UFU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 111: Dansk positionspapir om det næste EU rammeprogram for forskning og innovation

Uddannelses- og Forskningsudvalget 2016-17
UFU Alm.del Bilag 111
Offentligt

Early Danish position on the next EU framework programme for

research and innovation

A strong EU framework programme for research and innovation is essential for

the EU to maintain and strengthen its global position as a robust, competitive

knowledge economy and tackle societal challenges throughout the next decades.

Therefore, research and innovation is expected to be one of the

key priorities

a modernised EU budget.

The framework programme should generate maximum impact, e.g. by setting a

common,

strategic agenda

for European research and innovation investments

that effectively underpins the EU’s overall political objectives,

and supports the

implementation of the European Research Area.

The success of the EU framework programmes continues to depend on the

prin-

ciple of excellence

for all research and innovation actions. Excellence is the

basis for EU-funded research to be truly world-class and ground-breaking and

thus successful in reaching

Europe’s

overall, strategic objectives.

Excellent research and higher education are mutually supportive and mutually

dependent. More should be done to strengthen the

coherence between re-

search, innovation and higher education

to ensure the next generation of

excellent researchers and innovators, and the effective circulation of knowledge.

Furthermore, it is crucial for the next framework programme to contribute to

boosting innovation in Europe

and to effectively address the European

‘inno-

vation challenge’. The circulation of knowledge is key in this regard

–

and innova-

tion instruments should be lean, simple, user friendly and flexible.

The next framework programme should be

easy

to understand, easy to use and

easy to administer. It must be

open

and

inclusive

in order to tackle the research

and innovation divide and thereby complement efforts at national level.

With this position paper, Denmark would like to provide early, concrete input to

the preparations of the next EU framework programme for research and innova-

tion.

16 May 2017

Danish Agency for Science and

Higher Education

Bredgade 40

1260 Copenhagen K

Denmark

Phone

+45 3544 6200

Fax

+45 3544 6201

E-mail

[email protected]

Website www.ufm.dk/en

CVR no.

Ref. no.

1991 8440

16/045073-03

Page

1/7

UFU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 111: Dansk positionspapir om det næste EU rammeprogram for forskning og innovation

1. A robust framework programme with high impact

A strong EU framework programme for research and innovation is essential for the

EU to develop as a robust knowledge economy, tackle societal challenges, and re-

main a competitive leader in the world economy. Therefore, research and innova-

tion is expected to be one of the key priorities in a modernised EU budget.

The strategic character of the next framework programme should be strengthened

by a clear focus on underpinning the overall political objectives of the EU, including

the possible successor to the Europe 2020-strategy, the sectorial policies, and the

European Research Area (ERA)

–

as well as on the implementation of international

agreements such as the Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals.

This requires a stronger collaboration and coordination across different Commis-

sion DGs and EU executive agencies.

Tackling societal challenges should continue to be a cornerstone of the framework

programmes

–

possibly via a more mission-oriented approach; Tangible missions

that underpin the overall political objectives could enhance visibility and create a

more strongly engaging narrative of the programme.

In general, green growth, better health and public healthcare, digitalisation and

other new technologies, as well as developing inclusive societies with world-class

education, should be strong elements in the next framework programme.

The framework programme should remain civilian in nature. Therefore, any future

European Defence Research Programme (EDRP) should be separated from the

framework programme for research and innovation

–

in light of the two pro-

grammes’ different

nature, purposes, scope, tasks, and stakeholders.

The expected impact of calls and topics should be clearly specified in work pro-

grammes, while embracing cross-disciplinarity, engagement of end-users as well as

inclusion of aspects related to social sciences and humanities. At the same time,

narrow and too prescriptive calls should be avoided.

2. Strong focus on excellence

In order for the framework programme to deliver on its overall, strategic objectives,

excellence should continue to be the governing principle of the framework pro-

gramme and one of the main criteria for evaluating all proposals. The principle of

excellence should not be diluted by geographic concerns.

The excellence pillar and especially the European Research Council (ERC) and the

Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA) schemes are of great value because of the

'bottom-up' approach, which gives researchers the freedom to identify new oppor-

tunities and pathways and provides the basis for new and unforeseen scientific and

technological discoveries.

