be anticipated.

Project (128083/730), Antibiotic resistance and molecular epidemiology of M. tuberculosis in the Barents Region, Dominique A. Caugant, Project leader

Project design and objectives In 1995 a collaborate study was initiated between National Institute of Public Health, Oslo, and the Health Authorities in Arkangelsk to improve epidemiological surveillance of tuberculosis in Norway and in the Barents Region, and to implement control measures to prevent the emergence and spread of drug resistance in the pathogenic Mycobacterium tuberculosis. The current study (99-01) is a continuation of this study. The objectives are to compare different laboratory methods for identifying patients with tuberculosis, identification of routes of transmission of the bacteria, detection of outbreaks through analysis of restriction fragment length polymorphism of chromosomal DNA hybridized with the insertion sequence IS6110 probe, and the use of genotyping methods to determine improvements in tuberculosis control in Arkangelsk, monitoring antibiotic susceptibility patterns in M. tuberculosis against the most important antituberculous drugs, and finally, analysis of the characteristics of patients in whom these strains were isolated. The project is a collaborative effort carried out by doctors D.A. Caugant and P. Sandven, Oslo, and Doctors N.N. Ivanova and D.V. Ivanovich of the State Union Physiopulmonology, Department of Physiopulmonology of the Medical Academy in Arkangelsk. It should be noted that the study we have been asked to evaluate forms part of a larger investigation. The project was initiated by a collaboration contract in which researchers from Arkangelsk collected samples and then sent them to Oslo in containers supplied from Norway. Over 100 strains have been collected, in addition to 20 strains from the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC), USA, to be used as reference strains. Dr O. Toungoussava has started a study (for a MS, Oslo University) to determine risk factors for developing tuberculosis with drug resistant M. tuberculosis in Arkangelsk. Doctors Sandven and Caugant supervise this study. The results obtained so far indicate that the incidence of tuberculosis in Arkangelsk is high, and that multidrug resistance is more frequent in re-infections than in primary infections. Project output: publications 17 abstracts and one publication (Norwegian language (Lungeforum)) have been published. Most of the titles indicate that the work performed has focused on determining the prevalence and drug susceptibility of the isolated strains. No data on molecular epidemiology have been published yet, but other publications written by the Norwegian scientists indicate that the methods are being implemented. This is a low output in view of the amount of time the project has been running. Individual transfer of knowledge The project has generated some transfer of knowledge from Norway to Arkangelsk. The Arkangelsk partners have been provided with cultivation media and transportation tubes. Strains have been transferred to Oslo, where they are analyzed and the results compared with the results from other regions in Norway. A PhD student from Arkangelsk is

89 reportedly coming to Oslo in 2001, leading to an intensification of the project. When this training has been successfully carried out, the molecular methods will also be implemented in Arkangelsk. Institution building The progress reports, applications and the interview do not indicate that much institution building is going on. Nor could this be expected due to the very limited budget for this project. Taking into account the larger whole of which this project forms a part, institution building is probably more substantial. Cost efficiency 1999 2000 2001 From the program 110000 110000 115000 Total per year Total from the Research Council 335 000

This is a low budget project of a total of NKR 335,000 over 3 years. The project manager was unaware of how much money could be applied for, and hence submitted an application for a small-scale project to complement other activities. The results obtained are therefore limited. The incidence of TB is high, antibiotic resistance analyses have been performed, demonstrating the very high rate of multidrug resistance in patients already treated compared with patients newly diagnosed with TB and not previously treated, but the genomic RFLP has not been finally analyzed. Other programs have seen to it that equipment was transferred to Arkangelsk. Equality The questionnaire indicates agreement that this project is based on equality. Program management and goal achievement The collection and transfer of strains is well managed. In view of the low budget it is unrealistic to expect much more. There was some frustration that it was difficult to learn exactly what and how much could be applied for. The level of ambition for this project is rather low, and the key investigator is only capable of dedicating a limited amount of time to this project. TB is a major problem in the Arkangelsk region, it is of international concern as microbes do not respect borders, and the project is expected to be intensified by the planned enrolment of a doctoral student in 2001. There is no doubt that the investigators are technically capable of seeing this project through, and that valuable results are likely to accrue. The lack of international publications, despite a high number of abstracts and some local and one publication in the Norwegian language, may be an indication of a low level of ambition in this project. Sustainability Although the participants are positive concerning the continuation of this project, it is not necessarily sustainable. The larger thematic collaboration of which the project forms part will, however, continue with funding from other sources. Summary and assessment This is a low budget project with a rather low output, but one dealing with a problem of major concern for the local population and for global dissemination of multiresistant, untreatable TB. The researchers are hence dealing with a serious problem. The observation that reinfections are more frequently caused by multiresistant bacteria than are primary infections indicates failure in the primary treatment of patients. It is therefore essential that

90 the epidemiology be analyzed to ascertain whether such strains are spreading from the first cases to the local population, or whether new strains are generated because of insufficient primary treatment.

Summary evaluation of medical science projects

Objective Professional level Individual Institution Cost- Issues of equality of publications transfer of building efficiency Project knowledge 120473/730 4 4 4 5 3 128076/730 NA 4 4 2 4 128083/730 2 2 2 4 5

All three medical projects were initiated by a study visit by scientists from Arkangelsk several years before these projects were started. Actual project collaborations were thus based on several years of mutual familiarity and a long term collaboration. Output in terms of publications and training exceeds for one group (Bjertnaes) what could have been expected during the short period the program has been running. We expect that international publications from the two other projects will appear later. When partners are far apart in terms of scientific development, technology, methodology, scientific thinking and methods of scientific analysis, it is essential to institute long-term scientific projects where the goals and expectations are clearly stated. All these three projects were based on personal collaborations and not instituted by needs outlined by the research institutions. Two of the projects (Project (120473/730) and Project (128076/730)) were carried out by very dynamic Norwegian researchers who wanted to implement Western technology and thinking in the Arkangelsk University. While these projects look promising, the reason may be that they are based on the long friendship of the partners. This should be taken into account when such programs are initiated. The third project (Project (128083/730)) is judged to be based on technical support rather than research collaboration. The two Russian scientists who answered the questionnaire in fact described the major achievement to be that the staff in Arkangelsk no longer suffered from TB acquired during laboratory work. The reason was that another program had funded the installation of safety cabinets, thus reducing the risk of spreading bacteria. These scientists were therefore not aware that different programs were involved.

91 The major lesson is that carrying out a major research project takes more time than planned (Norwegian project leader). Chapter 8

Lessons Learned

I personally have learned very much: about project management, research teamwork at the international level, sociology, how to design questionnaires, international definitions and indicators, research implementation, survey methodology, and so on (Baltic participant).

First, I learned that methodological differences between Norwegian and Russian naturalists are greater than anticipated. That would not harm research cooperation if it were fully understood and acknowledged by both parties. Both sides need education. Because of the time required for mutual adaptation and the size of this country, short-term projects, so common in the West, are not of much use in Russia (Russian participant).

The project afforded us access to theoretical developments, empirical knowledge, and scientific methodology. We have changed our laboratory work methods. The medical staff of our bacteriological laboratory are no longer sick from tuberculosis.This project is an important part of the program to control TB in the Arkhangelsk and Barents regions (Russian participant).

[We have learned about] the need for careful planning. The possibility of using pilot series for further research. To use alternative methods of statistical analysis. To extrapolate experimental results in clinical situations. To use a research design which is potentially useful for clinical practice (Russian participant). This chapter assesses the merits of the Norwegian Cooperation Program with Central and Eastern Europe in relation to the overall project ambitions and objectives, relates the evidence from this program to international experiences gained in previous programs, as summarized in chapters 2-4, and summarizes the outcome of the projects reviewed in this report. In broad terms, the program has been a major success, as indicated by the comments of Eastern participants, and met most, albeit not all, of the original objectives: it has in general produced very good research, there has been a significant transfer of knowledge from Norway to the East and – to a lesser extent – from the East to Norway; the most successful projects have initiated processes of institution building; most projects have been cost-effective and, within the constraints of a Norwegian managed and financed program, been characterized by professional equality (or decreasing inequality) between Eastern and Western participants. There was less equality in the financial sphere, as Eastern contributions to funding have been the exception rather than the rule. It is also noteworthy that many of the programs are sustainable in the sense that they have laid a foundation for future cooperation between individuals and – in the most successful projects – between institutions. The projects have also had a positive impact on the overall transformation process in the Eastern countries and have met urgent concerns, in particular in the fields of health and social welfare. The relationships established through this program may, if

92 maintained and developed, spill over into other areas such as politics and business and provide Norway with a competitive edge in dealings with Eastern Europe compared with other countries that have not initiated such programs. The staff of the Research Council of Norway has managed the program very well, and all project managers credit the staff for professionalism, active interest and administrative support. The Norwegian Cooperation Program with Central and Eastern Europe has also avoided most, although not all, of the hazards that have beset similar programs in the past. There were only isolated cases, unavoidable in any program, of Eastern researchers complaining that they were not credited sufficiently for academic for contributions to joint research projects. Nor did the Norwegians, similar to other Western programs, fully recognize the financial constraints that hamper the contributions of Eastern partners, having channeled the lion’s share of funds to Norwegian participants and institutions. Incentives for an even modest increase in funding for Eastern collaborators, be they institutions or individuals, would definitely have improved the overall performance of the program. Finally, the Norwegian program has also encountered the well-known dilemma in institution building between strategies prioritizing reform of existing institutions versus construction of new institutions. The Norwegian program has experienced successes and failures in the pursuit of both strategies, emphasizing need for prudence when choosing institutional partners in the East. A further general observation from all three thematic fields is that while professional equality is a commendable objective, this program revealed an initial asymmetry between partners. In fact, the transfer of knowledge aimed for pre- supposes an initial asymmetry. This asymmetry was also known from previous programs but seems not to have been fully recognized when the Norwegian program was launched. Had the asymmetry been recognized it ought to have led to a differentiation of the general program call for equality, given that the experiences gained in this program confirmed what we already knew: that the nature of the initial asymmetry varies between thematic fields and professions. In the social sciences, most Eastern researchers initially lacked basic knowledge about standard theories and methodologies. In health sciences (medical sciences), Eastern partners were held back because they lacked scientific analytical thinking and were deeply ingrained in rigid hierarchical management structures. In the environmental sciences, the initial asymmetries had more to do with different research cultures, which drew both sides into a process of mutual learning and adaptation. Because of these initial asymmetries, joint educational and training ventures in the form of seminars, conferences, collective writing processes, or laboratory work have proved extremely useful in the most successful projects. Another general observation is that institution building must be seen in a very long- term perspective, and that a five-year program can provide only the impetus for a very long process requiring continued commitment from both sides. This observation is supported by data from the survey, which shows that if Eastern and Western researchers knew each other prior to the initiation of the present project, the Eastern participants were motivated primarily by pure research interests and were to larger extent equal partners in various phases of the research project. If the partners did not know each other prior to the project, Eastern partners tend to pay more attention to individual financial gains, and professional relationships become more unequal. In other words: the longer a scientific cooperation is carried on, the greater the professional motivation of the participants. Sustainability thus cannot be assured within the framework of a three-year program. A three-year time span is sufficient to establish the necessary personal contacts, develop the commitments required from both sides and gain the first experiences from collaborative projects. It does not suffice, however, for changing institutions. One Danish program targeting developing countries, having objectives comparable to those of the Norwegian program, works with a

93 time perspective of 12 years as the anticipated time needed to generate sustainable institutional change. In addition to these common features, there were also a number of lessons specific to the three thematic fields that were included in the evaluation. In the social sciences in particular, the initial conditions generated a variety of dilemmas and a need for trade-offs between competing objectives. These initial conditions included a weak professional identity in many disciplines, sub-standard training, insufficient knowledge about contemporary theory and methodology, and a strong ideologization of many institutions. These initial constraints made it impossible to meet all program objectives within the framework of one project. Project managers were therefore forced to prioritize between conflicting objectives. First, institutions building and excellent research may not always go together in this field. In some cases, loyal adherence to project objectives turned into a liability when sub-standard or unmotivated researchers were selected by Eastern institutions to participate in the projects. Project mangers who bypassed local institutions and selected partners themselves fared better in this regard. Second, initial professional asymmetries in disciplines that were banned or underdeveloped under communism showed that integrating training elements into a cooperation project was very useful in terms of research and individual transfer of knowledge. Finally, it must be recognized that good projects very often benefit from synergy with other projects that participants are (or were) involved in outside the scope (and funding) of the present program. In the medical sciences Eastern partners were initially relatively weak in terms of technology, scientific thinking and analytic methodology. Visits to Western institutions, where Eastern partners were introduced to Western work methods and technologies, have therefore been extremely useful as has been the transfer of Western technologies and procedures to Eastern institutions. In this context individual transfer of knowledge and institution building are integral aspects of the same process. In the environmental sciences, there was no initial difference in scientific standards between Eastern and Western scientists, but rather different strengths that in the process proved to be complementary. The synergy between these two different research cultures is one major explanation why projects in environmental sciences on average performed better than projects in the two other thematic fields. In this context, Eastern researchers were more specialized and often stronger in basic science and methodology than were their Western colleagues, who in contrast were stronger in cross-disciplinary approaches and in applied sciences. The combination of these two traditions achieved superior results. Also here it is difficult to differentiate between individual transfer of knowledge and institution building because the researchers are so closely integrated in and dependent upon their institutions. In the design of future programs it is thus important to acknowledge the fundamental difference that exist between the social and medical sciences on the one hand and environmental sciences (and natural sciences) on the other. In the first group, there is still room for individual transfer of knowledge and, in the social sciences in particular, the challenge is to find ways to combine individual training with institution building without jeopardizing scientific quality. In the second group (environmental and natural sciences), the challenge is to find ways to reap the obvious benefits of brining together two traditions with their own specific strengths. For all thematic fields it should, however, be recognized that sustainable patterns of collaboration, and institution building in particular, are long- term processes, and that the present five-year program can only be the beginning.

94 [Advice for project managers]: 1. Enforce deadlines more strictly (on self and others). 2. Do not accept participants into aproject on the basis of a recommendation from a third person only. 3. Do not conduct opinion surveys before you 4. are really ready to start analyzing the results 5. Accept that there will be some delays, 6. misunderstandings, etc, without getting too frustrated 7. Large scale project management is extremely time-consuming. 8. Do not expect to get much else done during the project period (Norwegian project manager) Chapter 9

Recommendations

The main recommendations and arguments of the evaluation group are:  It is recommended that the program be continued because its major objectives – institution building in the East and sustainable networks of scientific cooperation – are long-term processes. A termination of the program would render many investments futile, and would send negative signals to Eastern partners.  If the ambition is to produce high quality scientific research, we recommend a continued focus on “environmental” sciences. There are excellent opportunities for professional synergies due to the high level of particularly Russian research and the quality of the scientific manpower in the East.  If the ambition is to help the Eastern country to narrow knowledge and information gaps, we recommend that health sciences and social sciences be given high priority. These fields also meet urgent social and political concerns in the transition countries.  We recommended that future programs include incentives to integrate training elements and joint conferences in the Eastern countries.  Future programs should include additional incentives to increase the funding of Eastern collaborators, be they institutions or individuals.  In future selection processes we recommend that an applicant’s total project portfolio, including participation in other programs, be taken into consideration.  If short-term equality and a two-way, balanced transfer of knowledge is desired, it is recommended to focus on projects based on established networks.  A written or electronic “guide” about administrative/project management issues should produced to help future program managers.

Some of our recommendations are particular to this program and its triple goals of good research, knowledge transfer between individuals, and institution building in Russia and the Baltic states. Others may be seen as general advice for creating an international collaborative research program. We can distinguish between recommendations on implementation and justification of the program, recommendations on project selection criteria, and advice on managing projects and programs on a more operational level.

95 The list below primarily reflects what the evaluation group consider the most essential advice to the Research Council. Scientific quality, degree of institution building etc. are, of course, also dependent upon other variables that are not easily influenced by the way a program is organized and managed (e.g. the quality of the personnel involved and Eastern infrastructures such as financial institutions, postal services, and customs practices).

