Reflection Paper on the Role of the Standing Committee on Agricultural Research (SCAR)

Transcription

1 Reflection Paper on the Role of the Standing Committee on Agricultural Research agriculture Bioresources materials & chemicals bn bn tonnes to on n nne es fuel & energy forestry SUPPLY DEMAND food & feed fisheries & aquaculture How do we develop our research & innovation agenda by by SCAR Standing Committee on Agricultural Research

2

3 THE ROLE OF SCAR 3 Reflection Paper on the Role of the Standing Committee on Agricultural Research (SCAR) Prepared by an ad-hoc Task Force of SCAR and discussed at the SCAR Plenary Meeting of June 4, 2015

4

5 THE ROLE OF SCAR 5 Executive Summary Introduction SCAR organisation Plenary meeting Secretariat SCAR Working Group Foresight group Collaborative Working Groups (CWG) Strategic Working Groups (SWG) Ad-hoc working groups or task forces SCAR operation and achievements Foresight Process Common research agendas Mapping of research capacities Strategic policy advice Challenges to SCAR in an evolving landscape Markers of change Member State representation and inclusion Alignment between national research programmes Transparency, communication and outreach Resources Meeting the challenges adapting to a changing landscape Options SCAR s role and ambition Strategic SCAR output Deliverables Instruments Highlighting the benefit Visibility and communications Financial and human resources Conclusion... 27

6 6 4 th SCAR FORESIGHT CONFERENCE Executive Summary Since its re-launch in 2004, the Standing Committee on Agricultural Research has provided the European Commission, Member States and Associated Countries with independent policy advice on better cooperation and alignment of research activities in agriculture. Over ten years into this work, both SCAR and the world it serves have changed and continue to do so. Some of these changes are more notable than others. FP7 has been succeeded by Horizon 2020 along with its different focus ; and the policy domain SCAR serves has expanded from agriculture into bioeconomy including, amongst others, areas such as forestry, fisheries, food safety and quality. This paper reflects on SCAR s organisation and ways of working, its achievements and role in an evolving landscape, and proposes ways to continue producing high-quality strategic policy advice for another decade. It spells out SCAR s successes and the challenges still to be met and provides an overview of the activities and mechanisms through which these are being achieved. This paper provides a description of an evolving landscape, with the markers of change clearly demonstrating the need for adaptation in how the Committee functions so that it maintains its relevance. The paper outlines the most realistic trade-off between Member States and the Commission s ambitions and resources. Continuation of SCAR s strategic advisory role is dependent on a strong commitment from all partners, including proper country representation on SCAR activities, discussion and consideration of these activities at national level, and on the allocation of adequate human and financial resources. The Commission has proposed the potential support of Horizon 2020 funding in this respect. Also, the issue of SCAR s high quality advice being brought to a more strategic level will be considered further through the SCAR Working Group, a dedicated SCAR sub-group, or some other mechanism. This paper was drafted by an ad hoc Task Force commissioned by the SCAR and composed of members of the SCAR Working Group and representatives of DG RTD and DG AGRI. Inputs from the SCAR delegations were collected and analysed and draft documents considered at the December 2014 and June 2015 SCAR Plenary meetings. Endorsement of the proposed way ahead outlined in this paper was given at the June 2015 meeting.

7 THE ROLE OF SCAR 7 1. Introduction The Standing Committee on Agricultural Research (SCAR) was established in 1974 through a Regulation of the Council of the EU relating to the coordination of agricultural research 1. It adopted its own rules of procedure in line with those adopted by the European Commission on 31 January 2001 and in accordance with Council Decision 1999/468/EC 2. The Committee was given a revised mandate in 2005 by the Council, reflecting the significant changes to the agricultural research agenda over the years, which included the provision of advice to the Commission and the Member States on the coordination of agricultural research in Europe. The Committee currently represents 37 countries, mainly through ministries or organisations such as research councils, from all EU Member States and observers from Candidate and Associated Countries 3. SCAR has grown to become a respected source of advice on European agricultural and research related to the wider bioeconomy, along with being a major catalyst for the coordination of national research programmes and in helping shape the European Research Area. The Committee plays an important role in coupling, and removing the barriers to, research and innovation and aims to make it easier for public-public and public-private sectors to work together. This has particular relevance with respect to the growth-oriented approach of the Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme. This paper outlines a consideration by the SCAR Members and the European Commission of how SCAR is perceived and how it should continue to operate. It provides information on the SCAR operational structure and achievements, along with proposals for its future development based on an analysis of the challenges that the Committee needs to address. 1 http ://eur-lex.europa.eu/lexuriserv/lexuriserv.do?uri=celex :31974R1728 :EN :HTML 2 http ://eur-lex.europa.eu/lexuriserv/lexuriserv.do?uri=consleg :1999D0468 : :EN :PDF 3 https ://ec.europa.eu/research/scar/pdf/scar-members_en.pdf#view=fit&pagemode=none