MSCA’s promotion of mobility is

also key to realising

ERA. Therefore, ERC and MSCA should continue to be key components of the next

framework programme.

Synergies between ERC, MSCA and The European Cooperation in Science and

Technology (COST) should be established by linking researchers participating in

COST networks to especially young ERC grantees and MSCA mobility schemes

Page

2/7

Danish Agency for Science and

Higher Education

UFU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 111: Dansk positionspapir om det næste EU rammeprogram for forskning og innovation

aimed at junior researchers in order to maintain and utilise scientific talent in Eu-

rope.

Fundamental research should, however, not only be enabled in programmes such

as ERC, MSCA or Future and Emerging Technologies (FET), but also in strategic

programmes such as the Societal Challenges.

Research infrastructures are pivotal for European research and innovation. The

next framework programme should continue to fund access to advanced European

research infrastructures.

Better synergies should be created between the European Strategy Forum on Re-

search Infrastructures (ESFRI) and research infrastructures part of the next

framework programme. This is done through sufficient tools that aid ESFRI pro-

jects through the entire process from preparation to implementation of the re-

search infrastructure.

3. Coherence between research, innovation and higher education

Integrating research and innovation into education is one of the most, if not

the

most powerful means of disseminating new ideas and knowledge that fuel research,

innovation, productivity and competitiveness. Fostering robust links between re-

search, innovation, and education is important for the quality of higher education

and therefore for graduate employability. Knowledge exchange and transfer activi-

ties such as education, training and innovation activities for graduate and doctoral

students can significantly raise the impact of publically funded R&D.

Synergies between the ERA priority

“An

open labour market for researchers” and

the European Higher Education Area mobility tools should be realised.

Employability of researchers, mobility and knowledge exchange between academia

and business should continue to be stimulated by MSCA.

It should be explored to what extent education and training activities targeting

graduate or Ph.d. students - like developing modules to be integrated into curricula

- could be funded as eligible costs in framework programme projects (whereas the

education activity itself should not be funded).

As regards the successor of the Erasmus+ programme, it should be explored how

the

programme’s mobility activities within higher education (graduates,

Ph.d. and

staff mobility) as well as its curriculum development and teaching activities

(knowledge alliance and the strategic partnerships) could be linked to research

projects and/or the societal challenges or missions of the next framework pro-

gramme.

The concept of the Knowledge and Innovation Communities (KICs) is of great val-

ue, especially in terms of fuelling the next generation of innovative minds and en-

trepreneurs. However, the concept needs to be reviewed, not least in light of the

report from the European Court of Auditors. The administrative procedures related

to KICs need to be simplified in order to provide a less resource demanding and

more open access in the proposal phase. Furthermore, the administrative burdens

in connection with running KICs should be reduced and the focus on results should

Page

3/7

Danish Agency for Science and

Higher Education

UFU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 111: Dansk positionspapir om det næste EU rammeprogram for forskning og innovation

be enhanced. COST networks could possibly be connected to KICs to help realise

the full European innovation potential, and KICs should be linked to the strategic

programming in general. Finally, both KICs and the framework programme should

have a stronger focus on all sides of the knowledge triangle, including on education.

4. Boosting innovation

The next framework programme should contribute to boosting innovation in Eu-

rope and to effectively addressing the European

‘innovation

challenge’. The estab-

lishment of a European Innovation Council (EIC) could be a tool in this context.

Lessons learnt from the EIC Preparatory Action should be taken into considera-

tion. First and foremost, improving and promoting the circulation of knowledge,

which is important to maximising the impact of research and innovation invest-

ments, should be a key aim.

SME targeted instruments should be based on the bottom-up principle, and the

European value-added should be clear. With a view to increasing the impact of

research and innovation investments, an optimal division of labour between na-

tional and EU innovation instruments should be found, synergies sought, and over-

laps avoided.

EU innovation instruments should primarily be collaborative and foster knowledge

circulation. However, single-beneficiaries should be supported if there is a clear EU

added value, e.g. break-through innovation focusing on creating new European

markets and involving European end-users, or dissemination activities at European

level.

