DIAMOND: D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings Update – 1
Abstract
As described in the project’s Quality Management Plan, online and physical (hybrid) meetings take place regularly in order for the consortium to discuss and collaborate during the project’s time horizon. Hence, Executive Board Meetings (EBMs) are organised on a monthly basis and General Assembly (GA) meetings twice per year. The EBMs are hosted virtually, via Microsoft Teams, in one-hour seasons, while GA meetings take place either online in a two-day setup or physically (in a hybrid format, supported by Microsoft Teams, for online participation) back-toback with other project events, such as workshops. Physical GA meetings without any accompanying events are generally avoided due to sustainability concerns. EBMs are organised in order to inform all DIAMOND partners on the progress of all Tasks and to guarantee that all milestones and deliverables are prepared in time. In this context, the ICCS administration team organises these monthly meetings and prepares a draft agenda, before finalising it with the rest of the partners. During the second year of the project and the first half of its third year, one physical meeting was held, which took place in Lausanne, Switzerland on the 23rd and 24th of May 2024. In addition, during this 18-month period, 2 GA meetings and 8 EBMs were held online via Microsoft Teams. Both physical and online meetings are characterised by high attendance since almost all consortium partners are represented in each individual meeting, showcasing the partners’ dedication to the project’s progress and objectives.
Full text
www.climate-diamond.eu 30/05/2025 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 WP1 – Manage & Coordinate
Page i D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 Disclaimer Funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA). Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them. Copyright Message This report, if not confidential, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0); a copy is available here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. You are free to share (copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially) under the following terms: (i) attribution (you must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made; you may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use); (ii) no additional restrictions (you may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits). Grant Agreement Number 101081179 Acronym DIAMOND Full Title Delivering the next generation of open Integrated Assessment MΟdels for Netzero, sustainable Development Topic HORIZON-CL5-2022-D1-02 Funding scheme HORIZON EUROPE, RIA – Research and Innovation Action Start Date December 2022 Duration 48 Months Project URL http://www.climate-diamond.eu/ EU Project Advisor Silvia Vaghi Project Coordinator Institute of Communications and Computer Systems - ICCS Deliverable D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings Update 1 Work Package WP1 – Manage & Coordinate Date of Delivery Contractual 31/05/2025 Actual 30/05/2025 Nature Report Dissemination Public Lead Beneficiary Institute of Communications and Computer Systems - ICCS Responsible Author Anastasios Karamaneas Email [email protected] ICCS Phone +30 210 7723612 Contributors Konstantinos Koasidis, Alexandros Nikas (ICCS) Reviewer(s) Natasha Frilingou (ICCS) Keywords project meetings; communication; project management; SAB meetings
Page ii D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 EC Summary Requirements 1. Changes with respect to the DoA No changes with respect to the work described in the DoA. 2. Dissemination and uptake This deliverable’s purpose is to act as an internal tool to review DIAMOND’s progress and as a reference point for DIAMOND partners on their deliverables’ and tasks’ fulfilment regarding the agreed conditions by the partners and as proposed in the project’s Grant Agreement. 3. Short summary of results (<250 words) As described in the project’s Quality Management Plan, online and physical (hybrid) meetings take place regularly in order for the consortium to discuss and collaborate during the project’s time horizon. Hence, Executive Board Meetings (EBMs) are organised on a monthly basis and General Assembly (GA) meetings twice per year. The EBMs are hosted virtually, via Microsoft Teams, in one-hour seasons, while GA meetings take place either online in a two-day setup or physically (in a hybrid format, supported by Microsoft Teams, for online participation) back-toback with other project events, such as workshops. Physical GA meetings without any accompanying events are generally avoided due to sustainability concerns. EBMs are organised in order to inform all DIAMOND partners on the progress of all Tasks and to guarantee that all milestones and deliverables are prepared in time. In this context, the ICCS administration team organises these monthly meetings and prepares a draft agenda, before finalising it with the rest of the partners. During the second year of the project and the first half of its third year, one physical meeting was held, which took place in Lausanne, Switzerland on the 23rd and 24th of May 2024. In addition, during this 18-month period, 2 GA meetings and 8 EBMs were held online via Microsoft Teams. Both physical and online meetings are characterised by high attendance since almost all consortium partners are represented in each individual meeting, showcasing the partners’ dedication to the project’s progress and objectives. 4. Evidence of accomplishment This deliverable proves the successful organisation of the project’s meetings as presented in its Grant Agreement, as well as the high level of participation from the consortium. Moreover, this report details the discussions held in these meetings, which showcase the progress and completion of the project’s objectives as well as matters that are relevant to the scientific depth of the project’s deliverables and milestone reports.
Page iii D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 Preface DIAMOND will update, upgrade, and fully open six Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs) that are emblematic in scientific and policy processes, improving their sectoral and technological detail, spatiotemporal resolution, and geographic granularity. It will further enhance modelling capacity to assess the feasibility and desirability of Pariscompliant mitigation pathways, their interplay with adaptation, circular economy, and other SDGs, their distributional and equity effects, and their resilience to extremes, as well as robust risk management and investment strategies. This will be done via integration of tools and insights from psychology, finance research, behavioural and labour economics, operational research, and physical science. The project will develop a transdisciplinary scientific approach to legitimise the implementation process and co-create research questions that stretch the frontiers of climate science, as well as establish vibrant communities of practice to transparently open model enhancements and to develop capacities, thereby lowering the entrance barriers to the established IAM community. ICCS INSTITUTE OF COMMUNICATIONS AND COMPUTER SYSTEMS EL BC3 ASOCIACION BC3 BASQUE CENTRE FOR CLIMATE CHANGE - KLIMA ALDAKETA IKERGAI ES CESAR KRATENA KURT AT CICERO CICERO SENTER FOR KLIMAFORSKNING NO CYI THE CYPRUS INSTITUTE CY E4SMA ENERGY ENGINEERING ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT SYSTEMS MODELING AND ANALYSIS SRL IT HOLISTIC HOLISTIC IKE EL COMILLAS UNIVERSIDAD PONTIFICIA COMILLAS ES ISINNOVA ISTITUTO DI STUDI PER L'INTEGRAZIONE DEI SISTEMI (I.S.I.S) - SOCIETA'COOPERATIVA IT SEURECO SEURECO SOCIETE EUROPEENNE D'ECONOMIE SARL FR UM UNIVERSITEIT MAASTRICHT NL ESMIA ESMIA CONSULTANTS INC. CA USMF THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND FOUNDATIION INC US UMD UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND US EPFL ECOLE POLYTECHNIQUE FEDERALE DE LAUSANNE CH ETH EIDGENOESSISCHE TECHNISCHE HOCHSCHULE ZUERICH CH UNIBAS UNIVERSITAT BASEL CH Imperial IMPERIAL COLLEGE OF SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY AND MEDICINE UK Oxford THE CHANCELLOR, MASTERS AND SCHOLARS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD UK UCL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON UK
Page iv D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 Executive Summary As described in the project’s Quality Management Plan, online and physical (in a hybrid format) meetings take place regularly in order that the consortium can discuss and collaborate during the project’s time horizon. Hence, Executive Board Meetings (EBMs) are organised on a monthly basis and General Assembly (GA) meetings twice per year. The EBMs are hosted virtually, via Microsoft Teams, in one-hour seasons, while GA meetings take place either online in a two-day setup or physically (in a hybrid format, supported by Microsoft Teams, for online participation) back-to-back with other project events, such as workshops. Physical GA meetings without any accompanying events are generally avoided due to sustainability concerns. EBMs are organised in order to inform all DIAMOND partners on the progress of all Tasks and to guarantee that all milestones and deliverables are prepared on time. In this context, the ICCS administration team organises these monthly meetings and prepares a draft agenda, before finalising it with the rest of the partners. During the second year of the project and the first half of its third year, one physical meeting was held, which took place in Lausanne, Switzerland on the 23rd and 24th of May 2024. In addition, during this 18-month period, 2 GA meetings and 8 EBMs were held online via Microsoft Teams. Both physical and online meetings are characterised by high attendance since almost all consortium partners are represented in each individual meeting, showcasing the partners’ dedication to the project’s progress and objectives.
Page v D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 Contents 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose and scope ........................................................................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Structure of the Document......................................................................................................................................................... 1 2 Physical Meetings ........................................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 General Assembly Meeting, 23-24 May 2024 ..................................................................................................................... 2 2.1.1 Agenda ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 2.1.2 Minutes ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 3 Remote (Online) Meetings .......................................................................................................................... 14 3.1 General Assembly Meeting (8-9 January 2024) ............................................................................................................... 14 3.1.1 Agenda .................................................................................................................................................................................... 14 3.1.2 Minutes ................................................................................................................................................................................... 16 3.2 Executive Board Meeting – 28 February 2024 .................................................................................................................. 28 3.2.1 Agenda .................................................................................................................................................................................... 28 3.2.2 Minutes ................................................................................................................................................................................... 28 3.3 Executive Board Meeting – 27 March 2024 ....................................................................................................................... 32 3.3.1 Agenda .................................................................................................................................................................................... 32 3.3.2 Minutes ................................................................................................................................................................................... 32 3.4 Executive Board Meeting – 24 April 2024........................................................................................................................... 37 3.4.1 Agenda .................................................................................................................................................................................... 37 3.4.2 Minutes ................................................................................................................................................................................... 38 3.5 Executive Board Meeting – 19 June 2024 ........................................................................................................................... 42 3.5.1 Agenda .................................................................................................................................................................................... 42 3.5.2 Minutes ................................................................................................................................................................................... 43 3.6 Executive Board Meeting – 16 October 2024 ................................................................................................................... 46 3.6.1 Agenda .................................................................................................................................................................................... 46 3.6.2 Minutes ................................................................................................................................................................................... 47 3.7 Executive Board Meeting – 4 December 2024 .................................................................................................................. 50 3.7.1 Agenda .................................................................................................................................................................................... 50 3.7.2 Minutes ................................................................................................................................................................................... 51 3.8 General Assembly Meeting (29 January 2025) ................................................................................................................. 55 3.8.1 Agenda .................................................................................................................................................................................... 55 3.8.2 Minutes ................................................................................................................................................................................... 57 3.9 Executive Board Meeting – 26 March 2025 ....................................................................................................................... 65 3.9.1 Agenda .................................................................................................................................................................................... 65 3.9.2 Minutes ................................................................................................................................................................................... 66 3.10 Executive Board Meeting – 30 April 2025 ...................................................................................................................... 69 3.10.1 Agenda ............................................................................................................................................................................... 69 3.10.2 Minutes ............................................................................................................................................................................... 70
Page vi D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 4 Scientific Advisory Board meetings ............................................................................................................ 73 4.1 2nd SAB Session: 8 January 2024 ............................................................................................................................................ 73 4.2 3rd SAB Session: 23 May 2024 ................................................................................................................................................. 74 4.3 4th SAB Session: 29 January 2025 ........................................................................................................................................... 75 Table of Tables Table 1. DIAMOND Project Meetings (covering period December 2023-May 2025) ........................................................... 1 Use of AI disclaimer During all meetings (including EBΜs, GAs and SAB sessions), extensive draft notes have been manually kept by human participants. These minutes have undergone anonymisation and removal of any information that might be considered privileged and/or sensitive and parsed through AI (ChatGPT v4) to deliver summarised versions of the notes and synthesise them in concise minutes. The final output has been checked and approved for accuracy, and further edited (e.g., manual insertion of previously removed information when needed) by the contributing authors.