8 8 4 th SCAR FORESIGHT CONFERENCE 2. SCAR organisation SCAR operates through a coherent governance structure, with a range of groups having specific responsibilities and objectives but which ultimately report to the plenary meeting of the SCAR delegates Plenary meeting The SCAR convenes twice a year bringing together delegates from all EU Member States, candidate Member States and states associated to the EU. This governing body decides on the creation of dedicated working groups or other initiatives proposed by the Commission or the members, normally in response to proposals from the SCAR Working Group or other collaborative/ strategic working groups. Delegates are reimbursed their travel costs for the plenary meeting Secretariat SCAR Working Group The SCAR Working Group, composed of SCAR delegates, other nationally nominated officials, and Commission staff, meets around 6 times a year, providing the engine room of the Committee. It plans and prepares for the plenary meetings, including discussion/proposal papers, for example, in relation to coordination mechanisms in Horizon 2020 and prioritisation of ERA- NET Co-fund activities, and takes forward actions based on the decisions taken at the plenary meetings. Such actions will include establishing new working groups to address specific areas of research/innovation, as well as providing support to existing activities. Participation by SCAR countries is strongly encouraged but there is no central resource, to cover travel and other costs, to facilitate this.

9 THE ROLE OF SCAR Foresight group One of SCAR s main activities is horizon scanning and foresight. The SCAR Foresight Group oversees the execution of relevant studies, once this has been agreed at the SCAR plenary meeting. The Commission has made available financial resources, through the research Framework Programmes, to support this through the funding of independent experts to carry out foresight activities, including the review of other ongoing and recent studies, scenario building and research prioritisation, and the funding of related workshops, seminars, conferences and dissemination of outputs Collaborative Working Groups (CWG) SCAR Collaborative Working Groups have been an important coordination mechanism since These groups address matters of common interest in a specific area of research, with a view to initiating collaboration between research funding organisations. These groups enable the building of trust, common ways of working, and the development of common research agendas. Many CWGs have evolved into ERA-NETs 4. Membership is voluntary but one or more countries must take on the coordination role and European Commission staff are usually actively involved. The groups work within specific terms of reference on a well-defined subject for a limited period, usually between one and three years, but can also provide a longer-term platform for coordination if necessary. Terms of reference are agreed by the SCAR plenary meeting but the groups then have a high level of autonomy in their operation Strategic Working Groups (SWG) A more recent development is dedicated working groups established to discuss strategic matters relating to research and innovation, for which there is insufficient opportunity in the SCAR plenary meetings or in the SCAR Working Group. To date these groups have focused on formulating research and innovation policy advice on issues such as fisheries and aquaculture (SCAR Fish) 5 ; agricultural knowledge and innovation systems (SCAR AKIS) ; sustainable production of bio-resources (SCAR Biomass) ; forestry research and innovation (SCAR Forest) ; and the greater impact of European Agricultural Research on global challenges (SCAR ARCH). Membership of these groups is voluntary and is financed through national resources, again with Commission staff actively involved. For certain SWGs individual Member States have financially supported underpinning coordination efforts and/ or expert input to the process. Terms of reference are agreed by the SCAR plenary meeting but the groups then have a high level of autonomy in their operation Ad-hoc working groups or task forces Additional activities that take more time and effort than can be accommodated within the regular work of the SCAR Working Group will be taken forward by task and finish groups to address, for example, the preparation of SCAR s input to the development of EU research Framework Programmes, and the development of EU mechanisms for the coordination of national research programmes. 4 European Research Area-Networks funded under the research Framework Programmes/Horizon 2020 that support the coordination of research funding organisations and national programmes of research. 5 https ://ec.europa.eu/research/scar/index.cfm?pg=about

