Questions

Answers

a. How was the partnership established?

• After the project proposal was approved, two Danish partners (CU and RUC) submitted proposals to join the project. The meetings with both was organized during our visit Denmark in Septrmber 2011, in which the research ideas have been presented and discussed. Before writing project document we have also communicated together through emails to understand to each other.
• Finally, the RUC has been chosen as a Danish partner of the project with expectations of getting help in research and training young Vietnamese scientists in the field of climate change impact assessment based on the socio-economic views.
• Before starting the project, the Partnership Agreement had been signed by the representatives of HUS and RUC. After the kick-off workshop, both teams joined the overview field trip to NHQ. Then the role of each key researcher in the project had been proposed and made agreement with the project management board in term of the TOR, in which their contributions was identified (activities, papers, etc).

b. How well has it been functioning?

• Collaborations between RUC and HUS teams mainly are through the joint field works, seminars, workshops, sharing data, writing joint papers (so far only Dr. Thorkil Casse and Dr. Mogens Buch-Hansen have joint papers)
• The partnership has been running smoothly and well thanks to an open minded collaboration and responsibility on quality of work

c. What have been the main challenges in the partnership?

It seems to be differences in the research approaches and the purposes of the research between HUS and RUC teams:

• The natural science (HUS) versus the social science (RUC), and
• To build the PIS for local community used to reduce the vulnerability to climate change and capacity building for young scientists (HUS) is rather than the scientific papers (RUC)

d. Do you have any suggestions for changes/improvements in the setup of the programme in relation to the establishment of partnerships?

• Open exchange should be conducted during the proposal development and transparency in responsibility sharing
• Msc and PhD Students co-supervised by both sides
• Both sides should understand the cultures of each other

Questions

Answers

a. What has been the main outcome(s) of the research collaboration (lasting/sustainable)?

Co-author publications, networking, new ideas in the social approaches of climate change assessment and new friends

b. What has been the additional value of teaming up with the Danish partners (funding, joint field work, joint publications, etc.)?

• Mutual learning and accumulation of experiences in field surveys, joint publications and network reinforcement with local authority and community
• Funding and working motivation

c. What are the main effects on research capacity built at various levels (individual, departmental, university level)?

• To improve knowledge and experiences in the interdisciplinary approaches, research methodology development, especially in writing interdisciplinary scientific articles

d. Are there wider effects of the research collaboration e.g. on the ability to generate external funding, improve research administration, participate in international networks/partnerships, establish international recognition, or increase in quality of research, etc.?

• Improving management of international project in interdisciplinary issues and improving approach in working with community, connection of social and natural sciences

e. Has the project influenced policies e.g. at university or at regional or national levels?

• At regional (communal, district and provincial) levels: Local authorities are aware of the project approaches and outcomes

f. Has the project supported innovation?

• Yes, the PIS

g. Has it affected (regional) economic activities?

• Not yet

h. Has it fostered links with private sector or stakeholders within the local economy?

• Not yet

Questions

Answers

a. Have you received the necessary guidance and support for financial management and progress reporting from

       i. Your own institution?

• Yes

      ii. Danish partners?

• Yes

     iii. Danida Fellowship Centre (DFC)?

• Yes

Questions

Answers

a. Which challenges/problems have been the most difficult to meet/tackle/solve?

• To create common language in research activities development
• To make fluently cooperation with the partners

b. Do you have experience from other donor supported programmes that you would like to emphasize?

• Yes, collaboration with Germany (German Research Foundation - DFG), Australia (The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation - CSIRO)

c. Which recommendations do you have for future improvements in the setup of the programme?

• Mutual trust is the most important. It leads to simplify the administrative paper work
• Stronger commitment for joint-publication (number of publication, associated funding for each publication)
• Msc and PhD Students co-supervised by both sides