Page 1 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 1 Introduction As indicated in the Grant Agreement, regular and ad hoc meetings are organised during the project’s lifespan. Regular meetings (General Assembly Meetings) are organised twice a year in order to oversee the progress of all actions realised as well as to aid partners in fully comprehending the scientific work conducted in DIAMOND’s context. The Project Coordinator (ICCS) is in charge of formulating the meetings’ agenda, organising the meetings (cooperating with other partners) as well as informing all involved parties about the meetings’ time and location. In addition, online meetings (via Microsoft Teams) are organised regularly which allow partners to discuss specific issues regarding project deliverables, milestones and tasks. In this respect, ICCS also hosts monthly online meetings (Executive Board Meetings) in order that partners are in line with DIAMOND’s actions and progress. The Project Coordinator records all meetings and sessions, in the context of various work packages and activities as well as the project’s coordination and management. In this respect, this deliverable is related to the latter (i.e., General Assembly and Executive Board Meetings) for which the project’s administration team records meeting minutes and then shares them with the project’s partners on the internal data management system (MS2) ensuring that the whole consortium is informed about the project’s timelines, agreed plans and overall progress. The table below depicts the meetings that were organised during M13-M30 of the project’s implementation (meetings during the period M1-M12 are reported in D1.2). EBMs take place monthly unless a GA meeting is planned for the same period. Moreover, some EBMs were not organised either due to their proximity to GA meetings, their proximity to the internal review meeting and the preparatory consortium-wide preparation meetings (September 2024), or due to low availability as a result of Easter and summer vacations. Table 1. DIAMOND Project Meetings (covering period December 2023-May 2025) Type of meeting Date Online 2nd General Assembly Meeting 8th and 9th of January 2024 Online Executive Board Meeting 28th of February 2024 Online Executive Board Meeting 27th of March 2024 Online Executive Board Meeting 24th of April 2024 Physical 3rd General Assembly Meeting 23rd and 24th of May 2024 Online Executive Board Meeting 19th of June 2024 Online Executive Board Meeting 16th of October 2024 Online Executive Board Meeting 4th of December 2024 Online 4th General Assembly Meeting 29th of January 2025 Online Executive Board Meeting 26th of March 2025 Online Executive Board Meeting 30th of April 2025 1.1 Purpose and scope This deliverable aims to showcase a periodic report of all project meetings (physical and online), including the meetings’ agenda, list of attendees and meetings. Moreover, this deliverable includes any feedback provided by the Scientific Advisory Board from any online and physical communication, especially during dedicated SAB sessions, usually held within General Assembly Meetings. 1.2 Structure of the Document Section 2 is dedicated to presenting the agenda and minutes of physical meetings, Section 3 showcases all details from online meetings, and Section 4 presents the SAB’s feedback.
Page 2 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 2 Physical Meetings 2.1 General Assembly Meeting, 23-24 May 2024 The 3rd General Assembly Meeting of the project took place on the 23rd and 24th of May 2024 in Lausanne, Switzerland, on the EPFL campus, hosted by the project’s EPFL partners. Some of the objectives of this two-day meeting were to discuss the progress of the 6 core models of the project, to host a couple of workshops to further understand the connection between the 6 core models of the project and other developments (e.g. soft-linking with other models and stakeholder engagement activities), to discuss the timeline of the following 12 months and to inform all partners on the work done by other collaborators. In this meeting, all project partners were represented either physically or online. Moreover, some of the project’s SAB members participated in the relevant session. 2.1.1 Agenda Day I: An update to all WPs & exchange with the SAB Virtual participants: Zoom (Link) – Meeting ID: 629 6675 7780 Thursday, May 23, 2024, EPFL - Campus Ecublens, SG-0211 (all times in CEST/local) 09:00 – 09:05 I.1 Welcome by Prof. Philippe Thalmann EPFL 09:05 – 09:30 I.2 WP1 – Manage & Coordinate • Coordination & Management • Progress so far • Quality control (including review, review times) • Interim Report ICCS 09:30 – 10:30 I.3 WP2 – Codesign • Moving to Phase 2 of stakeholder engagement • Outcomes from the coordination of modelling/module teams stakeholder engagement requirements • Updated Multi-layered Stakeholder Engagement Strategy, requirements workshop & scenario workshops ISINNOVA & ETH 10:30 – 11:30 I.4 WP3 – Update & Upgrade • Model development progress • Brief presentation of current version of the models • Heading to the next update of the Model Development Strategy E4SMA & BC3 11:30 – 12:30 Lunch Break 12:30 – 13:00 I.5 WP6 – Open • Progress on supporting tools • I2AM PARIS Platform progress • Synergies with other projects & communities • Strategy/Webinars on WP2-prescribed actions ICCS & HOLISTIC 13:00 – 13:45 I.6 WP4 – Integrate & Expand • Progress on module development • Presentation of Tasks beginning on M19 Imperial 13:45– 14:30 I.7 WP5 – Apply & Explore • Summary of WP5 kick-off meeting • From model development to model use CICERO
Page 9 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 project which works as an aggregator for Horizon research results. Then, he informed the consortium that a demonstration version of the new I2AM PARIS interface would be shortly available. He also presented a design methodology for developing open and policyrelevant platforms . Lastly, he presented the progress on the validation routines and the development pipelines. WP7 Afterwards, Dr Xexakis presented WP7, demonstrating the planning for each Task and the overview of the relevant deliverables. He presented Task 7.3, focusing on the project’s targets and measured impacts. He mentioned that the project’s website, social media accounts as well as Newsletters and Press Releases are demonstrating good progress so far, mostly achieving the set targets. He also stated that the project has published 11 research articles and 13 conference papers/presentations. He also mentioned that the consortium should expect a higher impact later on since the majority of project outcomes are still under development. Regarding the project’s CDE plan, he mentioned that there are no significant changes, focusing on the project’s synergies with other EU projects and communities of practice, such as the MAIA network. On Task 7.1, he stated that there are no major updates apart from new content being constantly uploaded to the project’s website. Next, Dr Xexakis, Dr Vienni-Baptista, Dr Mittal and Dr Koasidis had a discussion on WP2 publications and in general the target of the project’s scientific publications, encouraging each partner to pursue publishable material. SAB Session The SAB session started with Dr Nikas presenting to the SAB members the progress of the project so far. He presented an SDG modelling study done acknowleding the project, a list of best practices for participatory modelling, the studies that were showcased at the EGU conference, some preparatory work done for stakeholder engagement activities, the development of the CLEWsEU model, a set of transparency procedures, surveys done with other projects, interactions with other communities and the updates of the I2AM PARIS platform, as well as a cooperation with the municipality of Athens. Next, the SAB members took the floor, with a member of the SAB commencing a discussion about the reporting process for Horizon Europe projects, and stressed the importance of consortium partners being aware of the project’s KPIs and their progress. Another member, asked if the consortium is considering participating in COP-29, with Dr Nikas replying that the project’s models are still in development, hence they cannot provide many policy insights yet and that it would be better to consider participating in upcoming COPs. Next, the member also suggested additional initiatives such as the UN High-Level Political Framework on Sustainable Development and the IPCC surveys. Dr Nikas and Dr Mittal replied that these recommendations are very useful and that the consortium is already running some relevant surveys. Then, another member asked if the consortium has considered how to adapt to potential changes in the policy landscape based on
Page 10 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 contemporary developments. He also stressed the importance of models being able to examine extreme events. In the first matter, Dr Nikas replied that the SAB’s feedback on this can be very useful and on the latter that project partners are already examining the models’ robustness. In addition, an SAB member and Dr Vienni-Baptista had a discussion on the effectiveness of the project’s participatory framework and Dr Nikas had a short discussion on citizen participation with members of the SAB, focusing on practitioners. Lastly, Dr Nikas thanked all SAB members for their attendance and insightful comments. Day II Welcome notes and aims of Day II Dr Nikas greeted the consortium and presented the agenda for the meeting’s 2nd Day. Organising work for RP2 Dr. Koasidis highlighted that the second reporting period will be significantly more intensive than the first, with most deliverables and activity concentrated before Month 36. All tasks are expected to be active soon, and close coordination will be essential due to strong interdependencies across work packages (WPs). He emphasised understanding these dependencies, especially between WPs 2 and 3, where technical questions from partners drive collaboration. Key upcoming milestones include MS6 (Nov 2024, M24) on stakeholder engagement and D3.2 (model strategy update), which will require early input from MS6. For WP2–WP5 coordination, D5.1 (M26) will rely on feedback from WP2-organised stakeholder workshops. ETH will lead meetings to support this. Additionally, WP2’s first deliverable (M30) must align with D5.1 timelines. The full interaction between WPs 2, 3, and 5 will culminate in D3.3 (final model strategy), integrating feedback, particularly for WP4 links. For WP3–WP4 interlinkages, MS8 will require initial working versions of all IAMs and inform second-period reporting. Final versions of CLEWs-EU and NEMESIS-World (D3.4 & D3.5) and all D4.1–D4.4 deliverables are due by M36, demanding strong coordination. Additionally, MS7 on ENGAGE and MAgPIE models must be ready by M26. Lastly, he pointed to the transition into Reporting Period 3, underscoring D2.6 on stakeholder feedback and WP6’s role in ensuring procedural openness. Cross-cutting themes on stakeholder engagement expectations The next session started with Dr Briers explaining to the meeting’s participants how the following workshop would function. She said that a set of questions will be presented that participants will have to answer, being grouped into 5 different teams on different thematics. She also mentioned that an online board in Miro will be available for online participants to join in break-out rooms.. Next, Dr Briers continued by guiding all online and in-person participants through the process. The internal workshop then took place (see more details in D2.4 and D2.5). After the ETH workshop, ISINNOVA presented the regenerative
Page 11 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 approach, explaining its foundation in the 3 Horizons methodology and the Transition Scenarios Meta-Model, which includes mid-term and longterm scenario pathways. Mr Sessa clarified that this approach will be more prominent in the upcoming Foresight Workshops, while the Requirements Workshop will focus on research questions gathered so far. He outlined the structure of the workshop, which will include 4–5 breakout sessions (Upstream, Industry, Downstream, End-use) with two rounds to allow broader stakeholder engagement. Discussions followed on workshop preparation, including the importance of communicating material clearly and concisely. ISINNOVA noted that stakeholders will be introduced to the regenerative approach through multiple channels (invitations, briefs, references, and workshop presentations). The team confirmed plans to inform partners about stakeholder selection and will send a survey to 53 identified stakeholders. The stakeholder database remains open for consortium contributions. The target is to engage around 20 stakeholders in the requirements workshop, and WP leaders will be invited once internal alignment on the workshop is achieved. There was brief coordination on the timeline of the organisation of the requirements workshop, stating that it might be useful to schedule it for September. Model development: Runin for beta versions The two models (CLEWs-EU) and GEMINI-E3-EU that are at a more advanced stage were presented and discussed. CLEWs-EU (Dr. Taliotis & Dr. Sridharan) Dr. Taliotis introduced the CLEWs-EU model, explaining the CLEWs framework and showing the model’s modular structure and interlinkages. He detailed the energy module, covering primary energy, electricity & heat generation, and three enduse sectors (buildings, transpor t, industry). The model’s time granularity and horizon were described, noting that energy demand and mileage inputs are exogenous. For industry, the team is considering outputting some results in physical units rather than generic terms. Data sources focus heavily on Eurostat, and documentation and progress tracking via Excel are underway. Initial model runs were shared to illustrate typical outputs. Dr. Sridharan presented the land & water module, explaining its foundation on OSeMOSYS and water balance mechanisms. He described the land system—land cover types, technology thresholds, and EU land cover data—and the representation of ten major crops with yield data from GAEZ and FAO. Water demand is modeled endogenously for agriculture and power sectors, exogenously for public supply and industry; desalination and energy module links were also detailed. Challenges and ongoing tasks include data collection and country-specific issue identification. Indicative results were shown. Discussions: Dr. Mittal proposed a WP3 workshop to unify data sources across models. On glacier-/snow-covered lands as “usable” in extreme scenarios, Dr. Organise a workshop for WP3 modelling teams on data sources CICERO, all WP3 modelling teams
Page 12 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 Sridharan noted modeling difficulties. The shipping sector’s inclusion was suggested; Dr. Taliotis said it was omitted initially due to limited sectoral interactions but could be added. Differences between CLEWs-EU and GCAM data approaches were highlighted by Dr. van de Ven and Dr. Mittal, who suggested a follow-up discussion. Biomass production was discussed; CLEWsEU currently excludes crop waste but can model biomass use tied to land types, important for BECCS scenarios. Livestock feed issues and the absence of separate feed crop categories were acknowledged as areas for further exploration, especially for country-specific modeling. Dr. Sridharan suggested compiling data lists and soliciting feedback for improvement. GEMINI-E3 EU (Dr. Marc Vielle) Dr. Vielle presented how GEMINI-E3 constructs its Current Policies Scenario from 2017 to 2050, using population, GDP growth, and energy price assumptions. The model is calibrated on historical data (20172022) excluding COVID impacts, aiming to replicate the electricity mix closely and adjust GTAP data as needed. The scenario integrates the EU’s Fit for 55 package and the European Green Deal (including CBAM, new EU-ETS). Links between the Green Deal and the DIAMOND project were highlighted, with inquiries on task responsibility for these links. Discussions: Use of NECPs is limited to some EU countries; no dedicated task exists for the Green Deal but Task 3.1 (model development) is most relevant. Scenario development also involves WP5 teams. Harmonisation across models and projects was discussed, with Dr. Koasidis noting that different core model parameters may require harmonisation in specific exercises. Dr. Kratena suggested sensitivity analyses for accelerating EU decarbonization targets from 2050 to 2040. Dr. Vielle welcomed methods to incorporate EU-ETS mechanisms effectively. Dr. Mittal emphasised understanding each model’s needs to ensure harmonisation for WP5 progress. Vetting processes for scenarios were discussed with Dr. Boitier. Data sources for reference scenarios were debated: SSPs (with newer data) vs. the 2024 EU Ageing Report, discussed by Dr. van de Ven and Dr. Korsbakken. Module development: Towards integration The last session began with Prof. Adam Hawkes summarizing the WP4 presentations from the first day. Dr. Maximov then presented on circular economy modeling, outlining the next six months' steps, ongoing discussions with GCAM and OPENPROM teams for synergi es, and explaining the linkages between OMNIA and ENGAGE. He also gave an overview of upcoming analyses related to iron and steel. Dr. Mittal highlighted the focus on land use modeling, the need to gather data from MAgPIE for OMNIA, and efforts to improve energy conversion within OMNIA.