10 10 4 th SCAR FORESIGHT CONFERENCE 3. SCAR operation and achievements SCAR plays an important role in establishing a European Research Area with a common agricultural and wider bioeconomy research agenda, which enhances cooperation, coordination, and information exchange between countries. This is achieved through four main initiatives 6 : 1) Developing a strong foresight process ; 2) Developing common research agendas ; 3) Mapping SCAR Member research capacities ; 4) Strategic Policy Advice. SCAR Standing Committee on Agricultural Research 6 https ://ec.europa.eu/research/scar/index.cfm?pg=about

11 THE ROLE OF SCAR Foresight Process To cope with the wide range of complex and interlinked challenges facing agriculture and the wider bioeconomy, the SCAR Foresight exercise, through its long term focus, is an excellent instrument for research planning and research policy building. For example : It explores new challenges, addresses cross-cutting issues, feeds the strategic planning process of research policy making and provides advice to decisionmakers (e.g. SCAR members, European Commission, Member States). The SCAR foresight reports highlight weak signals as well as future opportunities that can be used in the setting of midto long-term priorities for research and in helping to underpin a more integrated research system in Europe for agriculture and the wider bioeconomy. The SCAR Foresight reports have resulted in a high number of joint activities between countries, such as the implementation of working groups, ERA- NETs and Joint Programming Initiatives. The fourth Foresight process is the first that is directly connected to the Bioeconomy and its implementation SCAR has launched four foresight exercises since 2005, which have developed future scenarios for European agriculture as the basis for prioritising research and other coordination activities in the medium to long term. Each foresight exercise has been accompanied by a dedicated conference aimed at disseminating results and providing a platform for discussing the key messages. Conclusions and recommendations have been used by the Commission and MS/AC in planning research coordination activities.

12 12 4 th SCAR FORESIGHT CONFERENCE 3.2. Common research agendas SCAR Collaborative and Strategic Working Group activities have produced common research agendas that are a prerequisite to further multilateral cooperation, including alignment of programmes at national and EU levels. The SCAR Plenary and SCAR WG maintain an overarching view, which enables prioritisation of the different themes and proposals. Since 2005, more than 25 CWGs/SWGs have been established, engaging on a voluntary and variable-geometry basis, in the definition, development and implementation of common approaches. ON-GOING SWGs Coordinator SCAR countries Kick-off meeting Forest Research and Innovation SE 13 10/10/2013 European Agricultural Research towards greater impact on Global CHallenges - ARCH SCAR-EIARD 13 17/09/2013 Sustainable Bioresources for a Growing Bioeconomy - BIOMASS NL 15 07/09/2012 Fisheries & Aquaculture - SCAR FISH DK 18 14/06/2012 Agriculture Knowledge and Innovation Systems - AKIS III FR-NL 16 04/05/2010 ON-GOING CWGs Coordinator SCAR countries Kick-off meeting Sustainable Animal Production DE-ES /01/2014 Integrated Biorefineries DE 12 13/11/2013 CWGs leading to ERA-NETs Coordinator SCAR countries Kick-off meeting IPM for the reduction of pesticide risks and use IPM ERA-NET C-IPM FR 18 13/05/2011 Forest value chain in the light of climate change ERCF ERA-NET SUMFOREST AT-DE /05/2011 Sust. food production for wealth, welfare and health ERA-NET SUSFOOD DK 17 06/05/2010 Risk Research on GMOs ERA-NET preparatory action PreSto GMO AT 15 13/10/2009 Coordinated research agenda for EU rural policy ERA-NET RURAGRI SE - NL 7 23/11/2006 Agriculture and Sustainable Development ERA-NET RURAGRI FR 11 06/12/2005 ICT and Robotics in Agro-Food Industries ERA-NET ICT-AGRI DK 11 01/09/2005 Relevant Issues for Mediterranean Agriculture ERA-NET ARIMNet FR 12 02/12/2005 Animal Health and Welfare ERA-NET ANIHWA UK 21 08/12/2005 Animal Health ERA-NET EMIDA UK 21 08/12/2005 STAND-BY or FINISHED CWGs Coordinator SCAR countries Kick-off meeting Shared Infrastructures in the field of Agricultural Research FR 15 25/09/2008 Climate Change and Agriculture included in the JPI FACCE ES 21 24/06/2008 Agriculture and Energy supported by CSA AGREE DE 20 24/06/2008 Development of Sustainable Agriculture in the Baltic Sea Region PL 8 17/11/2006 Ecology for Ecosystems & Natural Resources Sustainable Management FR 8 16/06/2006 Adaptation of Human Nutrition to Environment Evolution FR 10 29/05/2006 Advanced Technologies for Climatic Control of Greenhouses and Livestock Housing IL 14 14/03/2006 Renewable Raw Materials and their Applications in Non-Food Industry DE 18 27/09/2005 Sustainable Livestock Production from Grasslands IE 21 01/12/2005 The dynamism and commitment of 8 CWGs has resulted in ERA-NET projects, drawing down national and EU funding to facilitate networking and coordination actions. The tables below show the mobilising effect of KBBE 7 ERA-NETs in comparison to those in other research areas. KBBE established the second highest number (28) of ERA- NETs after the Industrial technologies / MEs theme (KBBE s total has more than doubled between FP6 to FP7) ; has mobilised on average the largest number of countries (12.8 countries per call against an average number of 10 for the Framework Programme generally) ; and has the fourth highest leverage effect 8 (factor of 8.6 across FP6/FP7), mobilising total public funding of EUR million. Although KBBE was one of the smaller themes in FP7 in terms of the available funding, the impetus given by SCAR has brought significant added-value in terms of synergies between national programmes, efficiency gains and impacts, not only through joint calls for research but also through a host of additional collaborative activities. The leverage effect is not only financial but has led to a structuring platform of a permanent nature. 7 Framework programme 7 ( ) : Knowledge Based Bio-Economy programme 8 Ratio of combined national funding : EC funding

