Collaboration

This page provides a range of templates of legal instruments to be used for collaborations with TCPs and other multilateral innovation initiatives. These include:

The legal foundation for external collaborations
This section discusses the provisions in the TCP Framework and Implementing Agreements authorising collaboration with external initiatives and the IEA Secretariat, including the Coordinator role.

Building collaboration into TCP planning.
This section discusses the procedures and policies that TCPs may internally incorporate to enhance collaborative efforts, including through mission statements and official objectives.

Joint Tasks involving multiple TCPs
This section discusses considerations to take into account when developing Joint Tasks, including practical considerations and a template for a Joint Annex.

Memoranda of Understanding with external initiatives
This section discusses the possibility of entering into Memoranda of Understanding to define collaborative arrangements with external initiatives.

Informal participation
This section discusses options for experts outside the TCP network to informally participate within a TCP and its activities.

Article 6 of the Framework for the Technology Collaboration Programme encourages TCPs to carry out joint activities with multilateral initiatives involving IEA Member, Accession or Association countries, other TCPs and other multilateral initiatives.

While the Framework provides a clear mandate to engage in collaborative activities, the specifics of any particular collaboration must be developed according to the terms of the specific Implementing Agreement. Most Implementing Agreements allow cooperation beyond the TCP, but many do not have any explicit authorisation and these activities must generally be carried out in the context of a specific Task.

The IEA is working to assist the TCPs with updating the Implementing Agreements to incorporate the new Framework. Most TCPs that have completed this process have included in their Implementing Agreement the IEA’s model language on collaborative activities. 

Under this model provision, the Executive Committee may by unanimous vote authorise the Chair to enter into Memoranda of Understanding or other non-binding instruments on behalf of the Executive Committee. These arrangements can outline expectations for joint activities with TCPs and other external initiatives. They can lay out a roadmap for how the TCP and the other initiative will work together, including by listing the specific areas for cooperation and describing specific joint activities.

Under the model Implementing Agreement text, specific joint activities are generally carried through Tasks as long as the activities are consistent with the overall Programme of Work and the relevant Annex. Tasks can be designed as Joint Tasks, where two or more TCPs agree up front to carry out a Task together. Alternatively, TCPs may invite external participants to assist at various stages of a single-TCP Task, including by inviting input at the Task development stage and by inviting experts to participate at various stages of the Task. 

The IEA Secretariat is not formally able to join a TCP or a TCP Task as an official member. Instead, the IEA’s role in the TCPs is usually a coordinating function. The IEA assigns each TCP a “Desk Officer” to serve as the primary point of contact between the IEA Secretariat and the TCP. The Desk Officer is encouraged to attend meetings of the TCP Executive Committee in order to share information about IEA activities, to coordinate exchanges between IEA and the TCP, and to provide strategic input regarding the TCP’s planned activities. Article 5 of the Framework for the Technology Collaboration Programme encourages TCPs to work closely with the IEA Secretariat to ensure close coordination between their work and that of the IEA Secretariat. 

Formally speaking, no, the IEA cannot join a TCP Task. However, the Framework authorises the IEA Secretariat to take a more significant role in a specific TCP Task by acting as “Coordinator.” The Coordinator role is available in instances where it is mutually desirable for the IEA to have a deeper role in facilitating the work in a particular Task or sub-Task. This role maybe similar to the role of “Task Leader” or “Task Manager,” in some TCPs, except that the IEA cannot hold funds or carry out legal acts on behalf of the TCP members.

If interested in exploring this, we recommend that you contact your TCP Desk Officer to discuss possibilities. If there is interest in formalising such an arrangement, please contact the IEA legal office at TCP.legal@iea.org. 