Page 13 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 Dr. Kratena shared progress on household heterogeneity, discussing the conceptual framework, data and methodology advances, and plans for integration with related tasks, including connections to WP5’s research questions. Dr. Mittal then presented climate modeling next steps, illustrating how climate impacts various inputs and discussing data challenges with Dr. Sridharan, particularly concerning crop yields. Discussions followed on labor productivity functions between Dr. Mittal and Dr. Boitier. Mr. Engel introduced work on behavioral aspects and climate action preferences, describing the UNIBAS experiment’s progress, data collection across EU countries, and secondary analyses on psychological drivers and extreme weather events. Ms. Serebriakova a nd Mr. Morley covered financial and household dynamics, respectively, including proposed models addressing liquidity constraints, links to behavioral studies, and agent-based modeling approaches, with cooperation offers to modeling teams. Mr. O’Connell det ailed labor dynamics research focusing on skills, occupational mobility, and regional movement. The importance of labor issues for scenario modeling was emphasized, along with discussions on feasible implementation steps and potential use of policy inputs like WACCs. Dr. Lumbreras and Ms. Gómez Pérez presented the electricity modeling task and the OpenTEPES model, covering its scope, architecture, and integration with core models like TIAM-ECN. They shared example results and described ongoing model enhancements. Dr. Mittal encouraged focusing stakeholder questions on electricity modeling and recommended tha t the COMILLAS team consult existing WP3 questions to ensure coverage. Wrap-up Dr Nikas and Dr Koasidis concluded the meeting by mentioning that the proposed open discussion had already taken place with so many insightful questions and discussions, and finally thanking EPFL partners for hosting the event and all online participants for attending.
Page 14 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 3 Remote (Online) Meetings 3.1 General Assembly Meeting (8-9 January 2024) The 2nd General Assembly Meeting of the project took place on the 8th and 9th of January 2024 online via Microsoft Teams. Some of the objectives of this two-day meeting were to discuss the project’s progress over the last 6 months, the current developments on its core models and the next steps for the following 12-month period. All partners were represented as well as the SAB, for which a relevant session was held in order for its members to provide their feedback. 3.1.1 Agenda Day I: An update to all WPs & exchange with the SAB Microsoft Teams (Link) Monday, January 8, 2024 (all times in CET) 09:00 – 09:05 I.1 Welcome ICCS 09:05 – 09:30 I.2 WP1 – Manage & Coordinate • Coordination & Management • Progress so far • Quality control (including review, review times) ICCS 09:30 – 10:30 I.3 WP2 – Codesign • Outcomes of mutual understanding workshops and brief plan on engagement activities • Progress on the Multi-layered Stakeholder • Engagement Strategy & Database and brief plan on engagement activities ISINNOVA & ETH 10:30 – 10:45 Coffee Break 10:30 – 11:45 I.4 WP3 – Update & Upgrade • Updated Model Development Strategy and planned synergies with WP4 • Model development progress • Current version of the models E4SMA & BC3 11:45 – 12:30 I.5 WP4 – Integrate & Expand • Module meetings • Progress on module development Imperial 12:30 – 13:15 I.6 WP5 – Apply & Explore • Plan for kicking off WP5 in Year 2 • From model development to model use • Introduction to scenario pipeline uncertainties CICERO 13:15 – 14:00 Lunch Break 14:00 – 14:40 I.7 WP6 – Open • Vetting and visualisation tools • I2AM PARIS Platform progress • Synergies with other projects & communities ICCS & HOLISTIC
Page 15 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 14:40 – 15:00 I.8 WP7 – Communicate, Disseminate, & Exploit • Ideas for boosting our visual identity • Progress with regard to the CDE plan & KPIs • Ideas for website changes HOLISTIC 15:00 – 16:00 I.9 Scientific Advisory Board Welcome remarks, project progress/planning, feedback SAB members, ICCS, all partners
Page 16 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 Day II: Defining the role of stakeholders in the project Microsoft Teams (Link) Tuesday, January 9, 2024 (all times in CET) 09:00 – 09:15 II.1 Synopsis of Day I and aims of Day II: ICCS 09:15 – 10:15 II.2 What’s next for stakeholder engagement? • Planned workshops and activities in the three phases of co-design and co-development • Discussion, reflections on codesign so far ETH & ISINNOVA 10:15 – 10:30 Coffee break 10:30 – 12:30 II.3 Understanding stakeholder engagement expectations • Codeveloping models with stakeholders: Revisiting the model development strategy in the context of engaging with external stakeholders and using their preferences • Co-designing model expansions with stakeholders: Envisaging how we can integrate stakeholder feedback from engagement activities to planned module developments and linkages • Cocreating scenarios with stakeholders: Eliciting priorities and cocreating research questions relevant to different societal priorities and stakeholder interests • Open discussion All partners 12:30 – 13:30 Lunch break 13:30 – 15:00 II.4 Designing our engagements • Aligning actions to WP tasks • Deciding on engagement formats • When will engagements happen • WP contact point engagement planning ETH, ISINNOVA, E4SMA, BC3, Imperial, CICERO, All partners 15:00 – 15:15 II.5 Closing discussion and next steps Open discussion with a focus on timelines ICCS, ETH, All partners 15:15– 15:30 II.6 Wrap-up ICCS 3.1.2 Minutes Present on Call Name and Surname Organisation 1 Alexandros Nikas ICCS 2 Konstantinos Koasidis ICCS 3 Thomas Nikolakakis ICCS 4 Anastasios Karamaneas ICCS 5 Natasha Frilingou ICCS 6 Eleftheria Zisarou ICCS
Page 17 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 7 Anastasis Giannousakis ICCS 8 Panagiotis Fragkos ICCS 9 Dirk-Jan Van de Ven BC3 10 Jon Sampedro BC3 11 Claudia Rodes BC3 12 Russell Horowitz BC3 13 Kurt Kratena CESAR 14 Shivika Mittal CICERO 15 Glen Peters CICERO 16 Ben Sanderson CICERO 17 Jan Ivar Korsbakken CICERO 18 Norman Steinert CICERO 19 Constantinos Taliotis CYI 20 Elpida Gkiouleka CYI 21 Alessandro Chiodi E4SMA 22 Tomasso Pilon E4SMA 23 Sonja Sechi E4SMA 24 Maurizio Gargiulo E4SMA 25 Gabrielle Cassetti E4SMA 26 George Xexakis HOLISTIC 27 Sara Lumbreras COMILLAS 28 Daniel Cassolà ISINNOVA 29 Baptiste Boitier SEURECO 30 Paul Zagamé SEURECO 31 Pierre Le Mouël SEURECO 32 Eoghan O’Connell UM 33 Mark Sanders UM 34 Tania Treibich UM 35 Prescott Morley UM 36 Sascha Serebriakova UM 37 Marie Pied ESMIA 38 Sigit Perdana EPFL 39 Marc Vielle EPFL 40 Bianca Vienni-Baptista ETH 41 Stephanie Briers ETH 42 Lukas Engel UNIBAS 43 Adam Hawkes Imperial 44 Leigh Martindale Imperial 45 Vignesh Sridharan Imperial 46 Michael Obersteiner Oxford 47 James Price UCL 48 Isabela Butnar UCL 49 Alvaro Calzadilla UCL 50 Steve Pye UCL 51 Serguey Maximov UCL 52 Pietro Lubello UCL 53 Jessica Jewel SAB 54 Stephanie Waldhoff SAB 55 Cecilie Mauritzen SAB
Page 18 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 56 Brian O’Gallachoir SAB 57 Steve Smith SAB 58 David McCollum SAB 59 Hannah Daly SAB 60 Lukas Hermwill SAB Minutes: Main issues discussed Day I Item Description Welcome The General Assembly (GA) meeting started with Dr Alexandros Nikas (ICCS) greeting all participants and summarising the agenda of the 1st day of the meeting. WP1 Dr. Nikas presented WP1, starting with the overall project pipeline and WP interactions. He updated partners on SyGMa developments (Task 1.1) and informed them that ICCS would request researcher information from each partner. On Task 1.2 (scientific coordination), he confirmed Deliverables 1.1, 1.2, and 7.2 were delivered on time, D2.4 was shared with internal reviewers, and outlined the deliverables and milestones due in the next 12 months. He also mentioned D1.2, a periodic report covering GA and internal progress meetings. Regarding Task 1.3, the SAB synthesis remains unchanged, but highlights from SAB feedback were prepared, containing insights on stakeholder engagement and modelling. Dr. Nikas then discussed the project’s longterm outlook (Months 14–36), including future workshops. A discussion followed with Dr. Mittal on how SAB feedback relates to stakeholder eng agement, with Dr. Nikas underlining the value of SAB input regardless of direct participation. Dr. Briers echoed the usefulness of SAB feedback and, along with Dr. Nikas, discussed synergies with sister projects. Dr. Koasidis reminded the group of SAB member Dr. Mauritzen’s proposal to link DIAMOND with WorldTrans. Request feedback on researchers’ information ICCS WP2 Mr. Cassolà (ISINNOVA) presented the 2nd Phase of WP2 (M19–M36), including a flow diagram of the co-design process. He presented the initial stakeholder mapping, the categorisation, and requested contributions from partners that haven’t done so yet. He also discussed the stakeholder survey, pointing out some delays and questions around IAM familiarity. Upcoming engagement activities include updating D2.1, strategic foresight workshops, and citizen-driven foresight. A discussion followed with Dr. Mittal on including multiple themes in workshops and interaction with WP5. Prof. Pye raised targeting questions, and Mr. Cassolà emphasized the importance of balancing the stakeholder pool. Dr. Peters and
Page 25 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 to keep the stakeholder database current, noting that repeated engagement rounds can reduce participation. This prompted a broader discussion among Dr Briers, Dr Nikas, Dr Koasidis, and Mr Cassolà on whether stakeholder groups should be larger or smaller, weighing the respective advantages. Understanding stakeholder engagement expectations Dr Briers opened the session by explaining that each WP would have 20 minutes to present their stakeholder engagement expectations, followed by 10 minutes of discussion, and noted that the third session would focus on WP-specific actions. Dr Mittal suggest ed also addressing overlaps between WPs. Dr van de Ven presented the linkages between WPs 2 and 3, highlighting relevant actions, deliverables, and timelines, and showing how core models interact with stakeholders. He summarised modelling team needs and up coming steps, noting the importance of knowing stakeholder types, which led to a brief exchange with Dr Mittal on potential bilateral meetings. Dr Mittal then raised the issue of stakeholder surveys across WPs 3, 4 and 5, asking if they fall under stakeholder engagement and who would design them. Dr Koasidis proposed a consistent approach unless a task requires a different one. Dr Briers said ETH is not a survey expert but would like to be involved in reporting and proposed ETH lead workshop organisation instead, which Dr Nikas and Dr Mittal supported. Next, Dr Mittal outlined WP4’s engagement expectations, focusing on insights needed per task, overlaps with WP5, and interactions planned for finance, labour, and consumption. She noted WP4 is at an early stage and needs may evolve. Mr Cassolà responded that ISINNOVA would aim to reflect these needs in stakeholder interactions. Dr Peters followed with WP5, describing stakeholder cocreation of scenarios, expectations per task, and planned surveys and workshops. He and Dr Briers discussed aligning WP4 and WP5 timelines, with Dr Mittal adding that workshops would start in 2024, possibly continuing into 2025. Dr Peters and Dr Mittal also discussed the scenario filtering process and gaps in AR6, with Dr Sanderson suggesting broader scenario exploration. They agreed on the importance of familiarising stakeholders with uncertainty, which led to further discussion on how stakeholders perceive uncertainty across climate, economics, and SSPs. Dr Mittal noted that input here can help improve scenario design. This continued into a short exchange on holding a workshop focused on this topic. Dr Xexakis proposed organising both general and targeted workshops based on available resources, and Dr Briers agreed. Finally, Prof Pye and Dr Briers briefly discussed approaches to familiarising stakeholders with the 1.5°C target.