13 THE ROLE OF SCAR 13 Source : European Commission (2014) The ERA-NET scheme from FP6 to Horizon Report on ERA-NETs, their calls and the experiences from the first calls under Horizon 2020.

14 14 4 th SCAR FORESIGHT CONFERENCE The table below, though not complete, gives an indication of the value of some of the calls jointly funded by countries in the ERA-NETs initiated by SCAR activities. These figures give an idea of the national money coordinated and maximising the value of the funding available. As well as helping to achieve critical mass and avoid unnecessary duplication of effort, the widespread nature of these activities has established a level of trust between countries that has underpinned other initiatives and laid robust foundations for the European Research Area in this domain. ERA-NET Total value of calls ( millions) EMIDA (Emerging and major infectious disease of livestock) 40 RURAGRI (Sustainability and new relationships between rural areas and agriculture ARIMNET (Agricultural research in the Mediterranean area) 7 ICT-Agri (Coordination of ICT and robotics in agriculture) 9 SUSFOOD (Sustainable food production and consumption) 9.4 ANIHWA (animal health and welfare) As a consequence, SCAR has become highly active and influential in the Joint Programming process proposed by the European Commission in A key step was a series of SCAR workshops and other activities which helped in the elaboration of two clustered proposals ( Agriculture, Food Security and Climate Change and Health, Food and Prevention of Diet-related Diseases ) that were agreed by the High- Level Group on Joint Programming (GPC). In 2010, both proposals were included in the first wave of Joint Programming Initiatives adopted by the Council : Agriculture, Food Security and Climate Change (FACCE) 9 and A Healthy Diet for a Healthy Life (HDHL) 10. FACCE and HDHL have since adopted their Strategic Research Agendas (SRA), in 2011 and 2012 respectively, and have provided frameworks for the alignment of existing programmes and other joint research efforts Mapping of research capacities It was agreed that SCAR mapping activities should build on the existing EU AGRI- MAPPING project from the FP6 SSP-4 call, Mapping and foresight of the EU agricultural research capacity 11. A project was negotiated in cooperation with SCAR for the delivery of a mapping report on European capacities in the field of agricultural research and recommendations on the development that would be desirable in the enlarged Europe by In 2008, SCAR established the Collaborative Working Group on Shared Infrastructures for European Agri-Food Research to bring about increased collaboration between MS/ACs and the exploitation of potential synergies. The group provided a comprehensive analysis of this area including in relation to potential gaps, enablers and barriers to cooperation, and proposed approaches for overcoming current difficulties and for addressing future challenges. 9 https :// 10 http :// 11 http ://