An official policy is not required, and individual joint activities can proceed without such a policy. However, having an official policy may help participants to recognise external collaboration as an effective strategy to meet TCP goals while conserving resources. Establishing procedural requirements that institutionalise collaboration within decision-making processes can foster collaboration amongst TCPs and other external initiatives. This may be done through formalised regulations and procedural requirements put in place by the TCP ExCo, pursuant to their rights under the Implementing Agreement.

The policies on collaboration could include:

• designated ‘levels’ of collaboration with predetermined terms, rights and responsibilities of collaborative partners;
• a procedural step to be included on a project-to-project basis, to actively explore collaborations with external initiatives previously interested to collaborate with the TCP;
• establish a procedural step that must be undertaken by technical experts to incorporate collaboration in the project development phase of a new Task or project. This could include a section for proponents to provide details of expected overlap with other initiatives and to explain whether the topical focus is cross-cutting with other ongoing TCP Tasks. 

Incorporating collaboration within the official policy objective or mission statement of a TCP can help build common recognition that external collaboration is an important goal.

The concept of collaboration could be embedded within the TCP’s Programme of Work or Strategic Work Plan, which illustrates that the TCP mechanism as a whole is to inherently collaborate, thereby being intrinsic in the way the way the TCP operates.

The concept of collaboration could be included as part of a TCP’s overall mission statement or objectives, making it a basic requirement for all new TCP activities. This could illustrate that the collaborative nature of proposed new activities is considered as a criteria in deciding whether the activity is consistent with the TCPs overall programme of work and long-term strategy. 

The IEA maintains a repository of examples of TCP policies and mission statements on collaboration. If your TCP has an example that is not found here, please contact us at TCP.legal@iea.org. 

With collaborative projects involving multiple TCPs, the simplest approach may be to design and initiate joint Tasks as a means of collaborating on a chosen topic. TCP Tasks are usually underpinned by a legally binding Annex.

If you are considering establishing a joint Task, we encourage you to reach out to the IEA Office of Legal Counsel through an email at TCP.legal@iea.org for assistance. For tracking purposes, we also request that you please notify us after you have finalised any joint project and provide details of the TCPs or other initiatives that are involved.

A Task Annex is a good place to specify the duties and responsibilities that are expected of each TCP Participant. These responsibilities may include organising workshops and other events, conducting work on specific sub-tasks, handling logos and branding issues, designating Operating Agents, etc.

Although, it is completely up to each TCP participating in a joint Task to define what activities they can commit to, it is important to decide this upfront. Including this in the legal text of the Joint Annex can bring clarity and consistency regarding who is responsible for what. 

Each TCP has a different schedule for its Executive Committee meetings and Task reports, and a wide variety of members can be especially cumbersome for Task Leaders/Managers that are already occupied with running a Joint Task. For this reason, we recommend that TCPs interested in a joint Task adopt similar reporting structures and timelines as much as possible.

Another option that can be explored is to designate a single point-of-contact for each TCP Participating in the Joint Task. Each TCP point-of-contact would then be responsible for reporting to their own Executive Committee, which they should already be familiar with. This avoids having the burden fall on a single person. 

It is entirely up to the TCPs participating in the Joint Task to decide an approach that works best for them. The TCPs may each designate a single Task Leader/Manager to represent them in the Joint Task, and these Task Leaders jointly coordinate activities and lead the Task together. Alternatively, it may be simpler for the TCPs involved to designate a single Task Leader/Manager to lead the Joint Task, and then select only a point-of-contact from the other TCP for the purpose of reporting only. It may be especially convenient if the single Task Leader/Manager is designated from a country with common memberships in all the TCPs participating in the Joint Task. 

A notable obstacle when establishing Joint Tasks is that of mismatched TCP funding structures. While some TCPs are organised on a cost-shared basis, others are designed with a task-shared structure. It is important for TCPs interested in collaborating with other TCPs to adopt flexible funding structures to minimise the challenges that may arise in this regard. Adopting a flexible approach allows TCPs interested in collaborating to find common ground amongst them. For example, if both TCPs are at least in principle open to a task-shared approach, even if this is not their typical way of working, it can greatly facilitate funding discussions.