Fundamental recommendations: Implementation and justifications  It is recommended that the Collaboration Program be continued if the Donor (the Norwegian Government) intends to reap the benefits of the investments made so far, especially because institution building takes time. If the program were to be terminated now, a lot of the investments already made would be lost without any pay-off in terms of research, institutional change in the East and future prospects for spill-over into others spheres of activity (business, politics). A termination would make it difficult to capitalize on the learning and networks that have come about. In addition, it would send confusing political signals to partners in the East to discontinue a successful research collaborative program aimed at Russia and the Baltic States. Geographical and cultural proximity and common scientific and environmental challenges (e.g. in the Arctic) are substantial arguments in support of such a program.  It is recommended to continue collaboration on topics such as climate, energy and environment, because they afford particularly excellent potential for professional synergy, high quality research and two-way transfer of knowledge. These areas are of great common political and professional interest in Norway and Russia (to some extent also the Baltic States), and the quality of the stock of knowledge and the scientific manpower in the East is generally very high.  It is recommended to continue collaboration within the medical and social sciences if the ambition is to help the Eastern countries to narrow current knowledge and information gaps. Both fields also meet urgent social and political concerns in the transition countries. However, the initial asymmetries in these fields have been higher, necessitating a larger education or training component in the projects. The successful projects have nevertheless often created a basis for improving the research focus in later collaborative work. There is, of course, also potential for scientifically excellent projects in the social and medical sciences, as there is practical promise in the environmental projects.  It is recommended that a future programs integrate a variety of training and educational elements in the form of seminars, Ph.D. courses, summer schools, etc. We do not recommend the research and university part of the cooperation program be integrated, because that would put institutional constraints on the choices of Eastern partners. Many of the most interesting partners will be found outside the university sector, e.g. in scientific academies and various institutes and government organizations.  Due to the costs of institution building and international research collaboration, it is recommended to support projects of a certain minimum size and to create stable framework conditions. Although possibilities for “Additional funding” applications are welcome (naturally), many project participants nevertheless stated that this mode of operation should be kept to a minimum.  It is recommended that additional incentives (and possibilities) for funding of Eastern collaborators, individuals as well as institutions, be included. Experiences from the present program indicate that even a modest increase in such funding

96 would have relieved Eastern partners from other duties and activities related to their present financial hardships, with subsequent benefits for the joint research project.

Project selection criteria and similar considerations  In the choice of future projects it is recommended to consider if all program objectives are to be met within each individual project. Another option would be to credit potential project managers for participation in other projects that meet objectives that are not included in his own (research) project. The application of such criteria to the selection process would generate synergy with other programs and, eventually, greater cost-efficiency.  It is recommended that joint conferences in the East be encouraged because such conferences may generate the networks that are of so vital importance for researchers in the shattered Eastern institutions. Workshops, seminars and other professional meetings tend to be perceived as a means for turning personal networks into institution building.  It is recommended that the use of new technology in the dissemination of knowledge and information to the East be encouraged, but the design of such projects should be made in close collaboration with the prospective Eastern beneficiaries.  It must be recognized that financial equality is an impossible objective, and that genuine support and sustainable relationships must necessarily involve some amount of Norwegian support for Eastern institutions. Such financial support may also be a precondition if the Norwegian partners are to obtain the necessary commitment from attractive Eastern partners, because the best institutions often have to chose between offers from competing Western collaborators.  The initial/design phase is important when creating good general conditions for equality/balance. Careful planning of the empirical work may be a precondition for flexibility rather than a barrier to flexibility. It is recommended to consider including representatives from the geographical region in the selection of projects or in the general execution of the program. Another option is to be more positive when evaluating projects where Eastern representatives have been involved in making the project description.  It is recommended to stress the scientific motivation of participants. At the core of good research collaboration lies the professional motivation for doing interesting and exciting scientific work. Without genuine professional interest, fewer good researchers are likely to take on these projects with their difficult management challenges and frequent bureaucratic hindrances. Some successful projects also involve users in industry or government institutions. If social relevance are to be a central criterion for the selection of projects, it is recommended to select projects that involve users in some fashion.  Good institution building is also dependent upon the active involvement of Norwegian institutions. Many Norwegian institutes and universities/ departments have provided additional funding and other types of support, and the evaluation group recommends that this is taken into consideration if a future program is implemented.

Running the projects and the program  It is recommended that the Research Council set up guidelines for the transfer of money and/or equipment to Eastern partners, or see to it that project managers are

97 linked with other institutions in Norway who are experienced in these matters. Maintaining a simple list of well-functioning banks would be helpful to many participants.  A similar recommendation is that the Research Council create an arena for exchanging information and advice about project management. Regular (once or twice a year) seminars may be a device (some felt that previous project presentations focused too little on project management issues). Some of the project leaders did not know that others had projects in the same geographical region. Such knowledge would have been useful, e.g. when determining payment for Eastern researchers.  Project leaders face important decisions related to achieving a balance between collaborating with individuals and institutions, geographical central point, continuous cooperation or sharing of work, bilateral versus multilateral cooperation, and local network building versus project-leader-as-network-center. Multilateral projects may require a more top-down and “strict” management style, but may on the other hand create new local linkages. It is recommended that all (potential) applicants carefully consider the costs and benefits of their overall collaborative framework.

98 Appendix A: Questionnaire

Questionnaire for participants in research projects funded by

The Norwegian Cooperation Program for Central and Eastern Europe

99 Introduction

In September 2000 the Norwegian Research Council launched an evaluation of several of the largest projects funded by the program for research and higher education within the Action Program for Eastern Europe. The evaluation is to assess the outcomes and the effects of the projects, thereby providing data needed to improve future programs. This questionnaire forms part of the evaluation process, which is also to include assessments of relevant documents and publications, and interviews with project participants in Norway and collaborating countries (in the following Eastern European (EE) countries).

The questionnaire is standardized so as to be applicable to the experiences of both Norwegian and EE participants. It is important that you answer as many questions as possible, and that you base your responses on your personal experiences. Questions about which you have no information should be left blank. This will enable us to improve future programs and better meet the needs of the Norwegian and EE research communities. The results of this survey will be presented in the final research report, and will also be made available on the home page of the Research Council of Norway.

100 Background

1 Name

2 Home organization:

3 Academic degree:

4 Project title and number.

5 Sex. 0 Female  1 Male 

6 Age:

7 Your nationality:

8 Location of your home organization.

9 Your role in the project?

1 Project leader 

2 Partner in EE 

3 Ph.D. student 

4 Research assistant 

101 Project Implementation

10 How was the project initiated (indicate primary source):

1 Previous scientific collaboration 

2 Initial contact by partners 

3 Entirely commercial relation  4 Other (please specify): 

11 Approximately how much time did you spend within the project on (in percent):

Project design and preparation

Project management

Data collection and analysis

Writing and editing manuscripts

Participation in congresses and workshops

12 How much of your total salary was covered by the project (in percent)?

13 How many man months did you work on the project?

102 14 How much (in percent) of that time did you spend in:

% 0 Norway

1 EE

15 Did you have previous experience in research collaboration with EE/Norwegian (or other Western) researchers?

0 Yes  1 No 

16 How many persons (researchers) from your home organization were involved in the research project?

Persons Number Researchers employed specifically for this project Total number of researchers involved Of whom women

Ph.D. students

Research collaboration

17 Assess your personal benefits from research cooperation within this project in terms of theoretical development, empirical knowledge, and scientific methodology. Make your assessment on a scale from 1 – 5 (5 indicating the highest benefit, 1 indicating the lowest benefit). 1 2 3 4 5 Low High

Theoretical development     

Empirical work     

Methodology     

18 How do you assess the contributions made by the Norwegian and EE partners with regard to theoretical development?

103 Make your assessment on a scale from 1 - 5 (5 indicating a major contribution, 1 indicating a minor contribution)

1 2 3 4 5 Minor Major

Input from Norwegian partners     

Input from EE partners     

19 How do you assess the contribution made by the Norwegian and EE partners with regard to empirical work? Make your assessment on a scale from 1 - 5, 5 indicating a major contribution, 1 a minor contribution?

1 2 3 4 5 Minor Major

Input from Norwegian partners     

Input from EE partners     

20 How do you assess the contributions made by the Norwegian and EE partners with regard to scientific methodology? Make your assessment on a scale from 1 - 5, 5 indicating a major contribution, 1 a minor contribution?

1 2 3 4 5 Minor Major

Input from Norwegian partners     

Input from Eastern partners     

21 Assess the problems you encountered in the collaboration (1 indicating the least serious problem, 5 the most serious problem)

104 1 2 3 4 5 Least Most

Different research cultures 

Language     

Inadequate infrastructure (telephones,      computers, access to literature) Insufficient funding     

Lack of commitment and respect for      assumed obligations

Lack of mutual respect           G Other (please specify):

22 Assess your personal motivation for entering this project (rank from 1-5 on each item, 1 indicating the least important, 5 the most important)

1 2 3 4 5 Least Most The research topic     

It will benefit my scientific career      It will benefit a career in other      professions The prospects of travel     

The financial benefits      Other (please specify):     

Institution building

23 Assess the impact of the research collaboration on your home institution? (Please rank from 1 to 5: 1 indicating low impact, 5 indicating high impact)

105 1 2 3 4 5 Low High Change of curriculum     

Change of syllabus      New equipment and      scientific literature New knowledge input for      research

24 How did your institution contribute to this project?

Signed the application/letter of intent 

Supplementary financial support 

Logistic support (office space, telephones, computers etc.)  Additional scientific work (research assistance not funded  by the project) 5 Other (please specify): 

25 Compared to your previous work how do you perceive the research culture (i.e. quality standards, modes of work, management culture) that you experienced on this project?

Similar  Different 

If different, please provide a brief description:

26 Assess on a scale from 1 to 5 (1 indicating low effect, 5 indicating high effect) whether the scientific collaboration in this project has had a learning/teaching effect on:

1 5 Low High

106 Funding methods  

Scientific teamwork  

Presentation of results/writing   Other (please specify):  

Finances

27 To your knowledge, what has been the approximate total budget of the project you are/have been involved in (in Norwegian kroner or US$)?

28 To your knowledge, what has been the approximate overhead from the project to your home institution (in Norwegian kroner or US$)?

Publications

29 List below the publications that has resulted from this project and to which you have personally contributed (as author or co-author):

Relation to other programs

30 Did you participate in other international research projects during the project period (for example INTAS, INCO)?

Yes 

107 No 

If yes, what was the subject?

Funded by:

31 Did you collaborate with other Western non-research assistance programs during the project period (bilateral of multilateral)?

Yes  No 

If yes, what was the subject of the program:

Funded by:

Social relevance of the project

32 Do you believe that your project was relevant to the needs and current problems of the EE country?

Yes  No 

If yes, please note why:

If no, please note why:

33 Do you believe that your project in any way contributed to the solution of current problems experienced by the EE?

108 Yes  No 

If yes, explain why:

If no, explain why:

Project and program management

34 In your estimation, has the project met the overall objectives stipulated in the original project design? Please rank on a scale from 1-5, 5 representing total completion of objectives, 1 low completion Low total 1 2 3 4 5     

109 35 From your perspective, what were the major obstacles to efficient implementation of the project? (1 indicating the least important obstacle, 5 the most important obstacle)?

1 2 3 4 5 Least Most A Budget constraints      B Unclear objectives and goals      Lack of qualifications among  researchers involved Communications with Norwegian/EE  partner Bureaucratic hindrances in Norway  Bureaucratic hindrances in EE  Other (please specify): 

36 Was the quality of the process of evaluation and selection of projects satisfactory?

Yes  No 

If yes, why?

If no, why not?

37 Was the co-ordination and collaboration between your project and the Norwegian Research Council efficient and transparent?

Yes  No 

If yes, why?

If no, why not?

110 38 Were you in contact with members of the program steering committee during the project period?

Yes  No 

If yes, on what issue:

On equality

39 Was the collaboration on this project characterized by equal opportunities and equality between Norwegian and Eastern partners regarding: (Please rank from 1 – 5, 1 indicating low equality, 5 indicating high equality)

1 2 3 4 5 Low High Research design     

Research implementation     

Credit for results     

Management     

Access to financial      resources

Access to data     

Sustainability

111 40 Do you believe that the present project will lead to further joint research projects or other forms of cooperation?

Yes  No 

If yes, why?

If no, why?

Lessons learned

41 What major lessons have you learned by participating in the present joint research project regarding project design and implementation?

42 What are your recommendations for improving future joint research programs between Norwegian and EE researchers?

112 43 Here you may comment on any topic regarding project management, relations with the research council, or the questionnaire/evaluation procedure.

Thank you for taking the time and trouble to complete this questionnaire.

113 Appendix B: List of publications from the 13 evaluated projects

Environmental (natural sciences and technology) projects

120471/730 Environmental Issues and Agricultural Development in Estonia and Latvia

Articles in refereed journals Stålnacke, P., Vagstad, N., Tamminen, T., Wassmann, P., Jansons, V., and Loigu, E. 1999. Nutrient runoff and transfer from land and rivers to the Gulf of Riga. Hydrobiologia 410: 111-119. Vagstad, N., Jansons, V., Loigu, E., and Deelstra, J. 2000. Nutrient losses from agricultural areas in the Gulf of Riga drainage basin. Ecological Engineering 14: 435-441. Vagstad, N., Jansons, V., Deelstra, J. Baltic agriculture in transition - the contribution to nutrient loads in the Gulf of Riga drainage basin. IAHS – International Association of Hydrological Sciences. Accepted. Submitted manuscript Butina, M., Jansons, V., Deelstra, J., Vagstad, N. Analysis of Hydrological Characteristics of Small Agricultural Catchments in Latvia and Norway with Metq98 Hydrological Model. Under utsendelse, Nordic Hydrology. Master’s degree theses Mira Butina, 2000. Analysis of hydrological characteristics affecting nutrient load from small catchments. Master-oppgave ved Landbruksuniversitetet i Latvia Arvo Iital, 1999. Nutrient runoff from small agricultural catchments. Master-oppgave ved Det Tekniske Universitetet i Tallinn, Estland. “Peer reviewed” conference proceedings Deelstra, J., Vagstad, N., Loigu, E., Vasilyev, A., and Jansons, V. 1998. Interactions between hydrology and nutrient runoff in small agricultural catchments. A comparative study of Estonian, Latvian and Norwegian catchments. XX Nordic Hydrologic Conference Volume 1, pp 120-129. Jansons, V., Vagstad, N., and Delstra, J. 1999. Nutrient losses from agricultural areas in Latvia. Proceedings of ADAS/University of Warwic international conferenec ”Agriculture and the Environment – Challenges and Conflicts for the New Millenium”. Jansons V., Butina M. 1998. Potential impacts of climate change on nutrient loads from small catchments. Proceedings of Second International Conference on Climate and Water. Espoo, Finland, 17-20 August 1998. pp 932-939. Jansons V., Busmanis P. 1999. Trends in sustainable development of agriculture in Latvia. Sustainable agriculture. Proceedings from a Nordic seminar in Stockholm 10-12 September, 1998. pp. 63-69. Jansons V. Soil protection in Latvia. 1999. Soil Protection Policies within European Union. Proceedings of EU Workshop, 9-11 December 1998, Bonn, Germany. Bundesumweltministerium. pp. 233-239. Jansons, Viesturs.1999 Nutrient runoff measurements in Agriculture. Results of on-going programs in Latvia. Jordforsk/TTU/NJF-seminar on Drainage and Water Management in Agriculture. Lohusalu, Estland, mai 1999. Iital, Arvo. 1999. Nutrient runoff measurements in Agriculture. Results of on-going programs in Estonia. Jordforsk/TTU/NJF-seminar on Drainage and Water Management in Agriculture. Lohusalu, Estland, mai 1999. Vagstad, N. Agriculture and nutrient discharge to drainage basin. Foredrag ved Nordisk-Balisk forskerutdanningskurs, “Drainage basin nutrient inputs and coastal eutrophication – the case of theGulf of Riga. Jurmala, Latia, 6-12 sept 1999. Vagstad, N. 1999. An overview of nutrient losses measured in small agricultural catchments in the Nordic/Baltic region. Foredrag ved: An international Swedish-Polish seminar; Scientific basis to mitigate the nutrient dispersion into the environment. Institute for Land Reclamation and Grasland Farming. Falenty. Poland. 10-12.des.1999.

114 Jansons, V. 2000. Environmental Monitoring in Latvia. Results of measurements in small agricultural catchments. Foredrag ved HELCOM, Working Group Agriculture, Goslar, Tyskland. 10-12 April 2000. Butina, M., Deelstra, J., Vagstad, N. 2000. Testing of the METQ98 hydrological model on small agricultural catchments in Norway and Latvia. XXI Nordic Hydrological Conference. Nordic Hydrological Program Report No. 36, 233-240.