15 THE ROLE OF SCAR 15 In addition to these initiatives most of the SCAR CWGs, and the ERA-NETs that have originated from these, have carried out their own sector-focussed research mapping exercises, essential in underpinning a joint programming approach. Such mapping exercises may need to evolve into more dynamic/real time interactive analytical approaches that better engage the right stakeholders, provide proper gap analysis and allow better alignment of national research programmes Strategic policy advice The research policy advice provided by SCAR has included areas such as : The development of European initiatives such as Joint Programming. The Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, its work programmes, and strategic input to the development of the ERA-NET Co-fund mechanism. The SCAR Agriculture Knowledge and Innovation Systems (AKIS) Strategic Working Group has produced two influential reports that have developed our understanding of innovation systems in Europe. These have focused on the organisation of AKIS in Member States and regions and the incentives driving the AKIS sub-systems, along with members experiences with interactive innovation and the related policy instruments. This SWG has been instrumental in the development of the European Innovation Partnership Agricultural productivity and sustainability (EIP-AGRI) 12, which aims to accelerate innovation through linking instruments under the Common Agricultural Policy and Horizon The AKIS SWG has also shaped two new formats for interactive innovation projects under Horizon 2020 ( Multiactor research projects and Thematic Networks in compiling knowledge ready for practice), as well as a common EU format for sharing project results with practitioners and end-users. Helping to evolve the bioeconomy through groups such as the Strategic Working Group on Sustainable Biomass and the Collaborative Working Group on Integrated Biorefineries, bringing together key players in these fields and jointly producing relevant policy output. Contributing to global food security through, for example, the SCAR/EIARD 13 ARCH 14 Strategic Working Group that brings together the aims and activities of European Agricultural Research and Agricultural Research for Development. Contributing to the identification of research and innovation priorities and the coherence of initiatives in the fisheries and aquaculture, and forestry areas. 12 http ://ec.europa.eu/eip/agriculture/ 13 European Initiative for Agricultural Research for Development 14 http ://

16 16 4 th SCAR FORESIGHT CONFERENCE 4. Challenges to SCAR in an evolving landscape In its original form SCAR focused on primary agricultural production. The need for change was recognised in 2005 when the Committee was re-launched with a much wider remit, reflecting the need for sustainable development, multi-functional agriculture, a fork to farm approach and the need to take into account societal and environmental impacts. Since then the research and innovation landscape has continued to evolve and this needs to be reflected in how the Committee operates in the future. Agricultural practices and production processes are now set in the context of food security, sustainability and consumer concerns. Research and innovation must accordingly address a variety of different societal challenges, policy reforms, and international agreements and obligations. SCAR s activities now need to encompass the whole bioeconomy, including the food production and processing chain, nonfood biomass development for industrial products and processes, and sectors such as forestry, fisheries and aquaculture. This requires the SCAR to take into account a wider range of legislation, policies and the major conclusions of relevant European Commission scientific committees if it is to provide advice to European institutions and the Member States on research priorities that would benefit from better national coordination. Working in this very complex and diverse domain means that the continuity and active membership of SCAR members becomes increasingly important Markers of change Various developments are having an impact on research and innovation in the bioeconomy area. These include, but are not limited to : Primary production including the production of all biological resources, from land, forests, rivers/lakes and seas, requiring new approaches such as the establishment of SCAR strategic working groups in the fisheries and forestry areas. Publication and implementation of the Commission s Bioeconomy Strategy. Research with impact that leads to innovation (and to economic growth) requiring the involvement of a range of relevant actors and stakeholders rather than being considered as only a linear process. Issues such as food security, food trust, and relationships between animal, plant and human health have become increasingly important and have an impact on research policy. At the European level, the Seventh Research Framework Programme has been succeeded by Horizon 2020, with a new organization and structure, and an increased emphasis on innovation, growth and jobs. Implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy and the flagship initiative Innovation Union leading to the creation of the European Innovation Partnership for Agricultural Productivity and Sustainability. Under Horizon 2020, implementation of the EIP-Agri and the closer linking research with practice at EU level e.g. through multi-actor research projects and through Thematic Networks producing easy accessible end-user material. Innovation being embraced in almost all Rural Development Programmes (under the Common Agricultural Policy) through measures supporting EIP-Agri Operational Group projects. Co-management by the Commission s DG Agriculture and Rural Development and DG Research and Innovation in EU research funding and policy processes. New platforms, some created through SCAR, provide valuable input to the European debate on research policy, for instance the Joint Programming Initiatives FACCE, HDHL, and Oceans.