The framework programme should primarily be based on grants. When developing

the framework programme, the whole European innovation landscape should be

taken duly into consideration. It should be a priority to bridge the remaining

‘valley

of death’, and create a favourable ecosystem for SME innovation and growth where

access to both direct and indirect risk finance is provided.

Innovation instruments should be focused, lean, simple, user friendly and flexible.

Overlaps between the different instruments should be avoided. It should be taken

into account that SMEs are generally reluctant to engage in large projects that re-

quire a longer-term commitment. This could be addressed by shifting the balance

towards projects in the 3-8 million Euros band rather than the very large 10 million

Euros plus projects.

The scope and modalities of the innovation instruments should take into account

the concept of

‘open

innovation’ that calls for a close engagement with end-users at

all relevant project stages.

5. A new model for public-public partnerships

Alignment between national and European strategies, instruments and pro-

grammes is vital in terms of maximising impact of EU and national investments.

Public-public partnerships (P2Ps)

are key in terms of alignment, and should be

prioritised in the next framework programme. P2Ps should be focused in terms of

scope, and the total amount of P2Ps should be kept limited.

Danish Agency for Science and

Higher Education

Joint Programming Initiatives, ERA-NET Cofund, European Joint Programme Cofund,

Article 185 Initiatives.

Page

4/7

UFU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 111: Dansk positionspapir om det næste EU rammeprogram for forskning og innovation

The next framework programme should introduce a new, cross-cutting model for

P2Ps that is less resource-constraining and easy to administer, but flexible and

adaptable in light of the level of ambition of partners and the scale and scope of the

thematic area /societal challenge addressed. Action types in the area of P2Ps

should be defined already in the legislation package.

The joint programming process should be clearly linked with the strategic pro-

gramming process, in particular societal challenges

–

and synergies with other

instruments and initiatives should be explored. European added value and impact

targets should be identified and translated into activities with measurable and op-

erational targets (key performance indicators) that are tangible and visible.

P2Ps should have a long-term perspective, but should have sunset clauses, and

evaluations should be conducted with a view to discontinuing initiatives that are no

longer fit for purpose. The objective of self-sustainability should be pursued.

Procedures should be established for assessing impact across P2Ps, and dissemina-

tion of results stemming from P2P actions should be improved at both national and

European level.

There should be one administrative, less complex and streamlined model. Common

procedures for all P2Ps should be introduced to simplify implementation, e.g.

common funding rules and reporting procedures, abiding by the general framework

programme rules. And it should be explored whether administrative functions such

as handling calls could be carried out by a central unit.

6. A focused and coherent programme architecture

The three-pillar architecture has proven successful and should be maintained. Co-

herence between the pillars should be enhanced with a focus on covering the whole

knowledge chain. Instruments should be evaluated regularly with a view to discon-

tinuing or adjusting instruments in light of new needs. Therefore, work pro-

grammes should be flexible, and have a maximum duration of 3 years.

The next framework programme should be focused, streamlined and coherent in

terms of programmes and instruments. Content wise, no programmes or instru-

ments should be

‘free-floating’

outside of the three pillars. Instruments such as

KICs, P2Ps, etc. should underpin the overall societal challenges or missions of the

framework programme.

Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) play a vital role in tackling societal challeng-

es as well as in developing and transforming new technologies into practical solu-

tions for the benefit of citizens, thereby forming the basis for high impact. Integra-

tion of SSH aspects in the project design is an integral part of the excellence of a

project. A substantial effort must be made to integrate SSH across programmes,

while maintaining SSH as a priority in its own right.

The framework programme should continue to support key enabling technologies,

as they are vital to

Europe’s competitiveness

and ability to tackle societal challeng-

es.

Page

5/7

Danish Agency for Science and

Higher Education

UFU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 111: Dansk positionspapir om det næste EU rammeprogram for forskning og innovation

7. Flexibility and simplification

The next framework programme should take simplification to the next level. The

successful Participant Portal should be further developed to become a true one-

stop-shop for all the activities funded by the framework programme, including

P2Ps and cascading grants. The portal should function as a one-stop-shop compris-

ing all steps from application to final project reporting.