120362/730 Pechora

A: Scientific papers in journals and books 1995: Astakhov, V.I. 1995: The mode of degradation of Pleistocene permafrost in West Siberia. Quaternary International 28, 119-121. Tveranger, J., Astakhov, V. & Mangerud 1995: The margin of the last Barents-Kara ice sheet at Markhida, northern Russia. Quaternary Research 44, 328-340. 1996: Astakhov, V.I, Kaplyanskaya, F.A. & Tarnogradsky, V.D. 1996: Pleistocene permafrost of West Siberia as a deformable glacier bed. Permafrost and Periglacial Processes 7, 165-191. Mangerud, J., Jansen, E. & Landvik, J.Y. 1996: Late Cenozoic history of the Scandinavian and Barents ice sheets. Global and Planetary Change 12, 11-26. Pavlov, P., Indrelid, S., Svendsen, J.I., Hufthammer, A.K., Smirnov, N. & Andreicheva, L. 1996: Investigations of Paleolithic sites in European North-East. Archaeological Discovery, 24-27. Moscow (in Russian). 1997: Astakhov, V. 1997: Late glacial events in the Central Russian Arctic. Quaternary International 41/42, 17-25. Pavlov, P., Indrelid, S. & Markhov 1997: Upper Paleolithic site Garchi I. Russian Archaeology 3 (in Russian). 1998: Astakhov V. 1998: The last ice sheet of the Kara Sea: terrestrial constraints on its age. Quaternary International 45/46, 19-29. Astakhov V.I. 1998: Inversion relief as indicator of palaeocryological environments. Geomorfologia 4, 40-47 (in Russian). Landvik, J.Y., Bondevik, S., Elverhøi, A., Fjeldskaar, W., Mangerud, J., Siegert, M.J., Salvigsen, O., Svendsen, J.I. & Vorren, T.O. 1998: The last glacial maximum of Svalbard and the Barents Sea area: ice sheet extent and configuration. Quaternary Science Reviews 17, 43-75. Mangerud, J., Dokken, T., Hebbeln, D., Heggen, B., Ingólfsson, O., Landvik, J.Y., Mejdahl, V., Svendsen, J.I. & Vorren, T.O. 1998: Fluctuations of the Svalbard-Barents Sea ice sheet during the last 150 000 years. Quaternary Science Reviews 17, 11-22. Tveranger, J., Astakhov, V., Mangerud, J. & Svendsen, J.I. 1998: Signature of the last shelf-centered glaciation at a key section in the Pechora Basin, Arctic Russia. Journal of Quaternary Science 13, 189- 203. 1999: Astakhov V.I., Mangerud J. & Svendsen J.I. 1999: Russian-Norwegian investigation of the Arctic ice age. Otechestvennaya Geologia 2, 51-59 (Russian Geological Survey, in Russian). Astakhov, V.I., Svendsen, J.I., Matioushkov, A., Mangerud, J., Maslenikova, O. & Tveranger, J. 1999: Marginal formations of the last Kara and Barents ice sheets in northern European Russia. Boreas 28, 23- 45. Mangerud, J., Svendsen, J.I. & Astakhov, V.I. 1999: Age and extent of the Barents and Kara Sea ice sheets in northern Russia. Boreas 28, 46-80. Pavlov, P. & Indrelid, S. 1999: The initial settling of the tundra zone of Northeast of Europe, Bulletin of the Institute of Biology, Syktyvkar 2-1999, 24-26 (in Russian). Smirnov, N.G. & Golovachov, I.B. 1999: Holocene history of small mammals in the Urals. In Benecke, N. (ed): The Holocene History of the European Vertebrate Fauna. Modern Aspects of Research. Archaeologie in Eurasian. Band 6. Verlag Marie Leidof Gmbh. Radhen/Westf., 209-221. Smirnov, N.G., Andreicheva, L.N., Korona, O.M., Zinoviev, E.V., Golvachov, I.B., Pavlov, P.Yu. & Hufthammer, A.K. 1999: Materials to characterize the biota of the Pre-Urals Subarctic in Late Pleistocene and Holocene. Ekaterinburg 1999, 23-60, Ekaterinburg (in Russian, abstract in english).

115 Smirnov, N.G., Kuzmina, E.A. & Kourova, T.P. 1999: New data on rodents of the late glacial time in the North Urals. Ekaterinburg 1999, 68-78, Ekaterinburg (in Russian, abstract in english). Svendsen, J.I., Astakhov, V.I., Bolshiyanov, D.Yu., Demidov, I., Dowdeswell, J.A., Gataullin,V., Hjort, C., Hubberten, H.W., Larsen, E., Mangerud, J., Melles, M., Möller, P., Saarnisto, M. & Siegert, M.J. 1999: Maximum extent of the Eurasian ice sheets in the Barents and Kara Sea region during the Weichselian. Boreas 28, 234-242. Tveranger, J., Astakhov, V., Mangerud, J. & Svendsen, J.I. 1999: Surface form of the south-western sector of the last Kara Sea ice sheet. Boreas 28, 81-91. 2000: Pavlov, P.Yu. & Indrelid, S. 2000: Human occupation in northeastern Europe during the period 35.000 until 18.000 B.P. In Roebroeks, W., Mussi, M., Svoboda, J. & Fennema, K. (eds.): Hunters of the Golden Age; the Mid Upper Palaeolithic of Eurasia. Leiden University, 165-172. 2001 Astakhov V.I. (in press): Stratigraphic framework for the Upper Pleistocene of the Russian Arcitc: changing paradigms. Global and Planetary Change. Astakhov V.I. (in press): The last sheet glaciation of Arctic Russia. In Gerard, J. (ed.): Encyclopaedia of Quaternary Science. Kluwer. Astakhov, V.I. (in press): Pleistocene ice limits in Russian northern lowlands. Astakhov V.I., Mangerud J. & Svendsen J.I. (in press): Late Pleistocene ice sheets of the Russian Arctic: Age and configuration. Vestnik St. Petersburg University, Ser. 7 Geology 1 (7) (in Russian). Gataullin, V., Mangerud, J. & Svendsen, J.I. (in press): The extent of the Late Weichselian ice sheet in the southeastern Barents Sea. Global and Planetary Change. Henriksen, M., Mangerud, J., Maslenikova, O., Matiouchkov, A. & Tveranger, J. (in press): Weichselian stratigraphy and glaciotectonic deformation along the lower Pechora River, Arctic Russia. Global and Planetary Change. Mangerud, J., Astakhov, V.I., Murray, A. & Svendsen, J.I. (in press): The chronology of a large ice-dammed lake and the Barents-Kara ice sheet advances, northern Russia. Global and Planetary Change. Mangerud, J, Astakhov, V. and Svendsen, J.I (submitted): The extent of the Barents-Kara Ice Sheet during the Last Glacial Maximum. EPILOG special volume of Quaternary Science Reviews. Maslenikova, O. & Mangerud, J. (in press): Where was the outlet of ice-dammed Lake Komi, Northern Russia. Global and Planetary Change. Paus, Aa. (in press): Interpretative problems and sources of error related to pollen-analytical studies of the Holocene on the Timan ridge, western Pechora Basin, northern Russia. AmS-Skrifter 16. Paus, Aa., Svendsen, J.I. & Matiouchkov, A. (to be submitted): Late Valdaian (Weichselian) and Holocene pollen stratigraphy on the Timan Ridge, western Pechora Basin, northern Russia. Pavlov, P., Svendsen, J.I. & Indrelid, S.: Human presence in the European Arctic nearly 40,000 years ago. Under consideration by Nature. Siegert, M., Dowdeswell, J.A., Hald, M. & Svendsen, J.I. (in press): Modelling the Eurasian ice sheet through a full (Weichselian) glacial cycle. Global and Planetary Change. Svendsen, J.I., Gataullin, V. and Polyak, L. (in press). The glacial History of the Barents and Kara Sea Region. In Ehlers.J and Gibbard (eds) Quaternary Glaciations – Extent and Chronology, Vol. Europe. B: Popular science Indrelid, S. 1995: PECHORA-prosjektet. Unimus, Internblad for Bergen Museum 1, 1 pp. Indrelid, S. 1995: PECHORA-prosjektet: Ny kunnskap om gamal tid. Museumsnytt 4, 19-20. Indrelid, S. & Pavlov, P 1995: Nytt om mammut og istidsfolk i Nordvestrussland. Naturen 8, 278-283. Mangerud, J. 1999: Dype sår i Russlands tundra. Feature article in Bergens Tidende 07.08.99. Mangerud, J. 2000: På jakt etter istidens morener, mammutter og mennesker i Nord-Russland. QED (News paper for the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences) 7 (1), 11. C: Presentations at meetings 1995 Astakhov, V.1995: Glaciotectonism in a great sedimentary basin, West Siberia. International Union for Quaternary Research, XIV Congress, August 1995, Berlin, Germany. Terra nostra 2/95.

116 Astakhov, V. 1995: Influence of Pleistocene permafrost on glacial processes in northern Russia. International Union for Quaternary Research, XIV Congress, August 1995, Berlin, Germany. Terra nostra 2/95. Astakhov, V. 1995: Peculiarities of Pleistocene ice sheets of central Russia. European Foundation workshop on "Former Ice Sheets", 17.03.95, Edinburg, Scotland. Astakhov, V. 1995: The Pleistocene glaciation in the western Russian Arctic. National Science Foundation, Arctic System Workshop ("Research Priorities for Russian Arctic Land-Shelf Systems"), The Ohio State University, USA, 12-14 January 1995. Mangerud, J. 1995: Glacial fluctuation of the Scandinavian and Barents ice sheets since the last interglacial. European Science Foundation workshop on "Former Ice Sheets”, 17.03.95, Edinburg, Scotland. Mangerud, J. 1995: Glacial history and climate change in the Eurasian Arctic over the last 250,000 years. PAGES meeting: Pole-Equator-Pole paleoclimatic transect, workshop, 06.03.95, Tunis. Mangerud, J., Astakhov, V., Svendsen, J.I. & Tveranger, J. 1995: Fluctuation of the Scandinavian and Barents ice sheet the past 140,000 years. International Union of Quaternary Research, XIV International Congress. Berlin. Terra Nostra 2/95, 177. Svendsen, J.I. 1995: A lake drilling project in North-Russia - a proposal. European Science Foundation "European Lake Drilling Programme" (ELDP) Workshop. Le Bischenberg, near Strasbourg, France 24- 27.09.96. Svendsen, J.I. 1995: The PECHORA project - a status report. National Science Foundation, Arctic System Science Workshop (Research Priorities for Russian Arctic Land-Shelf Systems), The Ohio State University, USA, 12-14 January 1995. Tveranger, J., Mangerud, J., Astakhov, V. & Svendsen, J.I. 1995: Extent of the Weichselian ice sheet in the Pechora area, northern Russia. 5th International conference on Paleoceanography, October 1995, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. 1996: Astakhov, V. 1996: The shrinking Kara inland ice: Weichselian vs. Saalian. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 1st workshop, Strasbourg, France, Nov. 29 - Dec. 2 1996. Henriksen, M, Astakhov, V., Mangerud, J., Maslenikova, O., Matyushkov, A. & Tveranger, J. 1996: Stratigraphy and sedimentology of deposits from the last glaciation at Hongurei, Northern Russia. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 1st workshop, Strasbourg, France, Nov. 29 - Dec. 2 1996. Hufthammer, A.K. 1996: The PECHORA project. Conference on "Science in archaeology", Stavanger, September 1996. Indrelid, S. 1996: PECHORA-prosjektet: Ny kunnskap om eldste bosetning i Nordøst-Europa, Lecture at the University of Tromsø, Department of Archaeology, Tromsø, 15.11.96. Indrelid, S. 1996: The northernmost palaeolithic sites in Europe. XIII UISPP (Union Internationale des Sciences Prehistoriques et Protohistoriques). Forli, Italy, 08-14 September 1996. Matiouchkov, A. & Astakhov, V. 1996: New geomorphological data on extent of the last Kara ice sheet west of the Urals. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 1st workshop, Strasbourg, France, Nov. 29 - Dec. 2 1996. Mangerud, J. 1996: The glaciation history of the western flank of the Scandinavian ice sheet. Correlation of stratographic events of Upper Pleistocene in central and peripheral parts of the Last Glaciation, 37-39. Geological Society of Lithuania. Mangerud, J., Svendsen, J.I., Astakhov, V. & Tveranger, J. 1996: Glaciations and paleoenvironments in the Eurasian Russian Arctic; the Pechora Basin. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 1st workshop, Strasbourg, France, Nov. 29 - Dec. 2 1996. Paus, Aa. 1996: Late Valdai pollen stratigraphy in the Timan Ridge. PECHORA project meeting. Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Geology, Komi Science Centre, Syktyvkar, Russia 14/2 1996. Tveranger, J. 1996: The last interglacial-glacial cycle of the Pechora Basin, northern Russia. Faculty of Earth Science, Free University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 24/1 1996. Tveranger, J. 1996: Two post Mikulino ice advances? The stratigraphy at Vastiansky Kon', Kuya River and Shapkina River in the Pechora Basin. Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Geology, Komi Science Centre, Syktyvkar, Russia 14/2 1996. Tveranger, J., Astakhov, V. & Mangerud, J. 1996; Evidence for two Weichselian ice advances at Vastiansky Kon in the Pechora Basin, northern Russia. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 1st workshop, Strasbourg, France, Nov. 29 - Dec. 2 1996.

117 Ulvedal, P. & Mangerud, J. 1996: Stratigraphy and sedimentology of deposits from the last interglacial-glacial cycle along the Sula river, a tributary to Pechora, northern Russia. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 1st workshop, Strasbourg, France, Nov. 29 - Dec. 2 1996. 1997: Henriksen, M., Astakhov, V., Mangerud, J., Maslenikova, O. & Tveranger, J. 1997: Stratigraphy and sedimentology of deposits from the last glaciation at Hongurai, Northern Russia. Norsk Geologisk Forenings XV landsmøte, Bergen, Norway, 9-11 January 1997, Geonytt 1-97, 48. Mangerud, J., Astakhov, V.I., Svendsen, J.I., Tveranger, J. & Matyushkov, A 1997: The last glacial maximum of the Kara ice-sheet in northern Russia. The Geological Society of America, 1997 Annual Meeting, Abstracts, 110. Mangerud, J., Svendsen, J.I., Astakhov, V. & Tveranger, J. 1997: Siste istid i Nord-Russland. Norsk Geologisk Forenings XV landsmøte, Bergen, Norway, 9-11 January 1997, Geonytt 1-97, 64-65. Svendsen, J.I., Hufthammer, A.K., Indrelid, S. &Mangerud, J. 1997: Istidsmennesker og kvartærgeologi i Nord-Russland. Norsk Geologisk Forenings XV landsmøte, Bergen, Norway, 9-11 January 1997, Geonytt 1-97, 88. Tveranger, J., Astakhov, V. & Mangerud, J. 1997: Evidence for two Weichselian ice advances at Vastianski Kon in the pechora Basin, Northern Russia. Norsk Geologisk Forenings XV landsmøte, Bergen, Norway, 9-11 January 1997, Geonytt 1-97, 95. Ulvedal, P.W. & Mangerud, J. 1997: Stratigraphy and sedimentology of deposits from the last interglacial- glacial cycle along the Sula River, a tributary to Pechora, Northern Russia. Norsk Geologisk Forenings XV landsmøte, Bergen, Norway, 9-11 January 1997, Geonytt 1-97, 95. 1998: Astakhov, V.I., Mangerud, J., Maslenikova, O., Matiouschkov, A. & Svendsen, J.I. 1998: A new photogeological map of glacial features of the Timan-Uralian region. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 2nd workshop, St. Petersburg, Russia, 5-8 February 1998. Astakhov, V.I., Mangerud, J., Maslenikova, O., Matiushkov, A. & Svendsen, J.I. 1998: The last ice-dammed lake on the Pechora: Shorelines and sediments. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 2nd workshop, St. Petersburg, Russia, 5-8 February 1998. Astakhov, V., Mangerud, J., Matiushkov, A. & Svendsen, J.I. 1998: The margin of the last Kara ice sheet in northern European Russia: Mapping results. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 2nd workshop, St. Petersburg, Russia, 5-8 February 1998. Astakhov V.I., Mangerud J. & Svendsen J.I. 1998: On age of the last ice sheet of the Russian Arctic. Abstracts of National Conference "Glavneishiye itogi v izuchenii chetvertichnogo perioda", VSEGEI, St. Petersburg, 8-9 (in Russian). Finnekås, T., Olsen, T.Ø., Mangerud, J., Paus, Aa. & Svendsen, J.I. 1998: Pollen analysis of interglacial sediments in the Pechora Basin. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 2nd workshop, St. Petersburg, Russia, 5-8 February 1998. Heggen, H., Mangerud, J., Svendsen, J.I. & Astakhov, V. 1998: Quataernary stratigraphy of the Byzovaja paleolithic site in northern Russia. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 2nd workshop, St. Petersburg, Russia, 5-8 February 1998. Henriksen, M., Astakhov, V., Mangerud, J., Maslenikova, O., Matiouschkov, A. & Tveranger, J. 1998: Sedimentology and stratigraphy of deposits from the last glaciation at Hongurey, Northern Russia. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 2nd workshop, St. Petersburg, Russia, 5-8 February 1998. Hufthammer, A.K. 1998: The middle and late glacial (Weichselian) vertebrates for the Pechora region, north Russia. Preliminary results. Workshop in Nordic faunal history on the theme "Interdisciplinary research in faunal history". Seili, Åbo, Finland, 9-12 September, 1998. Mangerud, J. 1998: The last interglacial-glacial cycle of the Barents-Kara ice sheets in Svalbard and Northern Russia. London Quaternary Lectures, Royal Holloway, University of London. Mangerud, J., Astakhov, V. & Svendsen, J.I. 1998: The age and extent of the last glacial maxima of the Barents - and Kara ice sheets in northern Russia. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 2nd workshop, St. Petersburg, Russia, 5-8 February 1998. Maslenikova, O.A. & Astakhov, V.I. 1998: The last proglacial lake on the Pechora. Abstracts of National Conference "Glavneishiye itogi v izuchenii chetvertichnogo perioda", VSEGEI, St. Petersburg, 37-38 (in Russian).