Page 26 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 Designing our engagements The final session began with Dr Briers explaining that it would focus on aligning stakeholder engagement actions with WPs through a matchmaking process, followed by timeline planning. She presented 15 actions grouped into 3 themes, assessed by 20 respondents for importance, feasibility, and WP involvement. Action 1 emerged as the highest priority. Dr Nikas and Dr Mittal briefly discussed incorporating stakeholder feedback into models, with Dr Briers noting that informing stakeholders their input was used is often useful and sufficient. Discussions followed on combining certain actions, highlighting concerns over the complexity of some. Dr Mittal suggested prioritising actions related to the ones outlined in the Grant Agreement and forming a secondary “wish list.” The group also discussed working with existing communities of practice. Prof Pye, Dr Briers, and Dr Mittal addressed how to better engage them, while Dr Nikas noted that relationships already exist. Dr VienniBaptista advised strengthening existing communities instead of creating new ones and suggested coordination with sister projects. Dr Xexakis mentioned an existing contact list. Dr Briers encouraged partners to link actions to project tasks and to identify overlapping or mergeable actions. ETH will group actions based on partner input and define suitable engagement formats. A discussion followed on the roles of workshops, with ISINNOVA leading those for WP4, and ETH focusing on WPs 3 and 5. Further, the relevance of each action to research questions and WP priorities was discussed. Mr Cassolà noted that the first workshop set aligns with Action 1. Dr Vienni-Baptista added that ETH will be synthesising outcomes all workshops into a synthesis deliverable and that some discussion topics may only emerge through the additional actions. She also clarified that ETH’s goal is to support the consortium in selecting preferred actions. Ms Sechi and Mr Cassolà briefly touched on stakeholder mapping and expectations. Dr Nikas and Dr Briers then discussed how action-task links would be recorded, with Briers urging everyone to review and complete the list. Finally, Dr Briers, Prof Sanders, Dr Peters, and Prof Pye discussed relevant actions link to WPs 3– 5, highlighting implications for model design and audience targeting. Closing discussion and next steps Closing the discussion, Dr Vienni-Baptista summarised the previous discussion points and then stated that the actions have two dimensions: one is related to the different roles of stakeholders and the second one aims to make stakeholder engagement more robust. Next, Dr Peters and Dr Briers had a discussion on the flexibility of organising a workshop, regarding its topic, venue (physical or online), the time given to invite stakeholders, the
Page 27 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 heterogeneity of the stakeholders participating and the format of the event. Following this, Dr Peters, Dr Briers and Dr Vienni-Baptista discussed the timeline of these actions, agreeing that these actions will probably take place during the 2nd year of the project, starting from the following May. Next, Dr Peters briefed the consortium about the kick-off meeting for WP5. Lastly, Dr Nikas informed the consortium that the actions file with notes during the meeting was uploaded and encouraged partners to refine it. Wrap-up Finally, Dr Nikas thanked all the partners for attending the meeting and thanked ETH and ISINNOVA partners for their great contribution to the sessions on the 2nd day of the meeting.
Page 28 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 3.2 Executive Board Meeting – 28 February 2024 3.2.1 Agenda Executive Board Meeting Wednesday, 28 February 2024 14:00-15:00 CEST Microsoft Teams (Link) Participants: All Partners Agenda 1. Update on project progress (completed, ongoing, upcoming tasks & deliverables) • WP1: Manage & Coordinate o Request to keep the contact list updated • WP2: Codesing o Summary of D2.4 takeaways o Mapping of stakeholder actions to tasks o Updates on the stakeholder database o Progress towards D2.2 (April 2024) • WP3: Update & Upgrade o Overall progress in model development and short updates for all six core models: OMNIA CLEWs-EU GCAM-Europe NEMESIS-World OPEN-PROM GEMINI-E3 EU o Updates from bilateral calls (e.g., GEMINI-E3 - NEMESIS; CLEWs - visualisation) • WP4: Integrate & Expand o Progress on WP4 module/task discussions o Updates from bilateral calls (e.g., GEMINI-E3 - labour; CLEWs - behavioural surveys) • WP5: Apply & Explore o Updates on scenario pipeline uncertainties • WP6: Open o Progress on the supporting tools under development o Updates on the I2AM PARIS platform o Planning for WP2-prescribed actions • WP7: Communicate, Disseminate, & Exploit o Newsletters o Social media 2. Any other business 3.2.2 Minutes Present on Call Name and Surname Organisation 1 Alexandros Nikas ICCS
Page 29 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 2 Konstantinos Koasidis ICCS 3 Anastasios Karamaneas ICCS 4 Natasha Frilingou ICCS 5 Eleftheria Zisarou ICCS 6 Anastasis Giannousakis ICCS 7 Ioannis Tolios ICCS 8 Russell Horowitz BC3 9 Dirk-Jan Van de Ven BC3 10 Jon Sampedro BC3 11 Claudia Rodes BC3 12 Ben Sanderson CICERO 13 Ida Sognnaes CICERO 14 Jan Ivar Korsbakken CICERO 15 Tomasso Pilon E4SMA 16 Sonja Sechi E4SMA 17 Maurizio Gargiulo E4SMA 18 George Xexakis HOLISTIC 19 Andrés Ramos Galán COMILLAS 20 Sandra Lumbreras COMILLAS 21 Maria dek Socorro Gómez Perez COMILLAS 22 Constantinos Taliotis CYI 23 Daniel Cassolà ISINNOVA 24 Baptiste Boitier SEURECO 25 Mark Sanders UM 26 Marie Pied ESMIA 27 Stephanie Briers ETH 28 Adam Hawkes Imperial 29 Leigh Martindale Imperial 30 Sergey Maximov UCL 31 Sigit Perdana EPFL 32 Marc Vielle EPFL Minutes: Main issues discussed Item Description Action What Who WP1 The meeting commenced with Dr Alexandros Nikas (ICCS) greeting the consortium and briefing them on the agenda. Related to WP1, he reiterated items and requests discussed during the GA, crucially regarding keeping the internal contact lists up to date. WP2 Dr Briers opened the discussion on the outputs of D2.4 and related stakeholder engagement tasks. She presented an Excel file mapping stakeholder actions to WPs and ETH’s involvement, urging WP leaders to review and comment in a proposed half-hour meeting. The file will be shared via weekly updates, with Dr Koasidis suggesting proper folder placement. Dr Briers highlighted key insights from D2.4, Take a look at the stakeholder actions file Provide feedback to ETH All partners WP leaders
Page 30 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 noting stakeholders’ awareness of project progress and familiarity with the transdisciplinary process, recommending all partners read the executive summary. Nikas indicated that the deliverable features great detail. Mr Cassolá reported that Phase 1 of the survey rolled out finished with over 70 responses (68 positive) and 58 interested to join in the workshops. He noted a possible second invitation round to improve discipline representation and shared that work on updating D2.1 is underway, focusing on providing a timeline for the upcoming workshops. UNIBAS and ISINNOVA plan meetings for synergy. Dr Koasidis noted that 58 engaged participants could form a solid core group especially if they are committed to continuous participations. He and Mr Cassolá also discussed modelling teams’ roles in April workshops, with Mr Cassolá promising an update by next week. Disseminate the file through the weekly update Inform the consortium about the April workshops ICCS ISINNOVA WP3 Ms Sonja Sechi (E4SMA) presented recent model enhancements: OMNIA improved energy balance and plans an energy demand workshop; GCAM-EU integrated Eurostat energy data; OPEN-PROM completed its data and energy module; GEMINI-EU advanced on hydrogen, pollutants, and carbon taxation; CLEWsEU is adding transportation; NEMESIS progress remains limited. Dr Dirk-Jan van de Ven (BC3) updated on numerous bilateral meetings between modelling teams. Dr Sigit Perdana (EPFL) clarified meetings with non-modelling teams (e.g., UNIBAS, UM) and shared upcoming meeting plans. Dr Constantinos Taliotis (CYI) reported on discussions with HOLISTIC partners about results visualisation for CLEWs-EU, aiming to develop an interface similar to EUCALC. Dr Marc Vielle (EPFL) noted ongoing work on EUCALC at EPFL and offered contact. Dr George Xexakis (HOLISTIC) emphasised inspiration from EUCALC rather than direct use, supported by Dr Koasidis, who also saw benefit in engaging the EUCALC team for stakeholder work. Dr Koasidis stressed the c hallenge of tracking bilateral meetings, requesting brief summaries be sent to ICCS management for better coordination. He suggested such meetings could contribute to WP2 actions if relevant. Communicate with the EUCALC team Send a short description of bilateral meetings to ICCS EPFL, HOLISTIC All partners WP4 Dr Nikas took the floor mentioning the many aspects of WP4 had already been discussed with Prof Adam Hawkes (Imperial) mentioning that this WP is now starting to have major progress since it started quite late according to the project’s timeline. Specifically, he stated that Tasks 4.1 and 4.4 just started, hence ther e is nothing to report. Lastly, he mentioned that the Milestone 7 report is on track. WP5 Then, Dr Ben Sanderson (CICERO) informed the partners that the kick-off meeting of WP5 will take place on the 14th of March 2024 . He also mentioned that Dr Shivika Mittal (CICERO) and Dr Glen Peters (CICERO) had a meeting with the OMNIA team. Dr Sanderson also mentioned that CICERO is in Solve the MAgPIE issue CICERO, Imperial, ICCS
Page 31 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 the process of writing a preliminary report on climate impacts and that a relevant paper led by Dr Mittal will be prepared by the end of March. Issues related to access and use of the MAgPIE model were discussed. WP6 The discussion on WP6 commenced with Dr Koasidis discussing potential internal meetings and workshops regarding specific thematic areas. Dr Xexakis briefed the consortium on discussions with Dr Taliotis regarding the visualisation interface. Then, he briefed the partners on the progress of the I2AM PARIS interface, stating that a demonstration version would be soon available. He also mentioned that the interface allows users to easily modify the model documentation. Improve the I2AM PARIS platform Focus on open data issues meetings HOLISTIC All partners, ETH, ISINNOVA WP7 Lastly, Dr Xexakis informed the consortium that the dissemination process is progressing successfully and stated that developing a tool similar to EUCALC can be a good strategy. He also proposed communicating with the WorldTrans project teams on potential synergies. In this context, Dr Koasidis asked the consortium to communicate with the ICCS and HOLISTIC teams if they participate in or host any conference that would need dissemination resources. The meeting concluded with Dr Nikas thanking all participants. Contact HOLISTC/ICCS on conferences for dissemination All partners
Page 32 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 3.3 Executive Board Meeting – 27 March 2024 3.3.1 Agenda Executive Board Meeting Wednesday, 27 March 2024 14:00-15:00 CEST Microsoft Teams (Link) Participants: All Partners Agenda 1. Update on project progress (completed, ongoing, upcoming tasks & deliverables) • WP1: Manage & Coordinate o Preparation of the next General Assembly • WP2: Codesing o Planning of stakeholder actions from WPs/tasks o Updates on the stakeholder database o Progress towards D2.2 (April 2024) • WP3: Update & Upgrade o Overall progress in model development and short updates for all six core models: OMNIA CLEWs-EU GCAM-Europe NEMESIS-World OPEN-PROM GEMINI-E3 EU • WP4: Integrate & Expand o Progress on WP4 modules/tasks: Labour, finance, well-being Behavioural surveys Circular economy Climate/physical impacts • WP5: Apply & Explore o Reflections on the WP5 kick-off meeting • WP6: Open o Progress on the supporting tools under development o Updates on the I2AM PARIS platform • WP7: Communicate, Disseminate, & Exploit o Newsletters o Social media 2. Any other business 3.3.2 Minutes Present on Call Name and Surname Organisation 1 Alexandros Nikas ICCS 2 Konstantinos Koasidis ICCS 3 Thomas Nikolakakis ICCS
Page 33 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 4 Eleftheria Zisarou ICCS 5 Anastasis Giannousakis ICCS 6 Ioannis Tolios ICCS 7 George Plessias ICCS 8 Fotis Sioutas ICCS 9 Dirk-Jan Van de Ven BC3 10 Kurt Kratena CESAR 11 Shivika Mittal CICERO 12 Constantinos Taliotis CYI 13 Alessia Elia E4SMA 14 Tomasso Pilon E4SMA 15 Sonja Sechi E4SMA 16 Maurizio Gargiulo E4SMA 17 Daniel Cassolà ISINNOVA 18 Baptiste Boitier SEURECO 19 Marie Pied ESMIA 20 Bianca Vienni-Baptista ETH 21 Stephanie Briers ETH 22 Adam Hawkes Imperial 23 Leigh Martindale Imperial 24 Vignesh Sridharan Imperial 25 Steve Pye UCL 26 Sigit Perdana EPFL 27 Marc Vielle EPFL Minutes: Main issues discussed Item Description Action What Who WP1 Dr. Nikas (ICCS) opened the discussion about the upcoming General Assembly (GA) meeting, with Dr. Koasidis (ICCS) noting it will take place before the first reporting period and thanking EPFL for organizing the hybrid meeting in Lausanne. He shared that a draft logistics document, including hotel info, has been sent to partners and will be continuously updated, urging everyone to fill out the attendance spreadsheet. The agenda will focus mainly on the end of the first reporting period, with plans to include an SAB session. Dr. Perdana (EPFL) expressed the team’s enthusiasm for hosting and reiterated the logistics details. When Dr. Mittal (CICERO) inquired about other events during the two-day meeting, Dr. Nikas replied that while some time might be allocated to additional ideas, the GA remains the priority. Dr. Koasidis mentioned a potential concurrent online workshop but saw no need to merge it with the GA. Dr. Nikas added that the agenda is still open for suggestions, with intentions to cover WP2 and host the SAB session, inviting members in person if possible. He requested that all partners prepare Inform EPFL partners on physical attendance Prepare a draft agenda All partners ICCS, EPFL
Page 34 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 examples and deadlines for the WP1 session at the GA. Dr. Nikas stated that expectedly parts of the discussions during the GA will focus on the mid-term report and stressed the need to find an effective way to present progress for the interim report despite limited deliverables so far. Dr. Mittal asked for guidance on documenting modelling processes without sharing code, suggesting a brainstorming session during the GA. Dr. Nikas replied that the Commission prefers concise reports and that ICCS would share examples, with support from WP3 and WP4 leaders. They also discussed the GA meeting framework related to WP5 and stakeholder engagement. Dr. Nikas highlighted a busy June due to midterm reporting and clarified the role of associated partners ICCS will contact partners by end of May with requests and a 3–4 week deadline. WP2 Mr. Daniel Cassolá (ISINNOVA) updated the consortium on finalising the stakeholder engagement strategy (D2.1) and mentioned upcoming workshop requirements, with the date to be confirmed soon. He noted that stakeholders will be informed about the foresight and scenario workshops. Dr. Stephanie Briers (ETH) added that WP2 action meetings are ongoing with other WP leaders, highlighting coordination with WP6 on webinars, WP5 on relevant actions, and WP3 on the ISINNOVA workshop and its links to WP5. Dr. Koasidis emphasised that the timeline of scheduling the requirements workshop is crucial foran efficient preparation— if the workshop is to take place on May workshop, a clear workshop structure and timely working documents are necessary as well as invitations be sent before Catholic Easter. He also reminded that WPs 3, 4, and 5 must meet their deadlines on research questions to ensure the work remains stakeholderdriven. Finalise D2.1 Inform stakeholders of the upcoming workshops Communicate with WP leaders for WP2 actions ISINNOVA ISINNOVA ETH, WP leaders WP3 Next, Ms Sonja Sechi (E4SMA) briefed the partners on the progress of each of the six core models. The NEMESIS model team is preparing a simplified version of the model so they can test its properties. In the CLEWs-EU model, the energy module is almost complete and that the land & water module is under development. The GEMINI model team is currently working on the IPCC template and is also running some preliminary tests. The modularisation of the OPEN-PROM model has begun in order to provide simple and extended versions of each module. Regarding the GCAM-Europe model, energy balances and income groups are finalised, whereas the buildings’ energy balance is being extended. Lastly, the OMNIA model team started implementing the renewal potential, data for which is provided by CICERO colleagues. Then, she informed the consortium that two softlinking meetings had been arranged and that E4SMA awaited CICERO’s reply regarding the soft-linking of their model.