17 THE ROLE OF SCAR 17 Joint Programming Initiatives and ERA-NETs providing valuable insights and advice on what cooperation and alignment in research policy is realistic and feasible in given areas. Other novel instruments introduced at European level, including the EIT s 15 Knowledge and Innovation Communities (KICs) and a possible KIC for Food ; and public private partnerships such as the Joint Technology Initiative Bio-Based Industries. The role of small, medium and large private enterprises in research is receiving increased attention based on the potential for bringing innovations to market. Political changes, for example, the new European Commission in 2014 and the need to address the Agenda for Jobs, Growth, Fairness and Democratic Change, where the bioeconomy can play a leading role. Such developments require on-going evaluation of the activities, procedures and approaches used by SCAR Member State representation and inclusion SCAR s wider remit has obvious consequences for the operation of the Committee, such as the additional strategic working groups needed in areas such as forestry, biomass, and fisheries and aquaculture, and the need for an effective flow of information between the different groups via the SCAR Working Group. This also has implications in relation to maintaining country representation, which might be supported by improving the transparency of SCAR processes and information flow on the Committees activities, and by developing better interfaces with other relevant committees, groups, networks and relevant industry initiatives. Even so, the broad range of areas covered may still require individual countries to target their participation to the activities they consider a priority. As well as a challenge, the broad coverage of the Committee can be viewed as a major benefit as it brings a wide range of expertise, so giving SCAR a unique overview of research and innovation activities in the bioeconomy area. However, improvements can be made in developing a clearer international dimension to its activities and in bridging the gap between the different ministries (e.g. research, agriculture, economic affairs and regional ministries) at national levels Alignment between national research programmes Much is to be gained by improving the alignment and interoperability of national research programmes. Alignment can be defined as The strategic approach taken by Member States programming authorities to modify their national programmes, priorities or activities as a consequence of the adoption of joint priorities in EU level Public-public partnerships 16. In its report of 30 October 2014 the EU s High Level Group for Joint Programming concluded that alignment is the key to successful joint programming, enabling improved efficiency of research investment, nationally and across the European Research Area, through the facilitation of a transnational approach based upon common priorities and a variable geometry approach. ERA-NETs were first introduced during the EU s sixth research Framework Programme (FP6) and, since then, the coordination landscape has changed considerably. Cooperation of ERA-NETs with the Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs), European Innovation Partnerships (EIPs), Knowledge and Innovation Communities (KICs) and Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) requires further investigation to ensure potential synergies are maximised while ensuring a rational coordination landscape. This requires the Commission to serve as a nexus for effective information exchange and for SCAR to integrate this information and outcomes into its activities and policy advice. 15 European Institute of innovation and Technology 16 GPC, High Level Group for Joint Programming

18 18 4 th SCAR FORESIGHT CONFERENCE SCAR can also help countries to inspire and learn from each other by exchanging information on strategies, research programmes and other activities, so promoting learning based on the diversity of approaches across Europe (including those of countries that do not have dedicated research programs in particular areas). There is an issue around the long-term sustainability of activities such as the Joint Programming Initiatives and ERA-NETs once Community funding has come to an end and there is a need for these to be self-sustaining in the longer-term. This has been achieved by some (e.g. the ERA-NETs EUPHRESCO, Snowman, and Bio-Energy) and the Platform 2 Coordination and Support Action 17 will be investigating ways of sustaining such independence that might be used by others Transparency, communication and outreach SCAR needs to improve communication of its activities and outcomes to those outside the immediate circle of its members and other active participants. The Committee needs to ensure that its Collaborative/ Strategic Working Groups remain active and that their mandates and goals, contacts and outcomes are well publicised and easily accessible. The SCAR website should be more interactive and designed to engage stakeholders. Better visibility is needed at EU institutional level but also more widely, for example, in relation to global discussions on food security and with international research systems such as CGIAR. Many SCAR countries operate in this space but a joint approach, as with the SCAR/EIARD ARCH group, could be beneficial Resources As already indicated, SCAR requires significant investment of resources by countries if they are to participate effectively across the range of coordination activities, with this commitment growing over the years. The role of other bodies, such as the Commission s JRC, in helping to align MS/AC research and improving the mapping of research systems could be investigated, alongside the important role already played by the European Commission. The Commission and countries have driven forward a range of activities of a high standard but this is being challenged by budget cuts and limited staff availability, an issue for all but particularly for smaller countries. In terms of maximising available resources there are some examples of good practice. The SCAR AKIS Strategic Working Group has, in addition to the usual participation of countries, benefited considerably from additional resources from individual countries and research Framework Programme projects, which have underpinned a highly active group and the funding of supporting studies. However, such an approach is not likely to be sustainable in the longer term so there is a need to consider other solutions. 17 http ://