118 Matiouchkov, A.D. & Astakhov, V.I. 1998: Marginal features of the last ice sheet in the Timan-Uralian Region. Abstracts of National Conference "Glavneishiye itogi v izuchenii chetvertichnogo perioda", VSEGEI, St. Petersburg, 123-124 (in Russian). Paus, Aa. 1998: Late Weichselian and Holocene pollen stratigraphy in the Timan Ridge, northern Russia. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 2nd workshop, St. Petersburg, Russia, 5-8 February 1998. Pavlov, P. & Indrelid, S. 1998: Cultural and environmental changes in north-east of Europe (Pechora, Kama and Volga bassins) during isotope stage 2 and 3. Conference on European Late Pleistocene Isotopic Stages 2 & 3: Humans, their ecology & cultural adaptations. INQUA Project of the Commission on Human Evolution & Palaeoecology. Leuven, Belgium. Pavlov, P., Svendsen, J.I. & Andreicheva, L. 1998: Investigation of Byzovaja site in 1997. Archaeologicheske Otkrytia 1997, 34-36. Moscow (in Russian). Seidenkrantz, M-S., Funder, S., Tveranger, J., Ulvedal, P.W., Mangerud, J. & Svendsen, J.I. 1998: Eemian and Weichselian marine transgression in the Pechora basin, Northern Russia. 23th Nordic Geological Meeting, Abstracts, Aarhus University, Denmark. Seidenkrantz, M-S., Funder, S., Tveranger, J., Ulvedal, P.W., Mangerud, J. & Svendsen, J.I. 1998: Foraminifera and molluscs from the Mikhulinian and Mid-Valdaian of the Pechora region, northern Russia. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 2nd workshop, St. Petersburg, Russia, 5-8 February 1998. Svendsen, J.I. 1998: Ice sheets and climate in the Eurasian Arctic at the last glacial maximum. European Climate Science Conference, Proceedings. Vienna, Austria, 19-23 October 1998. Svendsen, J.I: 1998: PECHORA and Eurasian Ice Sheets - contributions to QUEEN. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 2nd workshop, St. Petersburg, Russia, 5-8 February 1998. Svendsen, J.I., Mangerud, J. & Astakhov, V.I. 1998: Reconstruction of the last glacial maximum of the Barents and Kara Ice Sheets in Northern Russia. International Conference; Marine periglacial and glaciation of the Barents-Kara Seas shelf in Pleistocene, Program and Abstracts. Murmansk, Russian Federation, 19-21 November 1998. 1999: Astakhov, V.I. 1999: Upper Pleistocene sedimentary formations in the extreme northeast of the Russian Plain. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 3rd workshop, Øystese, Norway, 16-18 April 1999. Astakhov, V., Mangerud, J. & Svendsen, J. I. 1999: Extent and age of shelf-centered ice sheets of Eurasia. INQUA XV International Congress, Durban, South Africa. Book of Abstracts, 12. Also in Quaternary International 63/64 (2000), 13. Astakhov, V.I., Mangerud, J. & Svendsen, J.I. 1999: Margins of Weichselian ice sheets in the Russian Arctic: Mapping results and problems. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 3rd workshop, Øystese, Norway, 16-18 April 1999. Gataulin, V., Mangerud, J. & Svendsen, J.I. 1999: The Late Weichselian glaciation maximum in the Pechora Sea: Inference from seismic profiles and borehole data. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 3rd workshop, Øystese, Norway, 16-18 April 1999. Halvorsen, L.S. 1999: Vegetation - and climate history at Mammotovaja Kurja, a paleolithic site in northern European Russia. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 3rd workshop, Øystese, Norway, 16-18 April 1999. Heggen, H., Mangerud, J., Svendsen, J.I. & Astakhov, V.I. 1999: Quaternary development at Byzovaja from pre-Eemian lake sediments to Late Weichselian eolian sand. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 3rd workshop, Øystese, Norway, 16-18 April 1999. Heggen, H., Mangerud, J., Svendsen, J. I. & Astakhov, V. 1999: Quaternary stratigraphy of the Byzovaya Paleolithic site, northern Russia. Norsk Geologisk Forenings XVI landsmøte, Stavanger, Norway, 6-8 January 1999, Geonytt 1-99, 55. Henriksen, M., Astakhov, V., Mangerud, J., Maslenikova, O., Matioushkov, A. & Tveranger, J. 1999: Studies of deposits from the last glaciation at Hongurei, Northern Russia. Norsk Geologisk Forenings XVI landsmøte, Stavanger, Norway, 6-8 January 1999, Geonytt 1-99, 57. Henriksen, M., Svendsen, J.I., Mangerud, J., Løvlie, R., Paus, Aa., & Wischer, F. 1999: Preliminary results from lake coring in the Pechora basin, European Russian Arctic. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 3rd workshop, Øystese, Norway, 16-18 April 1999.

119 Indrelid, S. & Pavlov, P. 1999: Zaselenje tsjelovekom severo-vostoka evropij paleolita. International conference dedicated to the 120th anniversary of the first paleolithic discovery in Kostenki. Rossijaskaja academija Nauk, St. Petersburg, 46-48. Mangerud, J. 1999: On the track of ice sheets and people in northern Russia during the last ice age. Lecture at the opening seremony of the new building for the Alfred Wegener Institute of Marine and Polar Reserch, Potsdam, October 1999. Mangerud, J., Astakhov, V.I., Svendsen, J.I. & Murray, A. 1999: Ice dammed lakes in northern Russia. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 3rd workshop, Øystese, Norway, 16-18 April 1999. Mangerud, J., Svendsen, J.I. & Astakhov, V. 1999: Age and limits for the Weichselian Barents and Kara ice sheets in European Russia. INQUA XV International Congress, Durban, South Africa. Book of Abstracts, 117. Also in Quaternary International 63/64 (2000), 90-91. Maslenikova, O. 1999: Morphological and age relationship between terraces formed by lake Komi, glacial melt water and postglacial rivers along Usa, a tributary to Pechora. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 3rd workshop, Øystese, Norway, 16-18 April 1999. Maslenikova, O., Mangerud, J., Astakhov, V.I. & Svendsen, J.I. 1999: Possible spillways of the last ice dammed lake of the Russian North. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 3rd workshop, Øystese, Norway, 16-18 April 1999. Matiouchkov, A. & Astakhov, V. 1999: Relations of Taimyr and Putorana Weichselian glaciers: Evidence from geological mapping. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 3rd workshop, Øystese, Norway, 16-18 April 1999. Paus, Aa. 1999: Fra en pollenanalytikers problemfylte hverdag. Om stratigrafiske feilkilder i forbindelse med pollen-analytiske studier på Timan Ryggen, Nord-Russland. Norsk kvartærbotanisk vintermøte, Stavanger, Norway, January 1999. Paus, Aa. 1999: Late Weichselian and Holocene pollen analytical studies on the Timan ridge, western Pechora Basin, northern Russia: Results and sources of error. Varve 99, laminated sediments workshop, Lammi, Finland, April 13-17, 1999. Svendsen, J.I. 1999: Maximum extent of the ice sheets in the Barents and Kara Sea region during the Weichselian. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 3rd workshop, Øystese, Norway, 16-18 April 1999. 2000: Astakhov, V. 2000: Last glacial cycles in northern European Russia: Swaying ice dispersal centres? Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 4th workshop, Lund, Sweden, 7-10 April 2000. Gataullin, V., Mangerud, J. & Svendsen, J.I. 2000: The extent of the Late Weichselian ice sheet in the southeastern Barents Sea. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 4th workshop, Lund, Sweden, 7-10 April 2000. Heggen, H., Mangerud, J, Svendsen, J.I. & Astakhov, V. 2000: Quaternary development at Byzovaya; from Pre-Eemian lake sediments to Late Weichselian eolian sand. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 4th workshop, Lund, Sweden, 7-10 April 2000. Henriksen, M., Mangerud, J., Paus, Aa. & Svendsen, J.I. 2000: Preliminary results of sediment cores from three lakes in northern Russia, including evidence for c. 40,000 years delayed melting of dead ice. 5th European Science Foundation "European Lake Drilling Programme" (ELDP) workshop, Pallanza, Italy. Terra Nostra 2000/7, 35-39. Henriksen, M., Mangerud, J. & Svendsen, J.I. 2000: Around 70,000 years delayed melting of dead ice in northern Russia – evidence from two lake corings. 24th Nordic geological winter meeting, Trondheim, Norway, 6-9 January 2000, Geonytt 1-2000, 83. Henriksen, M., Mangerud, J. & Svendsen, J.I. 2000: Till stratigraphy and ice movement at Seyda, northern Russia. International Field Symposium, Quaternary Geology of Denmark. The Peribaltic Group, INQUA Commission on Glaciation, 14-15. University of Aarhus, Denmark, August 29 – September 3 2000. Mangerud, J. 2000: Den astronomiske teori for istider og mellomistider. Norsk Astronomisk Selskap. Oslo. November 2000. Mangerud, J., Svendsen, J.I. & Astakhov, V. 2000: The Last Glacial Maximum of the Barents-Kara ice sheet. Ice Sheets and Sea Level of the Last Glacial Maximum. Oregon, USA. Mangerud, J., Svendsen, J.I., Astakhov, V., Indrelid, S. & Pavlov, P. 2000: Surprising discoveries on the glacial history and ice-age humans in northern Russia. 24th Nordic geological winter meeting, Trondheim, Norway, 6-9 January 2000, Geonytt 1-2000, 115.

120 Maslenikova, O., Astakhov, V., Mangerud, J. & Henriksen, M. 2000: Limnic and fluvial formations along Markhida Line in eastern Pechora Basin. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 4th workshop, Lund, Sweden, 7-10 April 2000. Svendsen, J.I. and co-workers of the EU project Eurasian Ice Sheet 2000: Age and extent of the ice sheets in the Eurasian Arctic – conflicting observations. Quaternary Environment of the Eurasian North (QUEEN), 4th workshop, Lund, Sweden, 7-10 April 2000. D: Theses Master’s Degrees: Finnekås, T. 1998: Pollenstratigrafiske undersøkelser og korrelasjoner av to sen-kvartære perioder i Pechora- bassenget, Nord-Russland. Cand. scient. thesis, Department of Geology, University of Bergen, 57 pp. Halvorsen, L.S. 2000: Palaeovegetation and environment during Weichselian stadials and interstadials at Mamontovaya Kurja and Sokolova in the Pechora basin, northern Russia. Cand. scient. thesis, Department of Botany, University of Bergen, 68 pp. Henriksen, M. 1998: Sedimentologi og stratigrafi av interglasiale og glasiale avsetninger i Hongurei, Nord- Russland. Cand. scient. thesis, Department of Geology, University of Bergen, 102 pp. Linge, H.C. 1996: Uranseriedatering av bivalver, kalkalger og torv fra noen arktiske lokaliteter. Cand. scient. thesis, Department of Geology, University of Bergen, 112 pp.

Doctoral degrees: Tveranger, J. 1995: The last interglacial-glacial cycle in East Greenland and northern Russia. Dr. scient. thesis, Department of Geology, University of Bergen, 86 pp. E: Other dissemination of project results Jubilee exhibition at the University of Bergen 1996: At the exibition that was arranged to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the University of Bergen, the Pechora project was representing the joint contribution from the faculty of Humanities and the faculty of Science. Svein Indrelid was the coordinator from the faculty of Humanities, Anne Karin Hufthammer from the faculty of Science.

 Articles/reportages from the project in news papers Bergens Tidende 06.09.94: "Mammutfunn gir ny kunnskap om bosetning" by Norman Kirkeeide. Bergens Arbeiderblad (BA) 15.03.95: "Kjempe-tann til Bergen" by Morten Wanvik. Bergens Tidende 10.10.95: "Mammut-baby fra istids-Russland" by Sidsel Hamre Dagsland. Bergens Tidende 1995: "Norsk-russisk sensasjonsfunn" by Sidsel Hamre Dagsland. Aftenposten 24.03.96: "De snur opp ned på bildet av istiden" by Morten Falck Die Zeitung July/August 1996: "Kratzer auf dem Stossbahn - Frühmensschen lebten in der letzten Eiszeit weiter nördlich als bislang vermutet wurde" by Hinrich Bäsermann.

 Articles/reportages from the project in other magazines University of Bergen Magazine 5/1993: "Naturens tause språk gir ny kunnskap om miljøet i Barents-regionen siste 150.000 år" by Knut Olav Almås. University of Bergen Magazine 2/1994: "Mammutbaby i bytte mot kopimaskin" University of Bergen Magazine, Autumn 1994: "The mammoth - younger than we thought" by Knut Olav Åmås. TELL`US science in Norway (news from the Research Council of Norway), vol. 3 (1) 1996: "A mammoth project" by Håvard Simonsen. Jörn Thiede & Jan Mangerud 1999: New map revises extent of last ice sheet over Barents and Kara Seas. EOS, Transactions, American Geophysical Union 80 (42), October 19, 1999.

 Presentations of results in television and radio programs TV program, Norwegian Broadcasting Cooperation, Channel 1, 02.09 1998: 30 minutes interview with Prof. Jan Mangerud in the program "Meeting place".

121 Broadcasting in radio, Norwegian Broadcasting Cooperation, Program 2 (P2), 27.12 (1205-1235) and 29.12 (1403-1433) 1998: Interview with the Norwegian project participants in the popular science program series "Verdt å vite". Reportage about the Russian-Norwegian project in the Komi TV, Syktyvkar, Russia. 14 February 1997. Reportage in TV from Naryan Mar, Russia from the field investigations in northern Russia, July 1996. Reportage in TV from Pechora Town from the field investigations in Byzovaya, northern Russia, June 1997. Reportage in TV from Pechora Town from the field investigations in Byzovaya, northern Russia, August 2000.

120398/730 The Nansen Fellowship List of publications of Nansen fellowship PhD Students (1995 – 2000) Refereed journals Johannessen O.M., Espedal H.A., Furevik B., Akimov D., Jenkins A. COASTWATCH: Integrating satellite SAR operational system for monitoring coastal currents, wind, surfactants and oil spills. EuroGOOS Conference, Rome, March 1999, Elsevier Oceanography Series- in press. Kondrayev, K.Ya., D.V. Pozdnyakov and L.H. Pettersson, 1998: Water quality remote sensing in the visible. International Journal of Remote Sensing, Vol. 19, no. 5, pp.957-979. Pozdnyakov D. V., Lyaskovsky A. V. A model study of adequacy of some case II water quality retrieval algorithms suggested for inland and marine coastal waters. Earth Obs. Rem. Sens. N 1, pp. 70-78, 1999. (in Russian). Pozdnyakov D. V., Lyaskovsky A. V., Tanis F., Lyzenga D. Investigation of the Optical Properties of Saginaw Bay Waters: Solutions to Forward and Inverse Problems. Earth Obs. from Space, N2, 2000, P. 43-51. VirolainenYa., A.V. Polyakov, Yu.M. Timofeyev. Errors in the simultaneous determining of a series of atmospheric minor gases from ground-based measurements of thermal irradiation: Izvestiya Russian Academy of Science, Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics, Vol.35, No.2, 1999, pp. 195-200. Zabolotskikh E.V., Leonid M. Mitnik, Leonid P. Bobylev, Ola M. Johannessen: Development and validation Sea Surface Wind Speed Retrieval algorithms, using SSM/I Data, neural networks and some physical limitations. Earth Obs. Rem.Sens. Vol.2. pp. 61 - 71, 2000. Book contributions (only partly due to the project) Pozdnyakov D.V. Environmental Remote Sensing: Radiative Transfer in the Water Body - Atmosphere System. St. Petersburg: Electro-technical University of St. Petersburg Publ. 1996. 70 p. Kondratyev K.Ya., Finlatov N.N., Johannessen O.M., Melentyev V.V., Pozdnyakov D., Ryanzhin S., Shalina E., Tikhomirov A. Limnology and Remote Sensing: a contemporary approach. Praxis, Great Britain, 1999. 406 p. Other Journals Poberovsky A.V., Mironenkov A.V., Makarova M.V. Ground-based spectroscopic measurements of total amounts of atmospheric CH4, CO, N2O. Optical Journal. N 5, 1998, pp. 359 – 361, in Russian. Pozdnyakov D.V., Lyaskovsky A.V., Bouznikov A.A. A study of the robustness of the most promising water quality biooptical retrieval algorithms for Lake Ladoga using simulated SeaWiFS data. In: Lake Ladoga. Nick Filatov Ed., Petrozavodsk: Karelian Scientific Centre, 2000, pp. 453 – 463. Samsonov I.V., Troyan V.N, Bobylev L.P., Johannessen O.M., Application of Computerized Tomography Algorithms for Microwave Remote Sounding of Convective Clouds. “Vestnik SpbGU” (Journal of Saint-Petersburg State University), series 4, issue 4, N 45, 1999 (in Russian). VirolainenYa., A.V. Polyakov. Line-by-line technique for the computation of transmission function in ground-based atmospheric sounding. “Vestnik SpbGU” (Journal of Saint-Petersburg State University), series 1, issue 4, pp.25-32, 1999 (in Russian). Conference Proceedings Akimov D., Johannessen O., Mitnik L., Volkov V. ERS SAR imagery of outflow fronts in the Ob-Yenisey shallow region. Proc. Int. Symposium “Atmospheric radiation’99”. 12-15.07.99. St. Petersburg State University. Russia, p.131.