Page 41 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 HORIZON projects disseminate their insights. This meeting can also be considered an action related to WP7 as well. Moreover, he informed the consortium of the enhancements of the I2AM PARIS platform, also stating that during the GA meeting, HOLISTIC will provide more details on how partners can contribute to upcoming webinars. WP7 In conclusion, Dr Nikas mentioned that the project had a sufficient representation in the EGU conference and thanked everyone for attending the meeting.
Page 42 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 3.5 Executive Board Meeting – 19 June 2024 3.5.1 Agenda Executive Board Meeting Wednesday, 19 June 2024 14:00-15:00 CEST Microsoft Teams (Link) Participants: All Partners Agenda 1. Update on project progress (completed, ongoing, upcoming tasks & deliverables) • WP1: Manage & Coordinate o Preparation for the review report: Technical Aspects including templates Financial Requirements Q&A o Interim review meeting o Reflections on Lausanne GA & SAB feedback o Reflections on RP1 • WP2: Codesing o Foresight Workshops o Updates on the planning of multi-stakeholder group discussions • WP3: Update & Upgrade o Overall progress in model development and short updates for all six core models: OMNIA CLEWs-EU GCAM-Europe NEMESIS-World OPEN-PROM GEMINI-E3 EU • WP4: Integrate & Expand o Progress on WP4 modules/tasks: Labour, finance, well-being Behavioural surveys Circular economy Climate/physical impacts • WP5: Apply & Explore o •Updates on Task 5.1 & the preparation of the novel scenario space • WP6: Open o Preparation on the thematic workshops and survey to brainstorm ideas o Progress on the supporting tools under development o Updates on the I2AM PARIS platform • WP7: Communicate, Disseminate, & Exploit o Status update on D7.3 o Newsletters o Social media o IAMC & ECEMP submissions 2. Any other business
Page 43 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 3.5.2 Minutes Present on Call Name and Surname Organisation 1 Alexandros Nikas ICCS 2 Konstantinos Koasidis ICCS 3 Anastasios Karamaneas ICCS 4 Thomas Nikolakakis ICCS 5 Anastasis Giannousakis ICCS 6 Ioannis Tolios ICCS 7 Claudia Rodes BC3 8 Jon Sampedro BC3 9 Shivika Mittal CICERO 10 Constantinos Taliotis CYI 11 Alessia Elia E4SMA 12 Tomasso Pilon E4SMA 13 Sonja Sechi E4SMA 14 Maurizio Gargiulo E4SMA 15 George Xexakis HOLISTIC 16 Maria del Socorro Gómez Pérez COMILLAS 17 Daniel Cassolà ISINNOVA 18 Pierre Le Mouël SEURECO 19 Mark Sanders UM 20 Marie Pied ESMIA 21 Sigit Perdana EPFL 22 Marc Vielle EPFL 23 Stephanie Briers ETH 24 Lukas Engel UNIBAS 25 Maro Malliaroudaki Imperial 26 Michael Obersteiner Oxford 27 Alvaro Calzadilla UCL Minutes: Main issues discussed Item Description Action What Who WP1 Dr. Alexandros Nikas (ICCS) opened the meeting by welcoming the consortium and introducing Dr. Maro Malliaroudaki (Imperial), who briefly presented her modelling background. He then gave an update on WP1, announcing that an evaluator has been assigned and that the interim review meeting will take place on 27 September 2024, with participation of WP leaders and selected task leaders in case questions arise on specific modelling matters. A rehearsal will be held earlier in September, and a Doodle poll will be sent out soon to allow scheduling before the summer holidays. Dr. Nikas reminded partners to update their SyGMA profiles and noted that associated partners should coordinate with ICCS for access. He and Dr. Mittal discussed the review process. He noted the GA meeting in Lausanne was successful, with the Prepare a Doodle poll for the presentations’ rehearsal for the interim review meeting Update SyGMA profile regarding research personnel Prepare technical and financial ICCS All partners WP leaders and all partners
Page 44 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 only change being the new September date for the Requirements workshop. WP1 and WP6 technical reports are now in the repository, and other WP leaders were reminded to prepare their reports. Dr. Koasidis outlined internal deadlines: 28 June for technical reports and 5 July for financial ones, ahead of the 30 July official deadline. Finally, Dr. Mittal and Dr. Nikas discussed how to present WP linkages. reports respectively WP2 Dr. Stephanie Briers (ETH) updated the consortium on a bilateral meeting with CICERO regarding the co-design and grouping of WP3 and WP5 research question modules. She plans to analyse these groups and design the modules by summer, encouraging modelling te ams to explore a few themes of interest to stakeholders. Mr. Daniel Cassolà (ISINNOVA) thanked partners for their feedback on the Requirements Workshop preparatory material, highlighting CYI’s suggestion to reduce the number of questions and E4SMA’s offer to lead the first session on model development strategy. Dr. Sonja Sechi (E4SMA) confirmed their support, and a bilateral meeting between E4SMA and ISINNOVA was proposed. Dr. Koasidis stressed that ISINNOVA should finalise the workshop’s structure and timeline, noting a scheduling conflict for ICCS colleagues on September13. Mr. Cassolà agreed on the urgency of settling key issues to reach out to stakeholders before summer. Dr. Mittal confirmed CICERO’s readiness to support, and Mr. Cassolà expressed ISINNO VA’s flexibility. He also noted that WP3 research question refinement can now begin. Co-design and group modules for research questions from WP3 and WP5 Organise a bilateral meeting for the 1st session of the Requirements workshop ETH ISINNOVA, E4SMA WP3 Next, Dr Sechi and Dr Jon Sampedro updated the consortium on the core models’ development progress. Then, Dr Nikas, Dr Koasidis, and Dr Sechi discussed technical reporting for model development as part of the interim report. Dr Mittal and Dr Koasidis also had a short discussion on what the technical report of tasks that have not started yet should include, agreeing that a short description and basic planning are sufficient. Prepare technical reports for each model Modelling partners WP4 Dr. Malliaroudaki noted she is still mapping the project linkages and proposed discussing next steps with Task leaders. Dr. Alvaro Calzadilla (UCL) then presented Task 4.1 progress on circular economy and related linkages. For Task 4.2, Dr. Mittal reported no major updates on MAgPIE and OMNIA but shared that a METEOR pipeline was discussed with the WorldTrans project, and a survey will be sent to WP3 modelling teams. Prof. Mark Sanders (UM) suggested synthesising the Lausanne work and mentioned Mr. O’Connell's upcoming visit to EPFL to advance linkages. He added that Ms. Serebriakova will follow up on the remaining UM topics. On Task 4.6, Mr. Lukas Engel (UNIBAS) said behavioural experiments are ongoing, with coordination efforts underway with UM and CESAR. Finally, Ms. Gómez Pérez (COMILLAS) reported ongoing coordination between Prepare a survey for WP3 modelling teams Synthesise the GA work CICERO UM
Page 45 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 COMILLAS and BC3 on aligning GCAM Europe with openTEPES. WP5 Regarding Task 5.1, Dr Mittal mentioned that CICERO has shared some surveys with the consortium. She stated that there are different ways to understand the gaps in scenario representation. Lastly, she mentioned that discussions with WP2 teams are already taking place, and that although other tasks have not started yet coordination with the stakeholder engagement process will be a crucial part of initial activities. WP6 Next, Dr George Xexakis (HOLISTIC) informed the consortium that HOLISTIC is focusing on preparing the technical report for WP6 and the work on the I2AM PARIS platform, stating that there are no significant updates. WP7 Then, Dr Nikas encouraged partners to submit their work at the ECEMP conference, with a submission deadline on the 1st of July. Dr Mittal and Dr Xexakis discussed the creation and/or enhancement of workspaces or applications in the platform regarding Task 5.1. Lastly, Dr Nikas thanked all partners for participating in this meeting.