Evaluation criteria should be the same across the framework programme and no

new general sub-criteria should be created. More criteria impinge on the freedom

to devise the best possible solutions and consortia, and hence to maximise the im-

pact of the projects.

The possibility of introducing a lump-sum-based funding model should be explored

based on the implementation of the activities in the Description of the Action, not

on the scientific results. While ensuring sound financial management, the system

should be designed to maximise the academic and operational freedom of the re-

searchers/beneficiaries, so that the approach does not favour

‘safe’

rather than

‘creative’

research and innovation activities.

The technical control/review system should not become heavier than the financial

control system it is replacing. This new management approach will require a flexi-

ble and fast contract management system to take account of necessary changes to

the Grant Agreement.

For projects for which the lump sum model is not deemed feasible, certain tech-

nical aspects should be further improved compared to Horizon 2020. E.g. as a gen-

eral rule, the next framework programme should allow the application of the bene-

ficiaries’

usual accounting practices to the greatest extent possible. Procedures en-

suring legal certainty are essential

–

and the reuse of data and automatic reporting

can be other ways of achieving further simplification.

8. Promoting openness

The next framework programme should take further steps to promote the Open

Science agenda. That includes the ongoing promotion of Open Access to publica-

tions as well as development according to the FAIR principles (Findable, Accessi-

ble, Interoperable and Re-usable) with respect to research data. Pilot initiatives to

promote Open Science, including new reward systems, alternative metrics, and

citizen science should be envisaged.

The framework programme should contribute to the realization of The European

Open Science Cloud, which will offer European researchers and science and tech-

nology professionals a safe and viable solution with regard to storing, sharing and

re-using research data across disciplines and borders.

The Joint Research Centre’s

(JRC) newly established Knowledge Centres should be

accessible for all Members States in order to fully exploit European research re-

sults, and it should be explored whether JRC could have a greater role in dissemi-

nating results of framework programmed funded projects,

complementing JRC’s

own research activities.

Danish Agency for Science and

Higher Education

Page

6/7

UFU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 111: Dansk positionspapir om det næste EU rammeprogram for forskning og innovation

9. A more inclusive approach

In order for Europe to fully tap into the potential of the ERA, the next framework

programme should be an open and inclusive programme, allowing for new ap-

proaches and participants.

In general, the translation of (European and national) investments into concrete

research and innovation results with a high impact depends on well-functioning,

effective national research systems. Therefore, Member States should have a con-

stant focus on implementing necessary, national reforms.

To help tackle structural barriers of the research and innovation divide, the Euro-

pean Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) should continue to stimulate re-

search and innovation capacity, as determined by the competent working bodies.

Further attention should be paid to exploiting synergies between ESIF and the

framework programme. Possibilities for further streamlining the rules of various

EU programmes under direct and shared implementation should be explored with

a user perspective in mind.

COST should to a greater extent contribute to addressing the notion of

‘closed

clubs’ by establishing networks with the specific objective of preparing consortia for

proposals to specific calls under the framework programme.

10. Enhanced international cooperation

International cooperation boosts the impact of investments in research and innova-

tion, e.g. by enabling companies to participate and commit themselves in new value

chains and tap into growing markets outside the EU. Steps need to be taken to re-

verse the decrease in international participation in projects under the framework

programme.

In accordance with the overall strategic objectives and potential missions of the

next framework programme, specific strategic areas should be identified in which

European and international partners have a particular common interest, e.g. the

implementation of international political agreements such as the UN Sustainable

Development Goals and research in issues related to the EU Arctic Policy.

For these specific areas, joint calls should be launched, and common evaluation

processes should be carried out in accordance with the standard procedures of the

framework programme. Third countries should participate in the identification of

evaluators.

Where relevant, reciprocity between the framework programme and third country

programmes should be sought.

The possibilities for countries outside of Europe and its neighbourhood to become

associated countries to the next framework programme should be explored.

Danish Agency for Science and

Higher Education

Page

7/7