122 Akimov D.V., Ola M. Johannessen, Leonid M. Mitnik, Vladimir A. Volkov, "Satellite Radar Signatures of Fronts in the Ob and Yenisey Estuaries in the Kara Sea", Proc. IGARSS-99, Hamburg, 28 June-2 July 1999, pp.2542-2544. Johannessen O.M., H.Espedal, Akimov D. “COASTWATCH’95: Modelling of Ocean Fronts Imaged by SAR. Proc. IGARSS-99, Hamburg, 28 June-2 July 1999, pp.1957-1959. Akimov D.B., Johanessenn O.M., Mitnik L.M., Volkov V.A. Validation of the ERIM model for ocean surface radar imaging using ERS SAR data and in situ measurements near current fronts. In abstracts from International Radiation Symposium: Current problems in Atmospheric Radiation- IRS’2000, St. Petersburg, July, 24-29, 2000. p.214. Sandven S., Johannessen O.M., Lundhaug M., Dalen Ø., Solhaug J., Kloster K., Alexandrov V., Melentyev V., Bogdanov A. Sea ice studies using RADARSAT SAR in the Eurasian Arctic. ADRO Symposium, Montreal, 1998. Sandven S., Lundhaug M., Dalen O., Solhaug J., Kloster K., Alexandrov V., Melentyev V., Bogdanov A. Sea ice investigations in the Laptev Sea using RADARSAT ScanSAR data - In Proc.IGARSS’98, Seattle, USA. Alexandrov V., Bobylev L., Bogdanov A., Zaitsev L., Sandven S., Johanessen O., Pettersson L. Application of spaceborn SAR for the investigation of sea ice cover in the Arctic. Proc. Int. Symposium “Atmospheric radiation’99”. 12-15.07.99. St. Petersburg State University. Russia, pp.111-112. Bogdanov A.V., Stein Sandven , Ola M. Johannessen, Vitaly Yu. Alexandrov. Automatic Classification of RADARSAT SAR Images of the Northern Sea Route. Proc. IGARSS’99, Hamburg, Germany, pp.1028- 1030. Johannessen O.M., Alexandrov V.Yu., Sandven S., Pettersson L.H., Bobylev L.P., Khizhnichenko V.M., Volkov A.M., Lundhaug M., Dalen O., Kloster K., Bogdanov A.V., Zaitsev L.V. Synergestic use of RADARSAT, ERS and «Okean» Radar Images for Sea Ice Studies in the Northern Sea Route. Proc. IGARSS’99, Hamburg, Germany, pp.1570-1572. Alexandrov V., Sandven S., Lundhaug M., Dalen O., Bogdanov A., Kloster K. – Analysis of winter sea ice in the Kara Sea region using SAR data and field observations- POAC’99, 1999 Helsinki, Finland. Volume 1, pp. 181-190. Bogdanov A.V., Sandven S., Johannessen O.M., Alexandrov V.Yu. Automatic Classification of sea ice using RADARSAT and ERS SAR Images. In abstracts from International Radiation Symposium: Current problems in Atmospheric Radiation- IRS’2000, St. Petersburg, July, 24-29, 2000, p.215. Donchenko V.V., Goltsova N.I., Bobylev L.P., Johannessen O.M., Kritsuk S.G., Pitulko V.M. Synergistic Use of ERS-1/SAR and other Satellite Data for the Polluted Areas Identification for Boreal Forests of St. Petersburg Region. In Proc. 3rd ERS Symp. on “Space at the Service of our Environment”, Florence, Italy, 17-21 March 1997 (ESA SP-414,3 Vols., May 1997), pp. 369-375. Johannessen O.M., Petterssen L.H., Sandven S., Kloster K., Ionov D.V., Timofeev Yu.M., Bobylev L.P., Melentyev V.V., Donchenko V.V., Ionov V.V., Shalamiansky A.M. Environmental Monitoring of the St.Petersburg Region Using ERS Data (AO2. No. 109). In Proc. 3rd ERS Symp. on “Space at the Service of our Environment”, Florence, Italy, 17-21 March 1997 (ESA SP-414, 3 Vols., May 1997), pp. 325-330. Donchenko V.V., Goltsova N.I., Bobylev L.P., Johannessen O.M., Kritsuk S.G., Pitulko V.M. Synergistic use of ERS-1/SAR and other satellite data to monitor damaged areas of boreal forests for the St. Petersburg Region. Proceedings of the 27th International Symposium on Remote Sensing of the Environment, June 8 -12, 1998, Tromsø, Norway. pp. 640 –643. Dontchenko V.V., Ola M. Johannessen, Leonid P. Bobylev, Sergey A. Bartalev . ERS/SAR data application for Russian boreal forests mapping and monitoring. Proc.IGARSS’99, pp.311-314. Dontchenko V.V., Ola M. Johannessen, Leonid P. Bobylev, Sergey A. Bartalev , Sergey V. Maksimov. Russian boreal forests mapping and monitoring by ERS/SAR data application . Proc. Int. Symposium “Atmospheric radiation’99”. 12-15.07.99. St. Petersburg State University. Russia, pp.113-114. Donchenko V.V., Bobylev L.P., Johanessenn O.M., Bartalev S.A., Maksimov S.V. ERS/JERS-SAR Multitemporal Data Application for Russian Boreal Forests Regional Monitoring – Case Study for Hot- Spot Areas in North-Western Russia and Siberia. In proceedings (CD-ROM) from ISRSE’2000, Cape Town, South Africa, 27-31. March, 2000. Donchenko V.V., Bobylev L.P., Maksimov S.V., Johannessen O.M., Bartalev S.A., ERS/JERS-SAR Multitemporal Data Application for land and forest type classification in Boreal zone of Russia. In abstracts from International Radiation Symposium: Current problems in Atmospheric Radiation- IRS’2000, St. Petersburg, July, 24-29, 2000, p.215.

123 Melentyev, V.V., O.M. Johannessen, L.P. Bobylev, O.G. Doncenko, Siberian frozen soil parameters and their modification: remote sensing using passive microwave and Radar satellite data. In abstracts from International Radiation Symposium: Current problems in Atmospheric Radiation- IRS’2000, St. Petersburg, July, 24-29, 2000, p.20-21. Johannessen O.M., Sagen H., Sandven S., Hobaek H., Hasselmann K., Maier-Reimer E., Mikolajevicz U., Wadhams P., Kaletzky A., Bobylev L., Evert E., Troyan V., Esipov I., Naugolnykh K. Acoustic Monitoring of Ocean Climate in the Arctic (AMOC). Int. Symp. Acoustic Tomography and Acoustic Thermometry. 8.9.02.1999. Tokyo, 10.02.1999, Yokosuka, Japan. Pp.132-145. Johannessen O.M., Sagen H., Sandven S., Hobaek H., Hasselmann K., Maier-Reimer E., Mikolajevicz U., Soldatov V., Bobylev L., Evert E., Wadhams P., Kaletzky A., Esipov I., Naugolnykh K. Acoustic Monitoring of Ocean Climate in the Arctic (AMOC). Proc. 5th European Conf. On Underwater Acoustics, ECUA’2000, Lyon, France, pp. 1297-1303. Kotova L.A., Espedal H.A., Johannessen O.M. Oil spill detection using spaceborne SAR; a brief review. Proceedings of the 27th International Symposium on Remote Sensing of the Environment, June 8 -12, 1998, Tromsø, Norway. pp. 791-794. Kotova L., Espedal H., Johannessen O. Oil spill monitoring by means of SAR. Proc. Int. Symposium “Atmospheric radiation’99”. 12-15.07.99. St. Petersburg State University. Russia,, pp.112-113. Kotova L.A., Espedal H.A., Johannessen O.M. Oil Spill Study based on Satellite Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data. In proceedings (CD-ROM) from ISRSE’2000, Cape Town, South Africa, 27-31. March, 2000. Kotova L.A., Espedal H.A., Johannessen O.M. Oil Spill Study based on Satellite Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data. In abstracts from International Radiation Symposium: Current problems in Atmospheric Radiation- IRS’2000, St. Petersburg, July, 24-29, 2000, p.216. Alekseev G.V., Johannessen O.M., Korablev A.A., Ivanov V.V., Kovalevsky D.V. Interannual variability of water mass in the Greenland Sea and the adjacent areas. Proc. of H.U. Sverdrup Symposium The role of ocean / sea ice / atmosphere interaction in polar and sub-polar climate Tromsø, Norway, 21-24 September 2000 – Abstract. Kovalevsky D.V., Alekseev G.V., Johannessen. Deep convection in the Greenland Sea: an analytical model applicable to various timescales. Proc. of H.U. Sverdrup Symposium - The role of ocean / sea ice / atmosphere interaction in polar and sub-polar climate Tromsø, Norway, 21-24 September 2000 – Abstract. Pozdnyakov D.V., Liaskovski A.V., Tanis. F.J. A comparative assessment of water quality retrieval algorithms for SeaWiFS data processing. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Remote Sensing for Marine and Coastal Environments, San Diego, California, USA, October 5-7th, 1998, pp.142-149. Pozdnyakov D.V., Lyaskovsky A.V. 1999. Numerical modelling of spectral variability of the water leaving radiance in the visible for inverse problem solution: implications for remote sensing. Proc. Int. Symposium “Atmospheric radiation’99”. 12-15.07.99. St. Petersburg State University. Russia, pp. 103 – 104. Lyaskovsky A.V., Shuchman R.A., Pozdnyakov D.V., Wackerman C.C., Tanis F.J., Pettersson L.H. Comparison of Forward Modeling of Apparent Hydrooptical Properties with In Situ Observations of Multi-spectral Data in Saginaw Bay: Water Quality Retrievals and Implications for SeaWiFS Data Proc. IGARSS’99, pp.1143-1145. Pozdnyakov D.V., Lyaskovsky A.V., Tanis F.J., and Lyzenga D.R. Modelling of apparent hydro-optical properties and retrievals of water quality in the Great Lakes for SeaWiFS: a comparison with in situ measurements. – Proc. IGARSS’99, pp.2742-2744. Pozdnyakov D., Lyaskovsky A., 1999. A model study of water quality retrieval algorithms for Lake Ladoga using simulated SeaWiFS data. The third International Lake Ladoga Symposium: Collection of summaries. Petrozavodsk: Joensuu Univ. Publ. p. 28. Pozdnyakov D.V. , Lyskovsky A. V., Shuchman R. A., Tanis F., Lyzenga D. Fluorescence of dissolved organics in Saginaw as evidenced in the measured upwelling radiance spectra: implications for the water color and accuracy of water quality retrievals. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Remote Sensing for Marine and Coastal Environments, May 1 - 3, 2000, Charleston, USA, p. 31-38 Pozdnaykov D.V., Bouznikov A.A., Lyaskovsky A.V. A model study of water quality retrieval algorithms for Lake Ladoga using simulated SeaWiFS data. In: Proc. 3rd International Lake Ladoga Symposium 1999. University of Joensuu, Publications of Karelian Institute No 129. Joensuu 2000, pp.344-351.

124 Pozdnyakov D.V., Lyaskovsky A.V., Shuchman R.A., Tanis F., Pettersson L.H. Transspectral and bottom albedo effects: implications for improvement of retrieval of inland and marine coastal water quality parameters from remote sensing data. In proceedings (CD-ROM) from ISRSE’2000, Cape Town, South Africa, 27-31. March, 2000. Pozdnyakov D.V., Lyaskovsky A.V., Shuchman R., Tanis F., Pettersson L.H.: Numerical simulations of trans-spectral processes in clear and turbid waters: Implications for water quality remote sensing in the visible spectrum. In abstracts from International Radiation Symposium: Current problems in Atmospheric Radiation- IRS’2000, St. Petersburg, July, 24-29, 2000, p .214. Makarova M.V., A.V. Poberovki. Study of atmospheric gaseous composition by spectroscopic method. Proc. Int. Symposium “Atmospheric radiation’99”. 12-15.07.99. St. Petersburg State University. Russia, p.116. Makarova M.V. Poberovsky A.V., Yu.M. Timofeev, Grassl H. Ground-based spectroscopic observations of atmospheric trace gases near St.Petersburg. In abstracts from International Radiation Symposium: Current problems in Atmospheric Radiation- IRS’2000, St. Petersburg, July, 24-29, 2000, p.241. Stepanov A., O.Johannessen, O.Tzvetkov, V.Tishkov, B.Belyaev, V.Domkin., A.Osokina, V.Plekhov, V.Mukhin, K.Bobylev. Isotopic Composition and Concentration of Plutonium in Bottom Sediments of the Greenland and Norwegian Seas. The 4th International Conference on Environmental Radioactivity in the Arctic, September’99, pp.20-23; Stepanov A., Ola Johannessen. Oleg Tsvetkov, Victor Tishkov, Boris Belyaev, Vitali Domkin, Anna Osokina, Vadim Plekhov, Victor Mukhin and Kirill Bobylev. “Isotopic composition and concentration of plutonium in bottom sediments in some regions of the Spitsbergen Archipelago”. In: PACON-99, Moscow, Russia, June 23-25, 1999, abstracts, p.348. Tishkov V., Yuri Panteleev, Ludmila Ivanova, Zigfrid Gritchenko, Natalia Tishkova, Vitali Gavrilov, Andrey Stepanov, Anna Osokina, Vadim Plekhov, Tatiana Orlova, Alexander Konopatkin and Mark Belenki. “Monitoring system of radioactive contamination of the Baltic Sea”. In: PACON-99, Moscow, Russia, June 23-25, 1999, abstracts, p.351. Bobylev L.P., Samsonov I.V., Troyan V.N, Johannessen O.M., Shuchman R.A. A computerized tomography approach for microwave remote sounding of convective clouds. Proceedings of the 27th International Symposium on Remote Sensing of the Environment, June 8 -12, 1998, Tromsø, Norway. pp. 379-382. Samsonov I., Bobylev L., Troyan V., Johannessen O. Method of microwave tomography recon-struction of the cumulonimbus cloud’s internal structure. Proc. Int. Symposium “Atmospheric radiation’99”. 12- 15.07.99. St.Petersburg State University. Russia, pp. 129-130. Bobylev L.P., Samsonov I.V., Troyan V.N., Johannessen O.M. Tomographic Reconstruction of Internal Structure of Severe Convective Clouds by Microwaves. In proceedings (CD-ROM) from ISRSE’2000, Cape Town, South Africa, 27-31. March, 2000. Samsonov, I.V., L.P. Bobyelev, V.N. Troyan, O.M. Johannessen, An algorithm for microwave remote sensing of convective clouds based on neural networks and computerised tomography. In: In abstracts from International Radiation Symposium: Current problems in Atmospheric Radiation- IRS’2000, St. Petersburg, July, 24-29, 2000, p.203. Soldatov V., Haak H., Mikolajewicz U. Simulation of the Arctic Ice-Ocean climate system model with Hamburg Ocean Model. In: XXV EGS General Assembly 2000. Geophysical Research Abstracts, Vol.2. Virolainen Ya.A, Polyakov A.V., Timofeyev Yu.M., Grassl H. The Possibilities of Atmosphere Ground- based Remote Sensing in IR Spectral Region. Proc. Int. Symposium “Atmospheric radiation’99”. 12- 15.07.99. St. Petersburg State University. Russia, pp.114-115 Virolainen Ya.A, Polyakov A.V., Timofeyev Yu.M.,Grassl H.,Spaenkuch D., Doechler W., Gueldner J. Ground-based thermal in interferometry as the source of information on different atmospheric parameters. In abstracts from International Radiation Symposium: Current problems in Atmospheric Radiation- IRS’2000, St. Petersburg, July, 24-29, 2000, p. 190 Bobylev, L.P., Mitnik L.M., Mitnik M.L., Zabolotskikh E.V., Timofeev Yu. M., Johannessen O.M. Microwave remote sounding of atmosphere-ocean system using Neural Network approach. Proceedings of the 27th International Symposium on Remote Sensing of the Environment, June 8 -12, 1998, Tromsø, Norway. pp. 312-315. Mitnik L.M., M.L. Mitnik, K.-S. Chen, J.-T. Wang and E. Zabolotskikh. SSM/I-derived fields of water vapor, cloud liquid water and surface wind over the SCSMEX area: relation with precipitation pattern. PIERS'99, 22-25 March 1999, Taipei, Taiwan.

