Draft Summary of Conclusions of the COST JAF Group Meeting1 Held in Brussels on 16-17 February 2005 (link)

March 21, 2005

Brussels, 18 Mar 2005

Full text of Document 226/05
Suite of documents 226/05

Subject: JAF Group meeting1 held in Brussels on 16-17 February 2005

1. Adoption of the agenda

The Group adopted the provisional agenda as set out in CM 257/05 of 24 January 2005 (Annex 2).

2. Approval of Summary of conclusions of the previous meeting

The Group approved the Summary of Conclusions of the JAF meeting of 3-4 November 2004 as set out in doc. COST 320/04.

1 Third meeting of JAF in its composition as agreed at the 159th meeting of the CSO (doc. COST 261/1/04 REV 1)

3. Presentation of the Review Panel report

Professor Juan ROJO, Chair of the Review Panel, presented the Panel report following the review of COST domains in Physics, Fluid Dynamics, Chemistry and Materials2. The Panel conclusions and recommendations can be found in Annex 3 to this document.

4. Proposals from the COST Office

(a) Domain restructuring and domains review

Following an exchange of views on the aforementioned report, the Group examined the proposal as set out in doc. COST 214/05 and agreed to recommend to the 161st meeting


[Public Info Net automatically generates links to Council Register documents where an appropriately formatted document number is given. However, the document may not be available for public use and/or it may not be loaded on the Council Register yet.]

Council Register

Please login or register to read this article.

Register to continue

Get a month's unlimited access to THE content online. Just register and complete your career summary.

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Most commented

Recent controversy over the future directions of both Stanford and Melbourne university presses have raised questions about the role of in-house publishing arms in a world of commercialisation, impact agendas, alternative facts – and ever-diminishing monograph sales. Anna McKie reports

3 October