19 THE ROLE OF SCAR Meeting the challenges adapting to a changing landscape Since its re-launch in 2005 SCAR has evolved to take account of the changing research, innovation and wider landscape. Ten years on, it is now a good time to take stock of how the Committee operates and how this might change in the face of future challenges. A number of possible approaches have been set out below, with different levels of ambition dependent on the level of resources available Options Option 1. Limit focus to activities addressed by the Committee pre-2012 in recognition of the constraints on resources of both the Commission and the Member/Associated Countries. Option 2. Continuing the current approach a resource constrained evolution of SCAR in response to a changing landscape ( business as usual ). Option 3. Building on option 2, extending towards a stronger strategic role based on the availability of more resources. Option 4. Building on option 3, extending towards a wider input to all areas of the Bioeconomy relating to the European Research Area. Assessment of the options Option 1. Limit the focus to activities addressed by the Committee pre-2012 (recognizing the constraints on resources of both Commission and Member/Associated Countries) Role and Ambition Governance Resources Implications Focus on the coordination of national research programmes in the agriculture area Plenary, SCAR WG, CWGs, Foresight Commission provides Secretariat support ; no additional funding other than in support of foresight process ; activities relying on voluntary contributions from countries CWGs could spawn ERA-NETs or act as task and finish groups Limited focus on research and innovation policy matters Limited coverage of the bioeconomy landscape Dependence on external sources (e.g. FP7/H2020 projects) for mapping or other activities

20 20 4 th SCAR FORESIGHT CONFERENCE Option 2. Continuing the current approach a resource constrained evolution of SCAR in response to a changing landscape ( Business as usual ) Role and Ambition Governance Resources Implications Focus on research and innovation taking into account the wider bioeconomy (primary sector perspective focus on agriculture but expanded to forestry, fisheries and issues such as sustainable biomass production and use ; biorefineries ; etc.) ; coordination of research ; targeted advice As above, plus SWGs Capacity problems continue with reliance on human resources from countries and financial input from a small number of countries ; perhaps support from dedicated projects in the Framework Programme/Horizon 2020 Lack of analytical capacity to process outputs from all SCAR groups and ERA-NETs into strategic advice, thus not maximizing potential impact Continued constraints on participation by MS/AC, experts Option 3. Building on option 2, extend toward a stronger strategic role based on the availability of additional resources Role and Ambition Governance Resources Implications As option 2, plus increased strategic and policy role in fostering the alignment of bioeconomy R&D policies in Europe in line with the European Research Area and beyond the EU FP/Horizon 2020-related instruments ; integrated strategic advice based on the reinforced provision of evidence-base. As option 2, plus a new organizational structure for formulating integrated strategic advice (perhaps SCAR Subgroup) in a more systematic way. Importance of systematically involving all Member States and Associated Countries (which is possible due to additional resources). As option 2 but additional financial resources from an H2020 Coordination and Support Action, administrative budget of the Commission services or some other mechanism. Enhances SCAR s strategic evidence-base provision and analysis capacity Increased visibility due to increased policy role Exploration of new instruments to foster alignment which are not EU FP-related Following up the Foresight Exercise and outputs from other activities (e.g. CWGs, SWGs) is now possible Possibly annual strategy conference Proper consideration of national research coordination needs including ERA-NET prioritization.