125 Zabolotskikh, E.V., Leonid M. Mitnik, Leonid P. Bobylev, Ola M. Johannessen Neural Networks Based Algorithms for Sea Surface Wind Speed Retrieval Using SSM/I Data and Their Validation. Proc. IGARSS’99, Hamburg, Germany, pp.1010-1013. Zabolotskikh L., Bobylev L., Mitnik L., Johannessen O. Ocean Winds Retrieved from SSM/I Data Using Neural Networks Based Algorithms. Proc. Int. Symposium “Atmospheric radiation’99”. 12-15.07.99. St. Petersburg State University. Russia, pp.101-102. Zabolotskikh E.V., Bobylev L.P., Mitnik L. M., Timofeev Y. M., Johannessen O. M. Neural networks algorithms for passive microwave atmosphere-ocean system parameters retrieval. In proceedings (CD- ROM) from ISRSE’2000, Cape Town, South Africa, 27-31. March, 2000. Zabolotskikh E.V., Bobylev L.P., Mitnik L.M., Timofeev Yu.M., Johannessen O.M. Neural Networks Algorithms for Passive Microwave Atmosphere-Ocean System Parameters Retrieval. In abstracts from International Radiation Symposium: Current problems in Atmospheric Radiation- IRS’2000, St. Petersburg, July, 24-29, 2000, p.204 Zabolotskikh L., Bobylev L., Mitnik L., Johannessen O. Ocean Winds Retrieved from SSM/I Data Using Neural Networks Based Algorithms. Ocean Winds Workshop, IFREMER, Brest, France. 17 – 23 June 2000. Technical reports Arapov P.P. Methodical manual for the forth-year students. Management faculty. The Saint-Petersburg State University. 1998. Stepanov A., Tishkov V., Bobylev K., Plekhov V., Osokina A. Improvement of the Baltic Sea Radioactive Contamination Monitoring System. Alpha Ltd, St. Petersburg, 1998. Sandven S., Kloster K., Lundhaug M., Dalen Ø, Alexandrov V., Melentyev V., Bogdanov A. SAR ice charting validation and assessment. Ice Routes Project Report, Contract WA-96-AM-1136, no. IR- NERSC-350-RP-001, v1.0, June 1998. Alexandrov V., Melentyev V.V., Bobylev L.P., Korotkevich O.E., Bogdanov A.V., Zaitsev L.V., Zemeszirks K. Satellite SAR ice charting and routing validation and assessment. NIERSC Technical Report no. 12. September 1998. Pettersson L., Sandven S., Dalen O., Melentyev V.V., Bogdanov A., Kloster K., Lundhaug M. Arctic demonstration and exploration Voyage (ARCDEV). NERSC technical Report no.167. Bergen, June 1, 1999. Sandven S., Alexandrov V., Bogdanov A. et al. IMSI. Development of new satellite ice data products. IMSI Report no x. NERSC Technical report., 1999 Donchenko, V.V., O.M. Johannessen, V.M. Pitulko, L.P. Bobylev and N.I. Goltsova: Extending Remote Sensing Techniques Developed in the Framework of the SAI Global Forest Monitoring Activities to the Monitoring of the Siberian Forests of Eurasia. NERSC Technical Report No. 139, 1997. Johannessen O., Alexeev G.V., Ivanov V.V., Korablev A.A., Kovalevsky D.V., Myakoshin O.I., Zakharov V.F. Ocanographic data analysis: Greenland Sea. Technical report on task 3. Grant INTAS 97-1277. St.Petersburg-Bergen, 2000. Grassl H., Gerdes J., Lampert W., Pozdnyakov D.V., Lyskovsky A. Einsatzmoglichkeiten der Satelliten- Fernerkundung in der Limnologie. DFG-Projekt, MPI, Humburg, Germany, 03 Mai 1999. PhD theses Bogdanov A.V.. Sea Ice Classification Using Spaceborne Synthetic Aperture Radar. Ph.D. Thesis. St.Petersburg State University. June 2000. Donchenko, V.V. On the evaluation of ecological parameters of Forest ecosystem, based on the complex of field bioindicators and remote sensing methods (example from Kingiset region, Leningrad oblast) (in Russian). Ph.D Thesis, St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, Russia, June 1998. Kotova, L.A., 1997: The complex method of oil spill detection on water surface (in Russian), Ph.D Thesis, St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, Russia, February, 1997 Lyskovsky A.V. Solution of forward and inverse problems relating to remote sensing of natural waters. Ph.D.Thesis. St.Petersburg Hydrometeorological University, June 2000. Virolainen Y.A. Infra-red Interphorometry of the Atmosphere. Ph.D. Thesis. St.Petersburg State University. June 2000.

126 Publications submitted or in press (per October, 2000) Kovalevsky D.V. On determination of parameters of deep convection from SAR images. - submitted to Methods and Techniques of Remote Sensing of Environment. Alexeev G.V., Johannessen O.M. Kovalevsky D. V. On the development of convective motions under the effect of local density perturbations at the sea surface -submitted to Izvestiya Russian Academy of Science, Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics. Pozdnyakov, D., A. Lyaskovsky, H. Grassl, L. Pettersson, 2000: Numerical modeling of transpectral processes in natural waters: implications for remote sensing. Accepted in Int. J. of Remote Sensing. Pozdnyakov D. V., Lyaskovsky A. V., Grassl H., Pettersson L. H. Numerical simulations of transspectral interactions (TI) of light with aquatic medium. I. Impact of TI on the spectral distribution of upwelling radiance. - submitted to Earth Obs. Rem. Sens. Pozdnyakov D. V., Lyaskovsky A. V., Grassl H., Pettersson L. H. Numerical simulations of transspectral interactions (TI) of light with aquatic medium. II. Impact of TI on the accuracy of water quality retrievals. - submitted to Earth Obs. Rem. Sens. Pozdnyakov D. V., Lyaskovsky A. V., Grassl H., Pettersson L. H. Numerical modeling of trasspectral processes in natural waters: implications for remote sensing. - submitted to Int. J. Rem. Sens. Makarova M. Methane total column amount time series near St. Petersburg – submitted to Izvestiya Russian Academy of Science, Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics Makarova M. Intercomparison of ground-based spectroscopic measurements of methane total content in the atmosphere” are submitted to the Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics – submitted to Izvestiya Russian Academy of Science, Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics Donchenko V.V., Maximov S., Bobylev L.P., Johannessen O., Bartalev S. A. ERS/JERS SAR Data Application for Russian Boreal Forests Mapping and Monitoring. Proc. of ERS - ENVISAT Symposium: Looking Down to Earth in the New Millennium, 16 - 20 October, 2000, Gothenburg, Sweden. Alexandrov V.Y., Sandven S., Johannessen O.M., Filatov N.N., Bogdanov A.V., Alexandrov M.V. Sea and Lake Ice Studies in the Northwestern Russia Using ERS SAR and other Satellite Data. Proc. of ERS - ENVISAT Symposium: Looking Down to Earth in the New Millennium, 16 - 20 October, 2000, Gothenburg, Sweden. Pozdnyakov D.V., Lyskovsky A. V., Shuchman R. A., Tanis F., Lyzenga D. Fluorescence of dissolved organics in Saginaw as evidenced in the measured upwelling radiance spectra: implications for the water color and accuracy of water quality retrievals. – submitted to PORSEC’2000, December 5-8, 2000, Goa, India

123433/730 Arctic Engineering and Environmental Technology Related to Petroleum Exploitation Books/Compendia Løset, S., K. Shkhinek and K. V. Høyland (1998): Ice Physics and Mechanics. NTNU, Department of Structural Engineering, Trondheim, 125 p. Gudmestad, O. T., A. B. Zolotukhin, A. I. Ermakov, R. A. Jakobsen, I. T. Michtchenko, V. S. Vovk, S. Løset and K. N. Shkhinek (1998): Basics of Offshore Petroleum Engineering and Development of Marine Facilities - With Emphasis on the Arctic Offshore. Stavanger, Moscow, St. Petersburg, Trondheim, December 1998, 492 p. Gudmestad, O. T., A. B. Zolotukhin, A. I. Ermakov, R. A. Jakobsen, I. T. Michtchenko, V. S. Vovk, S. Løset and K. Shkhinek (1998): Basics of Offshore Petroleum Engineering and Development of Marine Facilities - With Emphasis on the Arctic Offshore. Stavanger, Moscow, St. Petersburg, Trondheim, December 1998, 492 p. (Russian translation) Løset, S., K. N. Shkhinek and E. Uvarova (1999): Ice Loads on Offshore Structures. NTNU, Department of Structural Engineering, Trondheim, (in preparation). Articles in International Refereed Journals Løset, S., K. Shkhinek, O. T. Gudmestad, P. Strass, E. B. Michalenko, R. Frederking and T. Kärnä (1997): Comparison of Environmental Conditions of Some Arctic Seas. Journal of Navigation and Hydrography, Vol. 4, 1997, pp. 29-38 (English), pp. 39-49 (Russian).

127 Løset, S., K. Shkhinek, O. T. Gudmestad, P. Strass, E. B. Michalenko, R. Frederking and T. Kärnä (1999): Comparison of the Physical Environment of Some Arctic Seas. Cold Regions Science and Technology, Vol. (29)3, pp. 201-214. Refereed Conference Papers Shkhinek, K., T. Kärnä, O. T. Gudmestad, S. Løset, A. Bolshev, S. Mischenko, E. Chasovskih, E. Lehmus and P. Strass (1997): Potential Structures for the Russian Arctic Offshore. Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Yokohama, 13-18 April 1997, Vol. IV, pp. 183-190. Løset, S., K. Shkhinek, P. Strass, O. T. Gudmestad, E. B. Michalenko and T. Kärnä (1997): Ice Conditions in the Barents and Kara Seas. Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Yokohama, 13-18 April 1997, Vol. IV, pp. 173-181. Strass, P., S. Løset, K. Shkhinek, O. T. Gudmestad, T. Kärnä and E. B. Michalenko (1997): Metocean Parameters of the Barents and Kara Seas - An Overview. Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Yokohama, 13-18 April 1997, Vol. IV, pp. 165-172. Løset, S., K. Shkhinek, O. T. Gudmestad, P. Strass, E. B. Michalenko, R. Frederking and T. Kärnä (1997): Comparison of Environmental Conditions of Some Arctic Seas. Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference Development of the Russian Arctic Offshore (RAO‘97), St. Petersburg, September 23-26, 1997, Vol. II, pp. 3-9. Kärnä, T., K. Shkhinek, A. Bolshev, S. Rogachko, E. Evdokimov and S. Løset (1997): Development of Models for First-Year Ice Loads. Proceeding of the 3rd International Conference Development of the Russian Arctic Offshore (RAO‘97), St. Petersburg, September 23-26, 1997, Vol. II, pp. 205-212. Løset, S., K. Shkhinek and E. Uvarova (1999): An Overview of the Influence of Structure Width and Ice Thickness on the Global Ice Load. The 15th International Conference on Port and Ocean Engineering under Arctic Conditions (POAC), Helsinki, Vol. 1, pp. 425-434.

Social science projects

Project (110191/730 and 120461/730):Integration and nation building in post-soviet societies. A. Books, reports and articles directly related to the project. Pål Kolstø og Irina Malkova. 'Is Kazakhstan being Kazakhified?', Analysis of Current Events, vol. 9, no. 11 (November 1997), pp. 1 & 3-4. Aina Antane og Boris Tsilevich: Latvia: model’ etnicheskogo monitoringa. Moscow: Institut etnologii i antropologii RAN, 1997, 74 pages plus appendix Pål Kolstø and Boris Tsilevich ‘Bulletin of Electoral Statistics and Public Opinion Research Data: Patterns of Nation Building and Political Integration in a Bifurcated Postcommunist State: Ethnic Aspects of Parliamentary Elections in Latvia’, East European Politics and Societies, vol. 11, no. 2 (Spring 1997), pp. 366-391. Jørn Holm-Hansen,. Territorial and ethno-cultural self-government in nation-building Kazakhstan, Norwegian Institute for Urban and Regional Research, Report 1997:7., 100 pages. Irina Malkova, ‘Analiticheskii otchet po rezul’tatam issledovaniia na temu “Osobennosti natsional’nogo stroitel’stva i problemy sozdaniia edinogo gosudarstva v bikul’turnykh obshchestvakh”’ (Almaty: Institut Gillera, 1996), 77 + 28 pages. Pål Kolstø, 'Anticipating Demographic Superiority. Kazakh Thinking On Integration And Nation Building', Europe-Asia Studies, vol. 50, no. 1, (January 1998) pp. 51-68. Ainta Antane and Boris Tsilevich, ‘The problem of citizenship in Latvia’, in Magda Opalski, ed., Managing Diversity in Plural Societies. Minorities, Migration and Nation-building in Post-Communist Europe (Nepean, Ontario: Forum Eastern Europe, 1998),pp. 33-50. Nation-building and ethnic integration in post-Soviet societies. An investigation of Latvia and Kazakstan. Boulder, Colorado: Westview press, 1999. Nasjonsbygging. Russland og de nye statene i øst. (Nation-building: Russia and the new states to the east) Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. 1999, 354 pages.

128 Igor Munteanu, Social multipolarity in Moldova, Conflict Studies Research center, Royal Military academy Sandhurst, G80, November 1999, 38 pages Political construction sites. Nation-building in Russia and the post-Soviet States. 2000 Boulder, Colorado: Westview press 2000, 308 pages. Aleksei Semjonov, ‘Estonia: Nation Building and Integration. Political and legal Aspects.’ Copenhagen Peace Research Institute (COPRI), Working papers 8. 2000. 55 pages. Pål Kolstø, ed, Nation-building, integration and ethnic conflict in Estonia and Moldova, manuscript, Olso 2000, 357 pages. B. Reprts and articles in which the authors use work performed in the project. Boris Tsilevich: ‘Sem’ let spust’ia: Problemy i perspektivy integratsii obshchestva Latvii’, in: Galina Vitkovskaya: Problemy stanovleniia institutov grazhdanstva v postsovetskikh gosudarstvakh, Moscow: Moscow Carnegie Center, 1998, pp. 115-137. Raivo Vetik: Democratic multiculturalism: A new model of national integration, Mariehamn: Aland Islands Peace Institute, 2000, 52 pages. Pål Kolstø, 'Nation-building in the Former USSR', Journal of Democracy, vol. 7 no. 1 (January 1996), pp. 118-132 Pål Kolstø og Andrei Malgin, ‘The Transnistrian republic: A Case of politicized Regionalism’, Nationalities papers, vol. 26, no. 1, (March 1998) pp. 103-128. Pål Kolstø, 'Nation-building in the Former USSR', Journal of Democracy, vol. 7 no. 1 (January 1996), pp. 118-132. Pål Kolstø, ‘«Hunden som ikke gjødde». Hva skjedde med den hviterussiske nasjonalstatstanken?’, Nordisk Øst-forum, 1998, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 5-17. Pål Kolstø, 'Moldova og Transdnjestr', in Sven Gunnar Simonsen (ed.) Konflikter i OSSE-området, PRIO 1997, pp. 75-86, Boris Tsilevich, Civil Society and Nationalism in Latvia. In: Lars Nyholm (ed.). OSCE: A Need for Cooperation. Towards the OSCE's Common and Comprehensive Security Model for Europe for the Twenty-First Century. Copenhagen: Danish UN Association, 1997, pp.86-98. http://www.una.dk/osce/essays/pdf/tsilevich.pdf Boris Tsilevich, Democratic Challenge in the Baltics. Speaking about Rights - Canadian Human Rights Foundation Newsletter,Montreal, vol.XIV, No.2, 1999, pp.8 –9 http://www.greekhelsinki.gr/english/articles/chrf-sar99-2-Tsilevic.html Pål Kolstø, ’Territorialising Diasporas: The Case of Russians in the Former Soviet Republics’, Millennium– Journal of International Studies, 1999. ISSN 0305-8298. Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 607-631. Alla Skvortsova: (editor), The Centre for Human Rights of Moldova, Chisinau: Bastina, 1999, 34 pages. (in Romanian, Russian, and English) Alla Skvortsova, ‘On the Ways to the Civil Peace in Moldova’, in Ethnic Relations in the Republic of Moldova and the Ways for their Optimisation, Kishinev: 1999, pp.35-43. (In Russian) Alla Skvortsova, ‘Ethnic Identities and the Problems of Inter-Ethnic Integration in Moldova’, in Ethnic Mobilization and Inter-ethnic Integration: Sources, Factors, Horizonts, Chisinau: Departmentul relatiilor nationale, 1999, pp.17-20. (In Russian) Alla Skvortsova, ‘The Russians in Moldova’: in Ray Taras (ed.)Political Orientations, National Identities and Ethnic Minorities in Eastern Europe, London: Macmillan press, 1998, pp. 159-178 (in English). Alla Skvortsova, ‘Armonia etnica in Moldova: Perspective reale sau un vis irreal?’ (Ethnic Harmony in Moldova: a Real Prospective or Unrealistic Dream?), Arena Politicii, No.4(16), January 1998, P.17-18 (in Romanian). Alla Skvortsova, ‘Prava cheloveka dlia vsekh i usloviiakh etnicheskogo mnoroobraziia’, in Ramochnaia konventsiia o zashchite natsional’nykh men’shinstv: mekhanizm realiziatsii (Chisinau, 2000). pp. 63-77.