Page 46 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 3.6 Executive Board Meeting – 16 October 2024 3.6.1 Agenda Executive Board Meeting Wednesday, 16 October 2024 14:00-15:00 CEST Microsoft Teams (Link) Participants: All Partners Agenda 1. Update on project progress (completed, ongoing, upcoming tasks & deliverables) • WP1: Manage & Coordinate o Final stages of monitoring for RP1: Re-submission of interim report o Discussions during Interim review meeting & official (written) assessment o IAMC & ECEMP participation • WP2: Codesing o High-level Results of the Requirements Workshop o Lessons learnt from the organisation of the Requirements Workshop o Planning for the upcoming Foresight Workshops o Preparations for MS7 (Organisation of Workshops) o Plan for a multistakeholder workshop to finalise the research questions with WP5 • WP3: Update & Upgrade o Progress towards D3.2 (Model Development Strategy – Update): Updates from MS5 Integrating insights from the Requirements workshop o Overall progress in model development and short updates for all six core models: OMNIA CLEWs-EU GCAM-Europe NEMESIS-World OPEN-PROM GEMINI-E3 EU • WP4: Integrate & Expand o Planning for MS6 (ENGAGE and MAgPIE*) o Progress on WP4 modules/tasks: Labour, finance, well-being Behavioural surveys Circular economy Climate/physical impacts • WP5: Apply & Explore o Updates on Task 5.1 & the preparation of the novel scenario space o Initial Plans for D5.1 (novel scenario space) • WP6: Open o Preparation and first plan on the organisation of thematic workshops Updates on the I2AM PARIS platform • WP7: Communicate, Disseminate, & Exploit o Status update on D7.5 (Outreach) o Newsletters
Page 47 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 o Social media 2. Any other business 3.6.2 Minutes Present on Call Name and Surname Organisation 1 Alexandros Nikas ICCS 2 Konstantinos Koasidis ICCS 3 Anastasios Karamaneas ICCS 4 Christina Tigka ICCS 5 Anastasis Giannousakis ICCS 6 Ioannis Tolios ICCS 7 Claudia Rodes BC3 8 Dirk-Jan van de Ven BC3 9 Russell Horowitz BC3 10 Shivika Mittal CICERO 11 Jan Ivar Korsbakken CICERO 12 Tomasso Pilon E4SMA 13 Sonja Sechi E4SMA 14 Maurizio Gargiulo E4SMA 15 George Xexakis HOLISTIC 16 Sara Lumbreras COMILLAS 17 Luis Olmos Camacho COMILLAS 18 Maria del Socorro Gómez Pérez COMILLAS 19 Daniel Cassolà ISINNOVA 20 Baptiste Boitier SEURECO 21 Mark Sanders UM 22 Marie Pied ESMIA 23 Sigit Perdana EPFL 24 Marc Vielle EPFL 25 Mart van der Kam UNIBAS 26 Vignesh Sridharan Imperial 27 Maro Malliaroudaki Imperial 28 Adam Hawkes Imperial 29 Alvaro Calzadilla UCL Minutes: Main issues discussed Item Description Action What Who WP1 Dr. Nikas (ICCS) opened the meeting by welcoming participants and introducing Dr. Mart van der Kam (UNIBAS), who briefly presented himself. He then updated the consortium on the EC’s assessment, noting that the review was very positive—no deliverables need revision, with the evaluation featuring suggestions for future work. He also discussed financial aspects related to the 2 nd installment of Revise financial aspects of the technical report ICCS, all partners
Page 48 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 payments. Dr. Mittal (CICERO) suggested incorporating a section in the next report on how EC recommendations were addressed. Dr. Nikas agreed and proposed including comments and responses, as done in similar projects. He congratulated everyone on their contributions and shared outreach updates, including two accepted DIAMOND papers at the ECMP conference. He encouraged partners to notify the ICCS team about any upcoming IAMC submissions or physical attendance. WP2 Mr. Cassolà (ISINNOVA) updated the consortium on WP2, noting that the Requirements Workshop report is nearly complete and encouraging modelling teams to integrate stakeholder insights into their work and the Model Development Strategy report. He shared that a postworkshop survey received moderate ratings, with feedback indicating potential improvements to stakeholder engagement. He mentioned that a draft format for the second workshop was shared and will be discussed further on a dedicated meeting this week. Dr. Sechi (E4SMA) suggested improving industry and water sector participation. Mr. Cassolà noted that some invited stakeholders did not attend and proposed expanding the stakeholder database. Dr. Nikas discussed on ways and aspirations to structure the second workshop to increase impact. Dr. Mittal (CICERO) announced plans for a WP5 multi-stakeholder workshop and proposed a bilateral meeting with ISINNOVA. She and Prof. Hawkes (Imperial) encouraged WP3 and WP4 task leaders to provide input. Finalise the Requirement Workshop report. Plan the 2nd Workshop. Organise a multistakeholder workshop for WP5. ISINNOVA ISINNOVA CICERO, Imperial, ISINNOVA WP3 Next, Dr Sechi and Dr Dirk-Jan van de Ven (BC3) informed the consortium that a draft for Deliverable 3.2 will be shared in early November. In this context, Dr Koasidis replied that the plan seems good and he also suggested that the deliverable can build on top of MS5. He also mentioned that incorporating insight from the Requirements Workshop into Deliverable 3.2 is very important at this stage. Mr Cassolà mentioned that the Requirements Workshop report will be shared by the following Friday. Next, Dr Sechi briefed the partners on the updates done on each of the 6 core models and on upcoming bilateral meetings. In the same context. Finalise the draft of Deliverable 3.2 E4SMA, BC3 WP4 Next, Dr Maro Malliaroudaki (Imperial) summarised the work done on ENGAGE and MAgPIE as part of MS7. In addition, she briefed the consortium on the progress made in steel, aluminium and cement modelling in Task 4.1. Moreover, she mentioned that a meeting with IIASA is planned regarding Task 4.2 and she also presented the recent work on the MAgPIE model. regarding Task 4.4, Dr Mittal informed the partners that a paper is planned to be prepared by the end of 2024 and then she summarised the progress made on METEOR. Then, Dr Malliaroudaki took the floor once again to Paper on literature review on IAM development for labour, finance and demand, UM
Page 49 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 present the work done in Task 4.5. She mentioned that a paper incorporating the literature review for labour, demand and finance IAM development is being prepared. Moreover, she mentioned that a theoretical model is almost complete and that a series of additional papers on model extensions will be prepared. In this context, Prof Mark Sanders (UM) further informed the consortium of these developments. Lastly, Dr Malliaroudaki, regarding Tasks 4.6 and 4.7 informed the consortium on the data retrieved from CLEWs-EU and the progress made on electricity modelling. WP5 Regarding WP5, Dr Mittal informed the consortium that the first deliverable of this WP has started being developed. She also mentioned that CICERO aims to add some harmonisation and land-use aspects in this work, stressing the importance of linkages with WP2. In this context, Dr Nikas suggested a meeting between ICCS, CICERO and ETH be organised to discuss the questions for the WP5 workshop. Work on deliverable 5.1 Organise a meeting for the WP5 workshop. CICERO CICERO, ICCS, ETH WP6 Regarding WP6, Dr Koasidis mentioned that the consortium needs to make some changes to the project’s website to respond to the reviewers’ recommendations. In this context, he also informed the partners that work on tools is also underway. Lastly, he mentio ned that Dr George Xexakis (HOLISTIC) and Dr Stephanie Briers (ETH) are discussing organising a webinar on transdisciplinarity. Furthermore, Dr Xexakis highlighted updates performed on the I2AM PARIS platform. Changes on the project’s website Organise a webinar on inclusivity. HOLISTIC HOLISTIC, ETH WP7 Regarding, WP7 he requested that partners inform the project’s administration team of their participation in upcoming conferences. Lastly, Dr Nikas mentioned that the reviewers had no comment on the project’s progress regarding its KPIs and thanked all participants for attending this meeting.
Page 50 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 3.7 Executive Board Meeting – 4 December 2024 3.7.1 Agenda Executive Board Meeting Wednesday, 4 December 2024 14:00-15:00 CEST Microsoft Teams (Link) Participants: All Partners Agenda 1. Update on project progress (completed, ongoing, upcoming tasks & deliverables) • WP1: Manage & Coordinate o Updates on final stages of monitoring for RP1: Re-submission of interim report o Scheduling the next General Assembly o Updates on IAMC participation & EGU session announcement • WP2: Codesing o Insights from the First Foresight Workshop o Submission of MS7 (Organisation of Workshops) o Preparation for the Second Foresight Workshop o Progress on preparations for the kickoff meeting of the multistakeholder discussion groups • WP3: Update & Upgrade o Submission of D3.2 (Model Development Strategy – Update): o Overall progress in model development and short updates for all six core models: OMNIA CLEWs-EU GCAM-Europe NEMESIS-World OPEN-PROM GEMINI-E3 EU • WP4: Integrate & Expand o Planning for MS6 (ENGAGE and MAgPIE*) o Progress on WP4 modules/tasks: Labour, finance, well-being Behavioural surveys Circular economy Climate/physical impacts • WP5: Apply & Explore o Updates on Task 5.1 & the preparation of the novel scenario space o Initial plans for D5.1 (novel scenario space) o Launch of Tasks 5.3, 5.5, 5.6 • WP6: Open o Preparation and first plan on the organisation of thematic workshops: Timeline o Updates on the I2AM PARIS platform • WP7: Communicate, Disseminate, & Exploit o Status update on D7.5 (Outreach) o Newsletters
Page 57 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 3.8.2 Minutes Present on Call Name and Surname Organisation 1 Alexandros Nikas ICCS 2 Konstantinos Koasidis ICCS 3 Kimon Georgiou ICCS 4 Anastasios Karamaneas ICCS 5 Stratis Alexandrou ICCS 6 Anastasis Giannousakis ICCS 7 Dirk-Jan Van de Ven BC3 8 Jon Sampedro BC3 9 Claudia Rodes BC3 10 Russell Horowitz BC3 11 Kurt Kratena CESAR 12 Shivika Mittal CICERO 13 Glen Peters CICERO 14 Ben Sanderson CICERO 15 Jan Ivar Korsbakken CICERO 16 Karstein Maseide CICERO 17 Constantinos Taliotis CYI 18 Marios Karmellos CYI 19 Tomasso Pilon E4SMA 20 Alessia Elia E4SMA 21 Maurizio Gargiulo E4SMA 22 George Xexakis HOLISTIC 23 Stefanos Tsotras HOLISTIC 24 Angelos Potiriadis HOLISTIC 25 Christos Petkidis HOLISTIC 26 María del Socorro Gómez Pérez COMILLAS 27 Sara Lumbreras COMILLAS 28 Andrés Ramos Galán COMILLAS 29 Carlo Sessa ISINNOVA 30 Daniel Cassolà ISINNOVA 31 Baptiste Boitier SEURECO 32 Paul Zagamé SEURECO 33 Hayat Mekki SEURECO 34 Eoghan O’Connell UM 35 Mark Sanders UM 36 Tania Treibich UM 37 Prescott Morley UM 38 Sascha Serebriakova UM 39 Marie Pied ESMIA 40 Sigit Perdana EPFL 41 Marc Vielle EPFL 42 Bianca Vienni-Baptista ETH 43 Stephanie Briers ETH 44 Lukas Engel UNIBAS
Page 58 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 45 Mart van der Kam UNIBAS 46 Maro Malliaroudaki Imperial 47 Leigh Martindale Imperial 48 Michael Obersteiner Oxford 49 Alvaro Calzadilla UCL 50 Dan Zhang UCL 51 Pietro Lubello UCL 52 Steve Pye UCL 53 Jessica Jewel SAB 54 Lukas Hermwill SAB 55 David McCollum SAB 56 Stephanie Waldhoff SAB Minutes: Main issues discussed Item Description Action What Who Welcome Dr Konstantinos Koasidis (ICCS) greeted the consortium and thanked everyone for attending. WP1 Dr. Koasidis (ICCS) presented an overview of WP1, highlighting a Gantt chart for the next six months and confirming that the first reporting period concluded successfully. He summarised key points from the technical and financial reports and shared feedback from the Project Officer on harmonisation, submission timelines, publication strategy, and innovation. A figure showing PM allocation across WPs and partners was also shown, with a reminder for partners to verify their recorded work effort. For Task 1.2, he outlined the deliverables and milestones submitted in the past six months and flagged a demanding upcoming period (10 deliverables and 10 milestones due by July). The next GA meeting will be held in Oslo on June 12– 13, hosted by CICERO, aligning wi th the nearby EAERE conference, which the Project Officer strongly encouraged partners to attend. He also shared feedback from SAB members at the last GA, mainly regarding COP participation and modelling. A longerterm Gantt chart through M36 was presented, summarising WP requirements. Finally, Dr. Nikas urged partners to submit to EAERE before the January 31 deadline, echoing the Project Officer’s recommendation. Organise the next GA meeting CICERO WP2 Mr Daniel Cassolà (ISINNOVA) opened the session with a summary of insights from the Requirements and 1st Foresight workshops, which will feed into MS6. He presented a 3 Horizons framework, focusing on Horizon 2 and previewed the foresight workshop, highlighting its multistakeholder format, links with WP5, and alternative scenarios. He also shared a proposed timeline. Mr Carlo Sessa (ISINNOVA) followed with details on the Organise the 2nd Foresight workshop and the Ethical workshop for citizens Organise the 3 multi-stakeholder ISINNOVA, ETH ETH
Page 59 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 Ethical Citizens’ Workshop, planned after the 2nd Foresight session, explaining the approach and challenges. Citizen assemblies will begin in Milan and potentially extend to other cities. Dr Stephanie Briers (ETH) proposed a bilateral meeting with ISINNOVA to align efforts and ensure timely inputs for D2.3. Mr Sessa suggested workshops could occur in June or September to fit the deadlin e. Mr Cassolà supported collaboration between ISINNOVA, ETH, and CICERO to better integrate WP5 aspects and engage CDR-related stakeholders. Dr Bianca Vienni-Baptista (ETH) emphasised the importance of incorporating EC feedback and stakeholder selection. She and Mr Sessa discussed better coordination of stakeholder processes, with Dr Glen Peters (CICERO) cautioning about timing for modelling input, with Mr Sessa reiterating alignment with WP5 as the priority. Dr Briers then presented the structure of the ETH-led kick-off webinar, outlining stakeholder group compositions and cocreation processes for research questions. She shared the webinar schedule (Feb 18–27), plans for group reports, and logistical details. Feedback from the webinar was also reviewed. Dr Mittal (CICERO), Dr Peters, and Dr Briers discussed the need to adapt group meetings based on the first session’s outcome. Dr Nikas flagged potential overlaps with the foresight workshop; Dr Briers responded that ETH’s stakeholder pool is distinct. Further coordination discussions included a WP6 reporting exchange between Dr Xexakis (HOLISTIC) and ETH colleagues, with Mr Cassolà confirming ISINNOVA will provide internal reports. Dr Mittal raised the need to prioritise research questions based on modelling capacity, with WP3 involvement. Dr Vienni-Baptista noted that not all questions can necessarily be modelled, and Dr Briers added that some could be future research topics. Feedback from the CLEWs team was welcomed— Dr Taliotis (CYI) confirmed their support. The session closed with Dr Nikas and Dr Mittal addressing timing and coordination across activities. group meetings WP3 Dr Dirk-Jan van de Ven (BC3) opened the modelling session by outlining key progress on WP3, including submitted deliverables and milestones, and turned attention to the upcoming MS8. He presented the Model Harmonisation Protocol, stressing the importance of aligning key parameters across models while allowing flexibility depending on geographic coverage and model structure. He clarified that harmonisation efforts won’t constrain scenario development, as input diversity can still reflect alternative narratives. This led to a brief exchange with Drs Mittal, Peters, and Vielle on the use of multiple baseline scenarios, especially across different SSPs. The session moved into model-specific updates, with Dr van Deliver MS8 by July Deliver the final version of GCAM Europe by June 2026 Deliver the first stable version of OMNIA by July 2025 BC3 BC3 E4SMA