Each TCP manages its own membership, including Contracting Parties, Sponsors, and Limited Sponsors. Each TCP also sets different rules for who is allowed to designate experts to participate in specific Tasks. We recommend that any member of either TCP should be allowed to participate in a Joint Task – not only those that are members of both.

In terms of the process for designating experts, there are two options. One option would be for each TCP to manage the participation of its own members in the Joint Task, keeping the other TCP informed of any such designations. Thus, if a country is a member of only one TCP, they should follow the procedure for that TCP. If a country is a member of both, they can follow either procedure. Alternatively, the TCPs may agree on a streamlined procedure for designating national experts or Task Participants that both sides will use. To the extent this procedure differs from the TCP’s normal practices, this should be clearly communicated.

The Joint Annex should ideally provide:

• Background for the joint project
• Description of the Project
• Objectives and Scope of the Project
• Means
• Target Audience and Benefits
• Deliverables/Sub-Tasks
• Funding
• Time Schedule
• Specific Responsibilities of each TCP
• Specific Responsibilities of the Operating Agent(s)
• Information and Intellectual Property
• Cooperation with other IEA TCPs

The IEA maintains a repository of examples of joint Annexes. If your TCP has an example that is not found here, please contact us at TCP.legal@iea.org. 

TCP Implementing Agreements are unique legally binding instruments, which may be significantly different from other multilateral initiatives that do not have a legally binding agreement. In order to avoid complexity, the best approach may be to enter into a Memoranda of Understanding (MoU). MoUs are generally non-binding in nature and are generally very flexible.

The primary purpose of the MoU is to define the agreed-upon scope of cooperation to provide an institutional record of the intention of the parties. Formalising this in written form provides clarity and ensures that expectations are mutually agreed upon.

An MoU may be used for initiatives to organise joint activities, develop joint reports, organise workshops or events, invite representatives to attend meetings, amongst other activities. 

No, signing an MoU is not required, and most joint activities can be carried out without one. However, having a written arrangement can help to set the expectations of the parties and to define potential future areas of work with more clarity. 

Generally, no. Under the TCP Implementing Agreements, the Chair of the Executive Committee may be authorised to enter into an MoU or similar arrangement provided that it is not legally binding. The Chair does not usually have the legal authority to bind the TCP members. If a legally binding arrangement is necessary – for example because funding or confidential information will be exchanged – this can usually be agreed between the TCP Secretary or Operating Agent and the external initiative or organisation.

An MoU includes several standard provisions to facilitate carrying out of the MoU, including designating points of contact, confirming the independence of the Parties, setting expectations for the use of names and logos, and making provisos for the dissemination of information, intellectual property and the settlement of disputes. 

The IEA maintains a repository of examples of MoUs between TCPs and other initiatives. If your TCP has an example that is not found here, please contact us at TCP.legal@iea.org. 

Generally, yes. Every TCP Executive Committee has the ability to invite external participants to join as “observers.” For a one-off observer, the TCP Chair often has the authority to invite someone to participate in their individual capacity. For a standing invitation to another initiative, we recommend that the full Executive Committee agree to the invitation. The specific process for inviting observers may differ for each Implementing Agreement, but please consult TCP.legal@iea.org if you have any questions about the process.

Instead of developing a joint Task, it may be simpler to invite experts from other TCPs or different external initiatives to participate in an ongoing Task. This limited level of collaboration may be less time-consuming than deciding on terms of a joint Task. Although formally the Task is under the responsibility of only one TCP, having input from external participants may help to build ties between the two groups over time.

Participation in a TCP Task may be formalised through signing a Letter of Participation. The extent of participation, including any obligations and responsibilities, may be outlined in this letter. For tracking purposes, we request that you please notify the IEA legal office when you invite external groups or initiatives to participate in your Tasks.