123995/730 Comparative Living Conditions Research in the Baltic States Knud Knudsen, Lithuania in a period of transition, Fafo report 186, Oslo 1996. Aadne Aasland (ed.), Latvia: The impact of the transformation, Fafo report 188, Oslo 1996. Jens B. Grøgaard (ed.), Estonia in the Grip of Change. Fafo report 190, Oslo 1996. Aadne Aasland, Knud Knudsen, Dagmar Kutsar and Ilze Trapenziere (eds.), The Baltic Countries Revisited: Living Conditions and Comparative challenges, Fafo report 230, 1997.

129 Aadne Aasland and Vida Cesnuityte, Living Conditions in the Baltic Countries Compared, Oslo, Fafo paper 15, 1997. Dagmar Kutsar, 'The New Market Economy: Consequences for Living Conditions in the Baltic States', in De Baltiske land – et 'nyt' norsk næromnråde? (Steen, Sellias, ed.), Oslo, 1998 (rapport). Aadne Aasland, 'Ethnicity and unemployment in the Baltic States', International Politics, 35: 353-370. Aadne Aasland and Tone Fløtten, 'Ethnicity, Poverty and Social Exclusion in Estonia and Latvia', Paper, Oslo 2000. Aadne Aasland and Guri Tyldum, 'Citizenship and social exclusion in Estonia and Latvia ', Paper, London 2000. Aadne Aasland and Guri Tyldum, 'Finding ways out of poverty', Paper, Girona, 2000. Dagmar Kutsar and Ene Margit Tiit, , ’Comparing Socio-Demographic Indicators in Estonia and the European Union’, in Appleton L (ed.), Spatio-Temporal Dimensions of Economic and Social Change in Europe. Cross-National Research Papers. 6th Series: Improving Policy Responses and Outcomes to Socio- Economic Challenges: Changing Family Structures, Policy and Practice. Loughborough University 2000: 27-34 Aadne Aasland and Guri Tyldum, Better or worse? Living conditions in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania 1994 - 1999, Fafo-report 334, Oslo 2000. Aadne Aasland, Ethnicity and poverty in Latvia, Ministry of Welfare of the Republic of Latvia, UNDP, Riga, 2000. Aadne Aasland and Guri Tyldum, The NORBALT Project: Comparative Studies of Living Conditions in the three Baltic Countries, Social Indicators Research 2001 (forthcoming). Questionnaire and interviewer manual for the NORBALT II survey. Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonian tabulation reports representing data an analyses from the NORBALT-II project. A number of newspaper articles

120461/730 Integration and Nation-building (…) The Cases of Estonia and Moldova Pål Kolstø and Boris Tsilevich. ‘Bulletin of Electoral Statistics and Public Opinion Research Data: Patterns of Nation Building and Political Integration in a Bifurcated Postcommunist State: Ethnic Aspects of Parliamentary Elections in Latvia’, East European Politics and Societies, vol. 11, no. 2 (Spring 1997), pp. 366-391. Pål Kolstø and Irina Malkova. 'Is Kazakhstan being Kazakhified?', Analysis of Current Events, vol. 9, no. 11 (November 1997), pp. 1 & 3-4. Pål Kolstø: Nation-building and ethnic integration in post-Soviet societies. An investigation of Latvia and Kazakstan. Boulder, Colorado: Westview press, 1999 . Pål Kolstø: Nasjonsbygging. Russland og de nye statene i øst. (Nation-building: Russia and the new states to the east) Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. 1999, 354 pages. Pål Kolstø, ed,Nation-building, integration and ethnic conflict in Estonia and Moldova, manuscript, Olso 2000, 357 pages Pål Kolstø, 'Anticipating Demographic Superiority. Kazakh Thinking On Integration And Nation Building', Europe-Asia Studies, vol. 50, no1, (January 1998) pp. 51-68. Golosov, "From Adygeya to Yaroslavl: Factors of Party Development in the Regions of Russia, 1995-1998", Europe-Asia Studies (Glasgow), Vol. 51, No. 8, December 1999, pp.1133-1165. Raivo Vetik, Inter-Ethnic Relations in Estonia 1988-1998, Tampere University Press 1999, 209 p. Raivo Vetik, ‘National Integration in Estonia: Ethnic and Regional Problems in a Transitional Society’, in Hedegaard, L. et al. (eds.). Yearbook of Northern European and Baltic Integration, Springer 1999 (together with Erik. E. Anderseniga). Raivo Vetik, ‘Global Human Development: modernization versus postmodernization, Estonian Human Development Report 1999. Raivo Vetik, ‘Estonian State and Society in the beginning of 21. Century’, Estonian Human Development Report 1999. Raivo Vetik, A model for democratic multiculturalism in Estonia, Proceedings of the Ahland Peace Research Institute, 1999, 65 p. Vetik & Lauristin, eds., 'Integration of the Estonian society: Monitoring 2000', Iloprint 2000, 70 p.

130 Semjonov, Aleksei: ”Estonia: Nation Building and Integration. Political and Legal Aspects.” COPRI, Working Papers 8, 2000. Semjonov, Aleksei, ”Citizenship and Legislation in Estonia: Implementation and the Population’s Response.” In G. Vitkovskaia (ed.), Problems of Establishing Citizenry in the Post-Soviet States. Moscow: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1998. A. Books and reports directly related to the project. Pål Kolstø og Irina Malkova. 'Is Kazakhstan being Kazakhified?', Analysis of Current Events, vol. 9, no. 11 (November 1997), pp. 1 & 3-4. Aina Antane og Boris Tsilevich: Latvia: model’ etnicheskogo monitoringa. Moscow: Institut etnologii i antropologii RAN, 1997, 74 pages plus appendix. B. Reports and articles based on work performed in the project. Boris Tsilevich: ‘Sem’ let spust’ia: Problemy i perspektivy integratsii obshchestva Latvii’, in: Galina Vitkovskaya: Problemy stanovleniia institutov grazhdanstva v postsovetskikh gosudarstvakh, Moscow: Moscow Carnegie Center, 1998, pp. 115-137. Raivo Vetik: Democratic multiculturalism: A new model of national integration, Mariehamn: Aland Islands Peace Institute, 2000, 52 pages. Five publications listed in the questionnaire of Munteanu (all seem to be authored by him alone and mainly seem to deal with Moldova)

120356/730 (02/97), Governance and Economic Development in Post- communist Russia Steen, Anton (forthcoming, 2000b): ‘Bastard-økonomi og konkurrance-oligarki: Eliter som problem og mulighet i dagens Russland’, in Baldersheim, H., Hagtveit, B, Heidar, K. (eds.), Statsvitenskapelige Utsyn. Politiske tema og tenkemåter i en oppbruddstid, Norwegian Academic Press/Høyskoleforlaget (16 pp.) ISBN 82-7634-333-3 Gelman, Vladimir and Steen, Anton (eds.) (forthcoming 2001): Elites and Political Development in Russia. Research Report Serie No.1/01. Department of Political Science. University of Oslo. (170 pp.) (Kapitler av: Gelman, Steen, Higley/Bayulgen/George, Golosov, Duka, Hughes, Blakkisrud, Holm-Hansen). Steen, Anton and Timofeev, Vsevolod (2001): Russian Federalism Between Unity and Regionalism: The role of the State Duma. Manuscript , submitted for publication in East European Constitutional Review. (13 pp.) Steen, Anton (2000a), ‘What kind of light in the end of the tunnel? Democratic norms, market orientations and political socialisation. A comparison of elites in Estonia. Latvia, Lithuania and Russia’, in Frentzel- Zagórska and Wasilewski (eds.), The Second Generation of Democratic Elites in Central and Eastern Europe, Warsaw: The Institute of Political Studies/The Polish Academy of Sciences, pp. 125-158. Steen, Anton (2000c), ‘Decision-making in Russia: From Hierarchy to Networks?’, paper presented at the ECPR Joint Session of Workshops (Workshop: The management of Decision-making in the Centre of Government in Eastern Europe and the CIS), Copenhagen, 14.-19. April (22 pp.) Steen, Anton (2000c), ‘Some Notes on Russian Elites and the Central Government Connection’, paper presented at the ECPR Joint Session of Workshops (Workshop: The management of Decision-making in the Centre of Government in Eastern Europe and the CIS), Copenhagen, 14.-19. April (5 pp.) Steen, Anton (2000d),‘’Competitive paternalism’: the answer to market meeting collectivism?’, paper presented at the seminar: The New Elites in Russia: Consequences for Democracy and Economic Reform, St. Petersburg: The Norwegian University Centre, September 7.-9. (18 pp.). Steen, Anton (2000e) ‘The question of Legitimacy: Elites and Political Support in Russia’, paper presented at the seminar: The New Elites in Russia: Consequences for Democracy and Economic Reform, St. Petersburg: The Norwegian University Centre, September 7.-9. (25 pp.). To be published in Europe Asia Studies, Vol. 53, Summer, 2001. Steen, Anton (1999), ‘Elites in Russia: Attitudes, Behaviour and Social Biography of Central and Regional Elites 1998’, Report with frequencies from the project: ‘Governance and Economic Development in Russia: The Role of the Elites’, University of Oslo: Department of Political Science (261 pp).

131 120469/730 (11/97), Modern Environmental Strategies and Single Enterprise Towns in Russia and Latvia Jørn Holm-Hansen (ed.), The use of environmental policy instruments in post-socialist single enterprise towns (manuscript), 126 p. Jørn Holm-Hansen: 'Actors and environmental policy instruments in a Latvian town', Paper from the EADI conference, Paris 22-25 September, 1999. 14 p. Birgit Jacobsen, Local Self-Government in Russia. A decade of change. NIBR Working paper, 1998:117, 28 pp. Feliks N. Yudakhin, Alexander N. Davydov and Andrei A. Ivanov, 'Environment and environmental policies in Koriazhma: A field report. Project note 1998:1. Silvia Sile and Raimonds Ernsteins, Environment and environmental policies in Preili: A field report. Project note 1998:2,m 10 pp. Jurii F. Lukin, Development of regional economy and society in Arkhangelsk region, (in Russian), Project note 1998:3, 44 pp. Jørn Holm-Hansen, Enterprises, environment and reforms after state socialism (including preliminary findings from Koriazhma, Preili, Novodvinsk and Ogre), Project note 1998:4, 58 pp.. Vera V. Marieva, Environment and environmental policies in Koriazhma - the legal framework (in Russian) , Project note 1999:1, 7 pp. Alexander N. Davydov and G.V. Mikhaylova, Environment and environmental policy in Koriazhma. The town, the river and the enterprise (in Russian), Project note 1999:2, 21 pp. Alexander N. Davydov and G.V. Mikhaylova, Environment and environmental policy in Koriazhma: Town, enterprise and ecological conflicts - elucidated by the local newspapers, (in Russian) Project note 1999:3, 20 pp. Raimunds Erndteins, Ainis Builevics, Silvia Sîle, Environmental policy, practices and instruments in Latvia, Preili, Project note 1999:3 Birgit Jacobsen, Enterprise, environment and political change in Koriazhma, Archangel, Project note 1999:5, 14 pp. Birgit Jacobsen, Enterprise, environment and political change Preili, Latvia, Project note 1999:6, 14 pp. Jørn Holm-Hansen, Municipal enterprises and the sector of environmental protection in a Latvian town (field report), Project note 1999:7.16 pp.

132 123388/730 (24/98), Cooperation within Research on Juridical, Political and Administrative Reforms in Russia Ivan Gololobov, Indra Overland ‘We’ Russians versus ‘Us’ Russians: patriotic discourse and electoral support in Krasnodar kray in ‘NUPI working papers’, August 2000. Rozina, Center — Region Relations: Case studies of Moscow and Sverdlovsk regions. Risnes, B and Louis Skyner (ed) (forthcoming) Moscow vs the Regions – Main trends in the contemporary legal and administrative developments. The compilation contains the following chapters: Risnes, Brynjulf: A battle of laws - The legal framework of centre-regional relations. Kuzmin, Aleksei: Regional administrative reforms in the Russian Federation in the 1990s – An approach to comparative analysis. Skyner, Louis: 'Political Conflict and Legislative Reform; the Development of the Federal Land Code.' Nechaev, Vladimir: 'Innovation and Tradition in the Reform of Local Government in Post Soviet Russia. Slatinov, Vladimir: 'The Practice of Legislative Regulation; Russia's State Service on the Federal and Regional Level' Neumann, Iver (forthcoming) "Yeltsin to Putin: Russia's Turn to Europe fails" in Mikael af Malmborg & Bo Stråth (eds.) Competing Europes Oxford: Berg (in press). Ovchinnikov, Boris (forthcoming): The urban-rural electoral cleavage in contemporary Russia. NUPI working paper.

123403/730 (28/98), Democratisation of Transition Societies www.democratisation.org 1998 (with Tomas Hellén and Sten Berglund) The Handbook of Political Change in Eastern Europe, Edward Elgar, London 2000 (with Terje Knutsen) Politics and Citizenship on the Eastern Baltic Seaboard. The Structuring of Democratic Politics from North-West Russia to Poland, Nordic Academic Press, Kristiansand 2001 (with Sten Berglund, Henri Vogt and Georgi Karasimeonov) Challenges to Democracy: Eastern Europe Ten Years after the Collapse of Communism, Edward Elgar, London

Medical science projects

120473/730 Acute Lung Injury and the L-Arginine/NO Pathway Articles Koizumi T, Hermo CI, Bjertnaes LJ, Banerjee M, Newman JH, Kubo K. Nitric oxide and nitroglycerin reversal of pulmonary vasoconstriction induced by alpha-activation during exercise. Am J Physiol 1996; 270: H875-H880. Bjertnaes LJ, Koizumi T, Newman JH. Inhaled nitric oxide reduces lung fluid filtration after endotoxin in awake sheep. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1998; 158: 1416-1423. Nedashkovsky EV, Kirov MY, Egorina EM, Sovershaev MA, Seredkina NE, Evgenov OV. Our experience with the SAPS II for assessment of the illness severity in patients with septic shock. Intensive Care Herald 1999; 2: 3-7. Evgenov OV, Hevrøy O, Bremnes KE, Bjertnaes LJ. Effect of aminoguanidine on lung fluid filtration after endotoxin in awake sheep. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000; 162: 465-470. Kirov MY, Evgenov OV, Egorina EM, Sovershaev MA, Bjertnaes LJ, Nedashkovsky EV. The first experience with continuous infusion of methylene blue in human septic shock. Intensive Care Herald 2000; 4: 28-30. Evgenov OV, Sager G, Bjertnaes LJ. Methylene blue reduces lung fluid filtration during the early phase of endotoxemia in awake sheep. Crit Care Med 2001; 29: 374-379. Evgenov OV, Sveinbjørnsson B, Bjertnaes LJ. Continuously infused methylene blue modulates the early cardiopulmonary response to endotoxin in awake sheep. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. Submitted.