Page 60 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 de Ven presenting the GCAM-Europe developments, including regional granularity, trade flows, and stakeholderinformed revisions in various sectors. He also noted the documentation timeline for the model’s versions and provided example outputs. Dr Alessia Elia (E4SMA) then introduced the OMNIA model timeline, highlighting improvements in spatial and sectoral detail, guided by stakeholder feedback. She noted softlinking efforts with other models and reported on updates using VEDA templates, as well as adjustments to energy service demand assumptions. Dr Constantinos Taliotis (CYI) followed with updates on the CLEWs-EU model, announcing that the aggregated version is live and the disaggregated one is planned by M36. He emphasised how behavioural and technological aspects raised by stakeholders have been reflected in the model, particularly regarding CCS and land-water interactions. Next, Dr Sigit Perdana (EPFL) presented progress on GEMINEE3 EU, noting its developments on air pollutants, hydrogen use, and macroeconomic dynamics such as labour and household heterogeneity. He shared how stakeholder insights have informed the modelling of sectoral interactions and system-wide impacts. Dr Baptiste Boitier (SEURECO) shifted the focus to NEMESISWorld, noting that much of the upcoming work will take place in 2025. He provided an overview of the current focus on behavioural equations, economic data, and employment effects, linking these with stakeholder feedback on finance, behaviour, and heterogeneity. Dr Anastasis Giannousakis (ICCS) closed the model updates with a presentation on OPENPROM, highlighting improvements in temporal resolution, open-source toolchains, and its integration with other models like MAgPIE and openTEPES. He also outlined progress toward MS8 and discussed open data processes, prompting Dr Boitier to suggest a call on the utility of the mrprom library. Throughout the session, cross-cutting coordination remained a consistent theme, with repeated emphasis on soft-linking models, maintaining transparent documentation, and using stakeholder input not only to improve model detail but also to drive convergence across WP3. Deliver the disaggregated version of CLEWsEU by November 2025 CYI, ICCS, Imperial WP4 Dr Maro Malliaroudaki (Imperial) presented the WP4 timeline with a clear illustration of how its tasks connect to WP3 models, also noting the upcoming submission of Deliverables D4.1 and D4.2. She provided a task-by-task progress update, with emphasis on model linkages, and specifically outlined developments in Task 4.1 related to the ENGAGE model. Dr Mittal then presented updates on the MAgPIE model, highlighting the incorporation of harmonised socioeconomic drivers, an update to integrate recent national pledges, and Deliver D4.1 and D4.2 by June and July Imperial
Page 61 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 the development of an R script for exporting MAgPIE outputs to OMNIA. She confirmed that the MS7 report documenting the softlinking between MAgPIE and OMNIA has been almost ready and outlined the next steps under Task 4.2, including AFOLU harmonisation, data feeding to WP5, and ongoing refinements to MAgPIE. Dr Kurt Kratena (CESAR) followed with an overview of CESAR’s contributions, including coordination with WP3 teams and the new household heterogeneity workplan agreed with BC3. He described the dataset being developed, focusing on household income, consumption patterns, and data typology, and summarised how this data is being progressively integrated into WP3 models. Dr Ben Sanderson (CICERO) then briefed the group on progress with OpenSCM and METEOR. He mentioned an upcoming paper and a submission to the EGU conference, and presented a schematic showing how METEOR functions. He also discussed efforts underway to conne ct METEOR outputs with WP3 models. Prof Mark Sanders provided a short update on Task 4.5, focusing on the literature review, the development of theoretical and agentbased models, and recent paper submissions. Mr Lukas Engel (UNIBAS) presented on Task 4.6, detailing progress on the behavioural module for OMNIA, GCAMEurope, and CLEWs-EU. He explained the current structure across micro, meso, and macro levels, supported by a visual, and discussed ongoing data collection, particularly regarding electric vehicles and psychological factors influencing behaviour. Ms Maria del Socorro Gomez Perez (COMILLAS) then showcased progress on OpenTEPES and its integration with GCAM-Europe, outlining the threestep implementation process. She presented data inputs, regional coverage, and modelled connections, along with hourly energy demand and dispatch graphics which will inform GCAM. This prompted a broader discussion on soft-linking, with Dr Nikas calling for a consolidated timeline, and Dr Malliaroudaki committing to urge all teams to coordinate accordingly. Dr Koasidis re inforced that full model interlinking remains a core obligation under the Grant Agreement. SAB Session Following the lunch break, the SAB session commenced with Dr Nikas greeting the SAB members, and informing them about the location of the next GA meeting. Then, he presented the progress of the project since May focusing on the positive feedback from the project officer, the project’s key outputs, the intensive stakeholder engagement activity, the model development progress and the timeline of the next 6-month period. Afterwards, an SAB member, Dr Nikas, Dr Vienni-Baptista and
Page 62 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 Dr Briers had a discussion on sharing workshop insights with the general public as well as on the project’s options for increasing its social outreach via COP events and its website. Next, another SAB member made a point about examining dystopian scenarios with Dr Mittal and Dr Peters joining the conversation. Moreover, SAB members mentioned options in this direction, with Dr Nikas replying that the consortium is interested in scoping potential to pursue these recommendations. Additionally, he added that the consortium partners are already involved (e.g., through synergistic publications) in this endeavour. In conclusion, Dr Nikas mentioned that the SAB will be informed about the insights of this SAB session and thanked all attending SAB members for their participation and insightful suggestions. WP5 Following the SAB session, Dr Glen Peters provided an overview of the WP5 agenda, reiterating its objectives, timeline, and tasks. He confirmed that Deliverable D5.1 is ready for submission, with a follow-up update planned for Month 42. He outlined the structure of D5.1 and noted that it will serve as the basis for forthcoming publications. Dr Peters presented a schematic of scenario pipeline uncertainties and shared data visualisations covering scenario distributions by model and energy demand. Emphasising the need to tailor scenario assessments to specific research questions, he cautioned against over-relying on aggregate statistics. He also discussed efforts in data harmonisation and vetting, showcasing figures related to IPCC scenarios, CO₂ reduction, an d carbon budgets. He concluded this segment by illustrating the scenario space— qualitative and quantitative—using SSPs as a reference point. Prof Michael Obersteiner (Oxford) then presented the status of Task 5.2, focusing on the integration of human systems, biophysical impacts, and uncertainties under transient climate conditions. He introduced the modelling of human diseases within MAgPIE and IAMs, discussing links between health outcomes and variables like food prices, air pollution, and climate impacts. He showed preliminary MAgPIE results on BMI distribution and a diagram outlining potential soft linkages with macroeconomic modules. A brief discussion with Dr Mittal followed regarding the food demand model. Dr Maro Malliaroudaki summarised the launch of Task 5.3, outlining its objectives, structure, and timeline. She presented a Gantt chart tracking progress and highlighted early activities, including the disruptive events plenary, a stakeholder workshop, and a literature review. Dr Mittal then shared details of a paper under development on Solar Radiation Management (SRM) in climate scenario frameworks. A broader discussion followed between Dr Mittal, Dr Malliaroudaki, Prof Obersteiner, and Dr Peters on Submit D5.1 Submit 2 papers related to D5.1 SDG mapping in models by June Organise a WP5 meeting on multistakeholder discussion groups CICERO CICERO ICCS CICERO
Page 63 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 how the consortium defines “disruptive events” and which specific events are currently in focus. In a separate presentation, Prof Alvaro Calzadilla (UCL) introduced the ENGAGE material model, highlighting sectoral classifications and referencing an alternative dataset. He also shared upcoming simulation plans, showing how OMNIA and ENGAGE will be softlinked across baseline, policy, and circular economy scenarios. He concluded by summarising the current status and next steps. Prof Mark Sanders reported on Task 5.4, using a schematic to position the task within the broader modelling framework. He reviewed progress across three themes: finance, labour, and household heterogeneity, indicating what has been accomplished and what still needs to be done. Dr Mart van der Kam (UNIBAS) followed with insights into the human behaviour component, presenting a case study, outlining the methodological approach, and inviting input from partners. Dr Koasidis then introduced the timeline and structure for Task 5.5, detailing upcoming deliverables and milestones. He explained that ICCS plans to start SDG mappings across models by June, followed by targeted surveys to enhance modelling of SDGrelated dynamics. He noted particular focus on biodiversity, labour, and the water cycle, and mentioned growing interest in SDG16 (peace, justice, and strong institutions). Dr Peters concluded with a summary of the multi-stakeholder discussion group objectives and timeline, proposing that CICERO convene a dedicated WP5 meeting. This led to a broader exchange involving Dr Nikas, Dr Mittal, and Dr Peters on defining the number and scope of model runs and research questions. Dr Vienni-Baptista suggested collecting stakeholder questions and adjusting them for practical integration, noting the importance of careful translation and framing. Dr Koasidis acknowledged the potential workload implications of diverging stakeholder inputs, while Dr VienniBaptista stressed the importance of semantics and methodological alignment. Mr Cassolà (ISINNOVA) offered to facilitate further discussions, and Dr Peters and Dr Briers considered how to streamline coordination between WP2 and WP5. Dr Vienni-Baptista concluded by recommending small improvements to enhance collaboration, and Dr Mittal requested that key points and expectations be summarised and shared via email. WP6 Dr Koasidis then presented the timeline, milestones, and deliverables for WP6, noting that the second update of the Data Management Plan (DMP) is expected by November. He introduced an illustration of the Open Science Protocol, and upcoming development of supporting guidelines. He also outlined synergies with other projects and the consortium’s Prepare the 2nd update of the DMP by November Develop ICCS, HOLISTIC ICCS, HOLISTIC
Page 64 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 engagement in communities of practice, with particular reference to the MAIA Multiply Program. Additionally, he reported that D6.4 has been submitted, highlighting project activities, webinars, and exchanges on sustainability, with an update scheduled for Month 36. He noted the project officer’s emphasis on clearly defining each project's contribution. Following this, Dr Xexakis introduced the MAIA project, announcing a series of upcoming webinars on stakeholder participation, lessons from AR5/AR6, and open development. He added that capacity-building activities—such as videos, webinars, and training sessions—will commence after July. Dr Xexakis also outlined development pipelines and presented selected principles. He noted that an analysis of best IAM development practices is in preparation and introduced the new I2AM PARIS platform. Lastly, he summarise d the objectives of D6.8, focusing on the stakeholder-informed application library and the integration of LLM support for enhanced visualisation. guidelines for the Open Science Protocol Organise core capacity development activities after July HOLISTIC WP7 Regarding WP7, Dr Xexakis summarised its timeline and deliverables and then proceeded to Task 7.1 which is related to the project’s visual identity. In this context, he mentioned everything is completed except infographics (e.g., model infographics), videos (e.g., model tutorials) and media articles. Regarding the project’s CDE plan (Task 7.2) he confirmed that everything is progressing smoothly. Lastly, regarding Task 7.3, he summarised the conferences in which the consortium will participate in 2025 and presented the CDE indicators of the project. In this context, he briefed the partners on the next steps regarding the project’s social media presence focusing on media and infographics as well as the issue of the evolution of X (ex-Twitter) and joining BlueSky. In conclusion, Dr Nikas encouraged WP2 and WP5 partners to talk about the discussion groups and thanked everybody for participating in the meeting.
