Criteria for IAP endorsement or agreement to collaborate for external activities and products
Requests from external entities will be assessed by the IAP secretariat and co-chairs following these criteria. All criteria must be met, as agreed by the secretariat and a majority of the co-chairs, in order to engage.
- Is there sufficient IAP capacity to support it? If so, does it warrant the opportunity costs? What other activity should be deprioritised/sunsetted if necessary to enable IAP to engage?
- Has IAP been invited to engage early in the planning process? (Note: Requests for IAP to engage late in a process, e.g., to endorse a final statement, without opportunity to provide revisions, etc. should generally be declined, except in special cases where all below criteria are met and the co-chairs and secretariat agree to engage.)
- Is the activity aligned with IAP’s strategic goals? I.e., does the activity contribute to one or more of the following:
● academy capacity building
● provision of high quality, independent advice of scientific topics of global or regional importance
● communicating the importance of science, engineering and medicine
- Does the activity add unique value to IAP? Is the activity aligned with IAP’s principles of diversity and inclusion? i.e., does the activity engage scientists and other experts across all geographies, disciplines and career stages or can IAP ensure it does so? Does it attempt to engage important stakeholders in other sectors e.g. policymaking, NGOs, private sector?
- Does IAP add unique value to the activity? How?
- Is there a strategic reason to engage (e.g., demand from a key stakeholder for advice that IAP can provide, funding opportunity in line with IAP’s mission, forging a new and potentially fruitful strategic partnership, etc.)?