133 Kirov MY, Evgenov OV, Evgenov NV, Egorina EM, Sovershaev MA, Sveinbjørnsson B, Nedashkovsky EV, Bjertnaes LJ. Infusion of methylene blue in human human septic shock: A pilot controlled randomized study. Crit Care Med. Submitted. Evgenov OV, Evgenov NV, Mollnes TE, Bjertnaes LJ. Methylene blue attenuates pulmonary edema and inhibits cyclooxygenase products in endotoxemic sheep. Eur Respir J. Prepared for submission. Kirov MY, Evgenov OV, Bjertnaes LJ. Combination of intravenous methylene blue and inhaled nitric oxide ameliorates endotoxin-induced lung injury in sheep. Crit Care Med. Prepared for submission. Koizumi T, Johnston D, Bjertnaes LJ, Banerjee MR, Newman JH, Shibamoto T, Kubo K. Effects of N-nitro- L-arginine pretreatment on the distribution of pulmonary vascular resistance and prostanoid production in endotoxemic awake sheep. Acta Anaesth Scand. Prepared for submission. Kutzsche S, Lyberg T, Bjertnaes L. The effect of adenosine on extravascular lung water content in endotoxemic pigs. Crit Care Med. Submitted. Bjertnaes LJ, McGuire R, Jodoin J, Salzman AL, Traber LD, Passerini DJ, Smith DJ, Szabo C, Traber DL. Nebulized NO/nucleophile adduct reduces pulmonary vascular resistance in mechanically ventilated septicemic sheep. Crit Care Med. Prepared for submission. Murakami K, Bjertnaes LJ, Cox R, Katahira J, Hawkins HK, Herndon DN, Traber LD, and Traber DL. Heparin Nebulization Attenuates Acute Lung Injury in Sepsis Following Smoke Inhalation in Sheep. J Clin Sciences . Prepared for submission. Bjertnaes LJ, Murakami K, McGuire R, Soejima K, Jodoin J, Harper D, Traber LD, Schmalstieg FC, Traber DL. Smoke Inhalation followed by Pneumonia: A New Ovine Sepsis Model. Crit Care Med. Manuscript proposal. Abstracts: Evgenov O, Begic A, Reiersen AL, Tveita T, Newman J, Bjertnaes L. Methylene blue modulates endotoxin- induced lung damage in awake sheep. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1995; 39 Suppl 105: 176. Evgenov OV, Begic A, Sager G, Bjertnaes LJ. Methylene blue reduces lung fluid filtration during the early phase of endotoxemia in awake sheep. In: Abstract book; 11th World Congress of Anesthesiologists; 1996 Apr 14-20; Sydney, Australia: D1125. Evgenov OV, Begic A, Hevrøy O, Bjertnaes LJ. Methylene blue modulates hemodynamics, gas exchange and lung fluid exchange during the early phase of endotoxemia in sheep. Intensive Care Herald 1996; 2-3: 74. Evgenov OV, Hevrøy O, Bjertnaes LJ. Effects of aminoguanidine on hemodynamics, lung fluid filtration and gas exchange in awake endotoxemic sheep. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1997; 41 Suppl 110: 175. Evgenov OV, Eliassen LK, Bjertnaes LJ. Methylene blue impairment of lung fluid filtration in awake endotoxemic sheep is due to inhibition of cyclooxygenase products. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1997; 41 Suppl 110: 174. Evgenov OV, Hevrøy O, Bjertnaes LJ. Effects of aminoguanidine in the late phase of endotoxemia in awake sheep. In: Abstract book; 11th Assembly of the Russian Federation of Anesthesiologists; 1997 June 18- 20; Omsk, Russia: 127. Bjertnaes LJ, Evgenov OV, Hevrøy O, Eskeland K. Effects of aminoguanidine on lung fluid filtration after endotoxin in awake sheep. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1999; 159: 3 Part 2: A597. Evgenov OV, Bjertnaes LJ. Aminoguanidine changes longitudinal pressure profile in pulmonary circulation of endotoxemic sheep. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1999; 43 Suppl 114: 110. Bjertnaes LJ, McGuire R, Jodoin J, Traber L, Schmalstieg F, Traber D. Evidence of lung inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) expression and NO production in a model of ovine hyperdynamic sepsis. The biology of nitric oxide, Stockholm, September 5-8, 1999. Bjertnaes LJ, McGuire R, et al. Inhaled nebulized nitric oxide nucleophile adduct selectively reduces pulmonary vascular resistance in awake mechanically ventilated septicemic sheep. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1999; 43 Suppl 114: 95. Kirov M, Evgenov O, Egorina E, Sovershaev M, Nedashkovsky E, Bjertnaes L. Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) predicts outcome in septic shock patients. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1999; 43 Suppl 114: 111. Kirov MY, Egorina EM, Evgenov OV, Sovershaev MA, Nedashkovsky EV. SAPS II and the prognosis in patients with septic shock. Bull Arkhangelsk State Med Acad 1999; 1: 25-26. Evgenov OV, Bjertnaes LJ. Aminoguanidine changes the longitudinal pressure profile in pulmonary circulation after endotoxin in sheep. NAForum 1999; 12 (3): 27.

134 Bjertnaes LJ, McGuire R, Salzman AL, et al. Inhaled NO/nucleophile adducts preferentially reduce pulmonary vascular resistance in awake septicemic sheep. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1999; 159 (no 3, part 2): 613. Brauer KI, Bjertnaes LJ, McGuire R, et al. Pyridoxylated hemoglobin polyethylene conjugate may diminish the effects of L-mono-methyl-arginine in septic sheep. Crit Care Med 1999; 27(1 Suppl): 304. Bjertnaes LJ, McGuire R, et al. Inhaled nebulized NO/nucleophile adducts selectively reduce pulmonary vascular resistance in awake septicemic sheep. Anesth Analg 1999; 88(2S): S134. Bjertnaes LJ, McGuire R, Soejima K, et al. Smoke inhalation followed by bronchial instillation of bacteria: A new ovine sepsis model. Shock 1999: 12 (Suppl): 54. Brauer KI, Bjertnaes LJ, McGuire R, et al. Pyridoxylated hemoglobin polyethylene conjugate may act interstitially to restore circulatory function in septic sheep. Shock 1999: 12 (Suppl): 46. Evgenov OV, Kirov MY, Egorina EM, Bjertnaes LJ. Human septic shock treated with continuous infusion of methylene blue: hemodynamic consequences. In: Abstract book; 12th World Congress of Anesthesiologists; 2000 June 4-9; Montreal, Canada: 274. Kirov MY, Evgenov OV, Nedashkovsky EV, Bjertnaes LJ. Continuous infusion of methylene blue in human septic shock: impact on selected organ function indices. In: Abstract book; 12th World Congress of Anesthesiologists; 2000 June 4-9; Montreal, Canada: 285. Kirov MY, Evgenov OV, Egorina EM, Sovershaev MA, Nedashkovsky EV, Bjertnaes LJ. Use of methylene blue for correction of hemodynamics in septic shock. In: Abstract book; 7th Russian Congress of Anesthesiologists; 2000 Sept 25-29; St.Petersburg, Russia: 119. Bjertnaes LJ, Evgenov OV, Kirov MY. Combination of infused methylene blue/inhaled nitric oxide reduces endotoxin-induced lung injury in sheep. Intensive Care Med 2000; 26 Suppl 3: S226. Evgenov OV, Kirov MY, Bjertnaes LJ. Continuously infused methylene blue improves hemodynamics and reduces vasopressor support in human septic shock. NAForum 2000; 13(3): 25. Evgenov OV, Kirov MY, Bjertnaes LJ. Combination of infused methylene blue/inhaled nitric oxide reduces lung injury after endotoxin in awake sheep. NAForum 2000; 13(3): 22. Evgenov OV, Kirov MY, Bjertnaes LJ. Additive effects of intravenous methylene blue and inhaled nitric oxide in endotoxin-induced lung injury in sheep. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2001. Accepted. Kirov MY, Evgenov OV, Egorina EM, Kuzkov VV, Ramanathan S, Nedashkovsky EV. Incidence and outcome of severe sepsis and septic shock in patients of a Russian intensive care unit. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2001. Accepted. Evgenov OV, Kirov MY, Bjertnaes LJ. Combination of methylene blue and inhaled nitric oxide ameliorates acute lung injury after endotoxin in sheep. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2001. Accepted. Kirov MY, Evgenov OV, Evgenov NV, Egorina EM, Sovershaev MA, Sveinbjørnsson B, Nedashkovsky EV, Bjertnaes LJ. Continuous infusion of methylene blue improves cardiovascular function in human septic shock. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2001. Accepted. Kirov MY, Evgenov OV, Kuklin VN, Szabo C, Bjertnaes LJ. Nebulized nitric oxide donor reduces pulmonary hypertension and lung edema in endotoxemic sheep. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2001. Accepted.

128083/730 Antiobiotic Resistance Patterns and Molecular Epidemiology (…) in the Barentes Region Mariandyshev A.O., V. Dityatev, N. Nizovtseva, T. Toichkina, A. Youzquin. Tuberculosis in the North of Russia (Archangels region). European respiratory Journal, abstracts, ERS Annual Congress, Geneva, 1998, P1870 Mariandyshev A.O., N. Nizovtseva. Tuberculosis in the North of Russia. In the book of international scientific conference :« HEALTH IN NORTH WEST RUSSIA», Tromso, Norway, 2-4 November, 1998, p- 34-35 P. Sandven, D. A. Caugant, Mariandyshev A.O., N. Nizovtseva, G. Litver. Mycobacterium tuberculosis in the Barents region of Russia and in Norway - molecular epidemiology and antibiotic susceptibility. In the abstract book of international scientific conference : « Important aspects of pulmonology», A, 1997, p. 66-67 P. Sandven, D. A. Caugant, A.Mariandyshev , N. Nizovtseva, G. Litver. M. Tuberculosis in the Barents Region of Russia-molecular epidemiology and antibiotic susceptibility test results. In the abstract book of global Congress on Lung Health 29th World Conference of the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, Bangkok, Thailand, 23-26 November, 1998, p. 280.

135 Mariandyshev A., N. Nizovtseva, O. Toungoussova. How to prevent the development of epidemic of drug resistant tuberculosis in Arkhangelsk region, Russia. In the abstract book of International meeting ``Combating infectious diseases in the Baltic sea and Barents regions. 31.01-2.02.00, S22-23. E. Heldal, Mariandyshev A., Nizovtseva N., Ditjatev V., K. Øvreberg. Tuberculosis (TB) control in Arkhangelsk region. In the abstract book of International meeting ``Combating infectious diseases in the Baltic sea and Barents regions. 31.01-2.02.00, S24-25 Mariandyshev A., Moroz M., Nizovtseva N., Ditjatev V., Zdanova N. First experience of short - course chemotherary in North-west of Russia (Arkhangelsk region). In the abstract book of 30th IUATLD World Conference on Lung Health, Madrid, 1999, S137. Mariandyshev A.O., Dityatev V. I. The problems of TB at children in the North of Russia. In the book of ``Urgent problems at children in the North''. 1996, p.1-3. Mariandyshev A., A. Youzguin. The efficacy of Maxaquin (lomefloxacin) in the treatment of patients with multi-drug resistant pulmonary tuberculosis. European respiratory Journal, abstracts, ERS Annual Congress, Geneva, 1998, P24-28. Sandven, P., D. A. Caugant, and A. Mariandyshev. 1999. Tuberkulose - erfaringer fra Norge og Arkhangelsk. Lungeforum 9:5-6.

128076/730 Alcohol Drinking and its Impact on Public Health in the North of Russia No publications yet, apart from one Russian article, two articles used in Russian PhD works and eight paper presentations at international conferences.

Bojko states that 1 paper is accepted in Int. Journal of [not readable] Health.

Appendix C

Programme for Central and Eastern Europe

“Terms of Reference” for the evaluation of research collaboration

I Background

In 1995, the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Norwegian Council of Higher Education and the Research Council of Norway signed a two-year cooperative agreement regarding operational responsibility for a programme of higher education and research as part of the Action Programme for Eastern Europe. The Agreement was renewed and in 1997 and the Cooperation Programme with Central and Eastern Europe was established, with effect from 1997 until 2001.

The general objective of the Agreement is to cooperate with reforming nations in Central and Eastern Europe in their restructuring process, with the aim of ensuring that a democratic and economically sustainable process of development takes place. The specific goals of the Agreement include the financing of cooperation in higher education and research between universities, colleges and research institutions in Central and Eastern Europe and equivalent institutions in Norway. Companies, other institutions and organisations can also participate in project cooperation. Cooperative projects financed via the Agreement are based on the principle of equality among participants, which is to say

136 that both or all parties should contribute financially and professionally to projects. The geographical priority area for the Programme is North-west Russia and the Baltic states.

A Programme Committee consisting of representatives appointed by the Research Council of Norway and the Council of Universities. The Programme committee has the authority to evaluate and determine which project proposals should be given support within the financial framework of the Programme. At the moment, the Programme has an annual budget of NOK 17 million, subject to approval by Parliament.

II Project selection criteria

Several of the Programme’s current projects have been running since it started, and some of them were also being financed during the first programme phase as part of the Action Programme. On the basis of recommendations made in Parliamentary White Paper no. 38 (1998 - 99) “A New Epoch in Research“ and resolutions adopted by the Board, a selection of research projects financed by the Programme are to be evaluated. Altogether, 13 projects have been selected for evaluation in accordance with the following criteria:

 Geography: Geographical priority has been given to North-western Russia and the Baltic states. Projects from both of these general regions will be evaluated.  Size: Project funding via the Programme must be of a certain size, and priority are given to evaluate the largest projects.  Academic field: We wish projects from the academic fields specified in the Programme’s strategy to be represented.  Project duration: Projects for evaluation must have started and should preferably have been under way for a couple of years.  Relation between universities and institutes: Projects from both the university and institute sector shall be evaluated.

III What we will measure

The objective of the evaluation is to obtain knowledge and experience that will be capable of leading to a qualitative improvement in the ongoing and future activities of the Programme. The results of the evaluation will thus be utilised in the process of renewal of the Programme. The evaluation is intended to provide a basis for modifying the Programme or making changes in strategy and priorities at Programme and project level if a new period is approved.

The evaluation will assess the quality of projects and their results. It will consider whether resources have been utilised optimally to obtain the desired effects of the education and research programme, i.e. so that the aims of the Programmes and the individual project are achieved. Such evaluations must also embrace cost-efficiency considerations, relationships that have been of importance in implementing projects and the effects of projects, whether or not these were intended.

137 The evaluation of the quality of the projects should take place in terms of international research quality standards. Project links with other international efforts such as EU/INCO, INTAS, etc., or other international programmes or academic networks, may also be evaluated. The establishment of academic networks that overlie national and international programmes, and synergies among these, should be focussed on in this connection.

The evaluation should consider whether the projects involved fit in with the institutions’ own strategies and priorities.

IV Implementation of the evaluation

The point of departure of the evaluation will be the Programme Agreement and the strategy and set of objectives set out therein. The evaluation will deal with each of the 13 projects, and will provide a report and a set of conclusions on each individual project. The evaluation will also look at the projects as a whole, considering whether the represent a good means of implementing the objectives of the Programme. The evaluation will also consider whether there are general problems of significance for this cooperative effort; it will also focus on the following specific aspects:

1. Organisation Division of responsibility among partners, the scientific competence of the partners in the Norwegian and Eastern European institutions, equality of participation in the cooperative process and the degree of participation on the Eastern European side at both institutional and individual level. The evaluation group is also requested to consider whether the collaborative process has resulted in any practical problems, including problems involved in transferring funds, making customs payments, etc.

2. Institutional development Development of competence: Has the research collaboration made a contribution to the development of the area of expertise in the Eastern European institution? Has the Norwegian institution gained new scientific experience? Publishing: How much has been published during the period concerned, and are papers being published in international refereed journals?

3. Achievement of objectives; consequences of projects To what extent have the objectives of the projects been met or can be expected to be met? Study of the positive and negative, expected and unanticipated consequences of the projects.

4. Sustainability In addition to the question of achievement of objectives, the likelihood that any positive effects will continue to be felt after the completion of the projects should be considered. Has the collaboration contributed to the development of a research environment that will be better equipped to participate at international level, and has it helped to establish contacts

138 that will last beyond the lifetime of the project itself? The sustainability of the project should be evaluated in a long-term perspective.

5. Experiences The evaluation should include a more general survey and summing up of the individual parties’ experience of their projects and of the collaborative process, including participants’ own assessments of what has functioned well or poorly. The projects’ own experience and assessment of their relationships with the Research Council and the Programme Board should also be mentioned.

Conclusions and recommendations The evaluation committee is requested to present its conclusions in terms of the stated guidelines, in addition to discussing strengths and weaknesses in the design and implementation of the Programme. In addition, any suggestions as to modifications and improvements with respect to a continuation of this type of research collaboration at institutional level should be brought up.

Methodology The evaluation committee should make itself familiar with the strategy of the Programme and the background for its establishment. The evaluation will be performed with the help of studies of the project applications, progress reports and such final reports and publications as are available. Meetings and conversations will be held with the responsible Norwegian institutions and their project coordinators, and visits will be made to a number of partner institutions. These may be called in to a joint evaluation meeting.

All partners will also be interviewed, either in writing (questionnaire) or via personal contact.

Report The evaluation committee will draw up and present a final report on its work. The report will be in English. It will include a summary of the main conclusions regarding each project as well as a set of general conclusions. Those parts of the report that concern individual institutions will be sent to the institutions for their comments before the final version of the report is written.

The Research Council will be responsible for any published version of the report.

The Programme secretariat, which is based at the Research Council/MU, will assist the evaluation group in its efforts. An executive secretary will be specially appointed to support the evaluation committee.

139 Evaluation committee The evaluation committee should include expertise in the following areas:  experience of evaluations  familiarity with Russia/Eastern Europe  knowledge of research and higher education in the fields concerned.

The evaluation committee should cover the whole of the scientific range of the project portfolio to be evaluated. Special advisers may be used if the evaluation committee lacks specific expertise in a particular area.

Timetable The report should be completed and submitted to the Research Council by April 1, 2001.

140