Page 65 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 3.9 Executive Board Meeting – 26 March 2025 3.9.1 Agenda Executive Board Meeting Wednesday, 26 March 2025 14:00-15:00 CEST Microsoft Teams (Link) Participants: All Partners Agenda 1. Update on project progress (completed, ongoing, upcoming tasks & deliverables) • WP1: Manage & Coordinate o Quality management process – Internal Reviewer Assignments for 2025 o Scheduling the next General Assembly o Upcoming conferences • WP2: Codesing o Updates from the organisation of the first round of the multistakeholder discussion groups and next steps o Plan for D2.5 – Updated stakeholder-informed research questions o Preparation for the Second Foresight Workshop o Progress towards D2.3 – Updated stakeholder engagement strategy • WP3: Update & Upgrade o Preparations for developing a strategy towards claiming MS8 (first version of the models) o Updates and further requirements on harmonisation o Overall progress in model development and short updates for all six core models: OMNIA CLEWs-EU GCAM-Europe NEMESIS-World OPEN-PROM GEMINI-E3 EU • WP4: Integrate & Expand o Progress on WP4 modules/tasks: Labour, finance, well-being Behavioural surveys Circular economy Climate/physical impacts Land use, nature-based solutions Household Heterogeneity Electricity Module • WP5: Apply & Explore o Updates from the WP5 task leaders meeting. o Reflections on the feedback from the multistakeholder discussion groups: Group 1: Climate change Group 2: Climate action Group 3: User driven scenarios • WP6: Open
Page 66 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 o Reflections on the first thematic workshop and produced resource (video) o Upcoming webinars o Updates on the I2AM PARIS platform o Plan towards D6.6 – Development Pipelines • WP7: Communicate, Disseminate, & Exploit o Newsletters o Social media 2. Any other business 3.9.2 Minutes Present on Call Name and Surname Organisation 1 Konstantinos Koasidis ICCS 2 Anastasios Karamaneas ICCS 3 Christina Tigka ICCS 4 Stratis Alexandrou ICCS 5 Alexandros Nikas ICCS 6 Kimon Georgiou ICCS 7 Anastasis Giannousakis ICCS 8 Claudia Rodes BC3 9 Dirk-Jan van de Ven BC3 10 Russell Horowitz BC3 11 Glen Peters CICERO 12 Jan Ivar Korsbakken CICERO 13 Shivika Mittal CICERO 14 Constantinos Taliotis CYI 15 Tomasso Pilon E4SMA 16 Maurizio Gargiulo E4SMA 17 Alessia Elia E4SMA 18 George Xexakis HOLISTIC 19 Apostolos Tsotras HOLISTIC 20 Maria del Socorro Gómez Pérez COMILLAS 21 Daniel Cassolà ISINNOVA 22 Paul Zagame SEURECO 23 Hayat Mekki SEURECO 24 Baptiste Boitier SEURECO 25 Marie Pied ESMIA 26 Sigit Perdana EPFL 27 Marc Vielle EPFL 28 Bianca Vienni-Baptista ETH 29 Mart van der Kam UNIBAS 30 Vignesh Sridharan Imperial 31 Michael Obersteiner Oxford 32 Steve Pye UCL Minutes: Main issues discussed
Page 73 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 4 Scientific Advisory Board meetings The Scientific Advisory Board is made up of highly esteemed individuals, not belonging to the project’s consortium. The SAB's purpose is to provide technical and scientific insight to the project consortium. The members of this board are appointed by the project’s General Assembly, comprising one representative from each project partner and the Project Coordinator. The originally proposed synthesis, the Terms of Reference, and the formulation of the SAB have been reported in the project’s first milestone report (MS1). DIAMOND’s current SAB is comprised of 8 members, ensuring a wide range of experts, as well as gender balance, with its synthesis subject to modification if new challenges/opportunities arise. 4.1 2nd SAB Session: 8 January 2024 The second SAB session was held online during the 1st day of the project’s General Assembly. It followed updates from all work packages, enabling the SAB to reflect on the project’s progress after its first year. All eight SAB members attended. Brief Update to SAB The project consortium presented: • Key outputs since May 2023 (e.g., Joule paper on Fit for 55 & net-zero pathways; COP28 presentations; engagement in IAM conferences). • Ongoing efforts to strengthen modelling capacity (e.g., internal workshops, summer schools). • Updates on stakeholder mapping tools, and the mutual understanding work of WP2. • Status of model development and upgrades to the I2AM PARIS platform. SAB Feedback and Discussion Highlights 1. Stakeholder Engagement & EC Guidance • EC Direction & Feasibility: the SAB asked whether the EC has guided the project’s direction (e.g., on feasibility or sectoral optimisation). The consortium noted no concrete EC direction other than what is prescribed in the Grant, but upcoming review meetings may bring more concrete input. • Engagement Approaches: One SAB member shared experience from the CINTRAN project, highlighting the value of practitioner-based exchanges that inform research with real-world challenges. • Stakeholder Mapping: the SAB expressed interest in how stakeholder interest/influence was conceptualised. WP2 leaders clarified that mappings are task-specific, helping to define levels of engagement for each actor. 2. Modelling Progress & Strategy • Feasibility & Transition Speed: SAB members raised concerns about the feasibility of pathways, especially the speed of change. They suggested going beyond stock-based thresholds (e.g., bioenergy) and incorporating speed constraints and adoption dynamics (e.g., for EVs or heat pumps). • Follow-up: The consortium acknowledged the importance of this point and shared that related work is underway in WPs 4–5, including behaviour-informed modelling and risk assessment. A deliverable on stakeholder engagement and further work on feasibility metrics will follow.
Page 74 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 • Model Interlinkages & Pipelines: the SAB welcomed progress in model development and asked about shared infrastructure. The consortium discussed individual model pipelines and efforts to embed open science practices (e.g., open data/scripts, validation tools). • Regional Focus: the SAB encouraged the project to build on current momentum and expand regional analysis efforts. • Community Synergies: SAB members reiterated the value of engagement with sister projects and invited the consortium to ETSAP’s biannual meetings and the IEW conference. 3. Transdisciplinary Work • The ETH team highlighted the mutual understanding process, with seven in-person visits and two reports so far. • The SAB appreciated the focus on transdisciplinarity and acknowledged the difficulty of integrating it meaningfully. They encouraged continuing this early engagement of modellers and stakeholders. Dr. Nikas thanked the SAB for their constructive feedback and noted that more time would be beneficial in future sessions. He invited SAB members to follow up with further questions and offered to share upcoming deliverables for feedback. 4.2 3rd SAB Session: 23 May 2024 This SAB session took place on 23 May 2024, during the 3rd General Assembly (GA) meeting of the DIAMOND project, hosted at EPFL in Lausanne, Switzerland. The GA meeting was held in a hybrid format, allowing remote participation via Zoom. The SAB session was scheduled at the end of the first day of the GA, enabling SAB members to follow the project’s latest progress before contributing their insights. Three SAB members attended remotely: Dr. Cecilie Mauritzen, Dr. David McCollum, and Dr. Lukas Hermwille. The session began with a presentation by project coordinator Dr. Alexandros Nikas (ICCS), who provided an overview of key activities and progress across the project. Highlights included a summary of an SDG-oriented modelling study on EU decarbonisation pathways involving multiple partners, a set of best practices for participatory modelling derived from an internal study, and details on the DIAMOND project’s visibility at the EGU conference, where six studies were presented. He also mentioned forthcoming stakeholder engagement activities, including a Requirements Workshop, and introduced the CLEWs-EU single-node model to be used for capacity development. Transparency procedures, ongoing synergies with other projects (including a joint survey on the IPCC scenario submission process alongside the IAM COMPACT project), and updates on collaborations with the WorldTrans and MAIA projects were also discussed. Further points covered included the status of the I2AM PARIS platform and the conclusion of the first reporting period. Dr. Nikas also updated the SAB on ICCS’s involvement in developing net-zero pathways for the city of Athens, following the election of Prof Haris Doukas as mayor. Key discussion points raised by the SAB included: • On relevant events: SAB members inquired whether the consortium planned to organise any events at COP29. Dr. Nikas noted that, while no policy outputs were ready due to ongoing model development, the project would remain open to opportunities if they arise. One SAB member suggested that even limited partner participation could be effective. They also proposed that the consortium consider contributing to the UN High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF) in July 2025, which could serve as a valuable dissemination avenue for the project.
Page 75 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 • On modelling and engagement with international processes: SAB members asked whether the consortium is participating in IPCC surveys and whether results from the project’s own surveys would be submitted. Dr. Shivika Mittal (CICERO) confirmed that survey data was being collected with this intention. The SAB encouraged sharing these findings with the wider community, noting the IPCC’s ambition to make the scenario submission process more dynamic and iterative. They also informed the consortium about an upcoming IPCC workshop on scenarios in Bangkok. • On model robustness and policy relevance: the SAB advised the consortium to remain attentive to the evolving policy landscape, especially in the light of the upcoming EU elections, which could affect the direction of policy outreach. A member also encouraged modelling extreme or abrupt scenarios, such as a trade conflict between major economies, to test the resilience of the project’s tools. Dr. Nikas noted that colleagues at Imperial are already exploring such disruptions and that WP5 is focused on assessing model robustness under extreme conditions. • On participatory modelling and stakeholder validation: The SAB emphasised the importance of validating models with stakeholders and asked how the success of the project’s participatory framework would be evaluated. Dr. Bianca Vienni-Baptista (ETH) responded that a dedicated task in the next phase of the project will focus on implementing and testing the participatory framework. • On performance tracking and project KPIs: an SAB member stressed the importance of assessing the project’s progress against its KPIs. Dr. Nikas replied that, while KPI parameters (e.g., conference attendance) are tracked, there is no consolidated documentation yet. He acknowledged the value of raising awareness among partners, nonetheless. The session concluded with Dr. Nikas thanking the SAB members for their participation and insightful contributions. 4.3 4th SAB Session: 29 January 2025 This SAB session was organised in the context of the 4th General Assembly (GA) meeting of DIAMOND, held online via Microsoft Teams on 29 January 2025. The session took place after the lunch break and lasted one hour, enabling the (four) attending SAB members to be informed of the latest project developments. The session was opened by Dr. Alexandros Nikas (ICCS), who welcomed the SAB members and announced that the next GA meeting would take place physically in Oslo, Norway, encouraging efforts to facilitate in-person participation. He then gave a brief overview of the project’s progress, beginning with key points from the Commission’s monitoring of the 1st Reporting Period. All submitted deliverables had been approved, with one main recommendation being to enhance the publication strategy, particularly as several publications are expected after the project's completion. Dr. Nikas presented highlights of the project’s outputs since May, including submitted publications, scientific outreach, and networking activities in 2024. He provided an overview of stakeholder engagement efforts, summarising completed workshops and noting that more are planned for 2025, including the upcoming 2nd Foresight workshop. He also outlined progress on model development and linkages, showcased the DIAMOND scenario space, and explained how the models are expected to be used. Finally, he summarised the Open Science Protocol and gave a brief overview of the project’s next steps for the following six months. Key discussion points raised by the SAB included: • On stakeholder engagement and impact: o The SAB stressed the importance of maximising the visibility and impact of stakeholder engagement
Page 76 D1.3 – Report on project and SAB Meetings – Update 1 activities, including through the publication of reports. o SAB and project partners suggested creating a dedicated space on the project website to showcase transdisciplinary and participatory activities, a recommendation positively received by the consortium. o There was encouragement to clarify the project’s contribution and unique value proposition (USP/UVP), particularly by explicitly outlining what DIAMOND is doing that others are not. • On scenarios and model development: o One SAB member highlighted the lack of dystopian or disruptive scenarios in many modelling efforts, suggesting DIAMOND could help fill this gap. Examples mentioned include low energy demand scenarios or reduced trade scenarios, and how such futures might affect political systems or global dynamics. Dr. Peters and Dr. Mittal noted that some WP5 tasks already explore disruptive futures, and that this direction could be pursued further. o Another SAB member referred to broader scenario debates in the community (e.g., SSPs, DERPs) and pointed to venues such as the Scenarios Forum and a planned special issue in the Futures journal. A suggestion was made to organise a dedicated session on scenarios (possibly with SAB involvement), either internally or through community fora. The SAB acknowledged the constraints of the project scope but encouraged DIAMOND partners to stay engaged with scenario developments, possibly contributing to post-project initiatives and proposals. • On project visibility and continuity: o The SAB raised the idea of framing project achievements for broader communication, suggesting simple messages such as "we did this, and this fills a gap". o The SAB proposed a strategic meeting to explore potential future directions for the consortium, including follow-up projects, after the updated Model Development Strategy is delivered. o The consortium welcomed this and expressed willingness to host a dedicated SAB session or meeting to support future planning and deepen engagement.