Clearly identify your users

The European Union is in the process of introducing an emissions trading scheme, for example for emissions of carbon dioxide from heavy industry. The scheme is a policy instrument that is designed to bring about cost-effective reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. The advantage for the environment is that the authorities can decide in advance what level of emissions is to be permitted. For industry, the advantage is that companies can choose whether they wish to cut their own emissions or buy emission quotas from someone else.
IVL, whose goal is to promote a sustainable society on the basis of consensus between government and industry, has for many years now been collecting data to describe the contributions which different sectors are making to the greenhouse effect. When Mistra issued a call for proposals relating to the climate issue, therefore, it lost no time in responding.
- Following a pre-announcement, we knew that this was in the pipeline, and therefore read the call very carefully. We asked ourselves a number of questions, such as what our contribution could be and how we could deliver what Mistra was looking for. IVL enjoys good relations with industry. Our initial idea, therefore, was to seek funding for a programme whose results would be aimed at industry, says Lars Zetterberg at IVL.

TOOK A RISK
Before long, though, it became apparent that achieving a single focus within industry was going to be difficult.
- We wanted to have a clear user community, and when we took this line of thinking a step further we realized that the obvious users we re to be found in the political sphere. The idea of supporting the political process in the area of environmental management provided us with a we l l defined user group and a chance to offer them clear benefits.
Although this involved taking a risk, as climate policy was not one of IVL´s core areas,  the decision was taken to press ahead, and Lars Zetterberg put together an application for a planning grant.

- In every other way, it felt completely right. We wanted to see Europe as a laboratory for ideas on environmental policy instruments. We felt that this was something our international negotiators ought to be very interested in. Initially, I was a bit lacking in self-confidence, as I myself didn´t have a doctorate in this field. At the same time, though, I was beginning to realize that that could be an advantage.
As he was not applying for funds for an existing research programme, Zetterberg was in a better position to "think outside the box".
- I simply asked the people who we re to use the results what they considered most important. What questions did they as climate change negotiators want answers to three years down the line? What did industry want?
The results of his interviews were condensed into a list of points, a specification of a somewhat different kind, which in fact formed the main core of the planning grant application.

- We got our grant. After that we had a meeting with Mistra and we re given some useful feed-back, which was very important. They advised us to “think about this" and “avoid that" - in other words, they gave us clear advice on how to work our proposal up into a full application, Zetterberg recalls.
After that, the major task of writing the full application began. Once again, Lars Zetterberg got in touch with officials, research groups and organizations.
- The aim was to get the leading researchers in Sweden and the rest of the world involved. Industry turned out to be very interested - they wanted to know what types of "greenhouseefficient" technology to invest in over the next few years, and to understand the theory of emissions trading.
From their meetings with Mistra the group also knew now that it was important, for example, to think about the geographical spread of the project, to consider questions of gender balance - and to read the instructions to applicants carefully.
- Our dialogue with Mistra gave us a clearer focus, helping us to understand that they were more interested in an in-depth niche programme than a large, broad one offering only vague answers. To put it simply, they wanted us to deliver tangible results to our user group.

CHAMPAGNE!
When the application was completed, it was time to meet both the reference group that was to assess the programme´s value to users and the scientific review panel
- They asked pertinent questions. The reference group, of course, consisted of potential users, with a broad focus, says Lars Zetterberg.
The review panel proved a little more difficult, partly because of the scientific criteria they applied. However, as IVL had by this stage brought together a group of established researchers to work on the project, they were able to answer the panel´s questions.
- Yes of course we were a bit nervous, but there´s no need to feel in awe of the panel. They just want answers to their questions.
The two groups gave the programme conditional approval, subject to certain additions to the original proposal.

- That was no problem. All we had to do was meet their requirements, such as involving more Swedish researchers and incorporating additional areas of research.
After handing in a revised application and giving a presentation to the Board, all that remained was to await the Board´s decision.
- We were informed the very same day that we´d been awarded the grant. It was great news, especially as we´d been working on the application for almost a year. I phoned round to everyone involved - and got out the champagne!

Now the group can get to work, observing how the EU´s emissions trading scheme evolves and analyzing alternative courses of development for it. Their analysis will look to the longer term, beyond the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol. The project ‘The Role of Emission Trading in Climate Policy´ (ETIC) is one of two forming the core of Mistra´s Climate Policy Research Programme.