21 THE ROLE OF SCAR 21 Option 4. Building on option 3, extending towards a wider input to all areas of the Bioeconomy relating to the European Research Area Role and Ambition Governance Resources Implications As option 3 ; structuring the ERA for the bioeconomy (addressing the whole range of activities under this heading e.g. markets etc.) ; SCAR advises on existing barriers/bottlenecks at national/regional level and recommends potential R&D policy legislative measures to support the development of the bioeconomy. As option 3. Broader expertise and systematic representation from innovation and economic/industrial-related policy fields. As option 3. However, the membership of the Committee may need to be adjusted if issues other than research and innovation were taken on board. A horizontal Strategic Working Group which is not thematic (e.g. forestry, agriculture) and works on policy measures for the ERA may need to be established. Scope of SCAR is broadened to cover the bioeconomy in a systematic manner SCAR identifies the potential non-funding measures (legislation) which have a clear EU-added value SCAR s role is closely linked to policy-making and SCAR has increased influence on MS national agendas and policy-making The SCAR Role Task Force considered these options and concluded that Option 3 plus some aspects of Option 4 best described a realistic trade-off between ambition, available human and financial resources, and SCAR s legislative boundaries. At its meeting of 4 June 2015, the SCAR also considered the four options and agreed that an Option 3 Plus would allow the Committee to better address its coordination activities and better provide more integrated strategic advice, but on the basis that additional resources would be available, for example, in the form of a Coordination and Support Action under Horizon Such an approach is further elaborated below SCAR s role and ambition SCAR acts as a lynch-pin and provides a comprehensive overview in what is a complex European research and innovation landscape in the agricultural and wider bioeconomy area, providing countries and European institutions with timely, focussed and high-impact advice. In recent years there has been an increase in the number of bodies active in this space, including the Joint Programming Initiatives, the European Commission s Bioeconomy Panel, the EIP- AGRI and a number of ERA-NETs. However, SCAR is in a unique position in that it : Gives an opportunity for all Member States and Associated Countries and the Commission to participate unlike those expert groups not based on country representation. Covers the full spectrum of bioeconomy research and innovation activities. Integrates the outcomes of different initiatives and a range of topics. Being a member of SCAR is not a passive role, requiring initiatives to be instigated at the national level across a domain that has significantly increased in size in recent years. This calls on the Committee and its members to be flexible and creative in seizing opportunities, in improving or developing new instruments and in embracing contributions that help to fulfil its ambitions.

22 22 4 th SCAR FORESIGHT CONFERENCE The Committee could and should play a greater role in engaging countries in the alignment of national research programmes and activities, and there is a need for a very close relationship between the SCAR and relevant Joint Programming Initiatives such as FACCE and HDHL. Working together in a systematic and strategic way to identify societal challenges and then implementing joint activities should increase national engagement in the alignment process and the realisation of the European Research Area Strategic SCAR output SCAR should continue to provide research policy advice, directed at both Commission and the national level, on strategic programming on a short-, medium- and long-term timeframe with the latter effectively covered by the SCAR Foresight Process. This should include the following aspects : Advice on the development of research and innovation in the bioeconomy Building on current activities in the dedicated strategic working groups, SCAR will continue to provide advice on potential synergies between EU and national research initiatives. An important product will be a knowledge and innovation agenda to be used as inspiration for forthcoming work programmes under the Horizon 2020 programme. Advice on food security in a global context Many of the research challenges in SCAR s area of activity have a global dimension so the Committee has an important role to play at an international level. Those research areas that have a clear European dimension and those that need to be considered at a wider global perspective will be identified. Relevant issues may include : global food and nutrition security and the role of European farming and food industry ; food safety in a global production and trade environment ; the relationship between European Agricultural Research and Agricultural Research for Development ; the relationship between Horizon 2020, national research programmes and the research agenda of the CGIAR ; and the development of international R&D agreements with countries such as Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, India, New Zealand, the USA, the African Union and others. Miscellaneous strategic advice In a changing research and innovation landscape SCAR has a major contribution to make in providing strategic advice in areas such as : Strategic programming in Horizon 2020 and at country level to foster synergies. Alignment and interoperability between national programmes ; enabling alignment through JPIs, research infrastructures (including networking of experimental farms) ; new approaches towards coordinated/ joint activities (e.g. through European Joint Programmes). AKIS policies and delivery at Member State level and their linkages at an EU level. Attention could be paid to research and innovation objectives and instruments, funding approaches, capacities, incentives, monitoring and impact. Contributions to European policy development should be included, as with the SWG AKIS and the EIP-AGRI. A more strategic approach to ERA- NET prioritization. The large number of Bioeconomy related ERA-NETs funded under FP7 reflect the diversity of this area and the bottom-up approach encouraged to kick-start the European Research Area philosophy. Some networks continue to seek additional funding support under H2020 while others are considering ways of maintaining a more selfsufficient approach in the longer term. SCAR has made a strategic contribution to the selection of ERA- NET Co-fund topics under the Horizon 2020 work programmes. However, there is need for a more structured top-down approach that ensures the consultation of all relevant actors

23 THE ROLE OF SCAR 23 and organizations, in particular the relevant national research funding bodies active within the societal challenge. SCAR strategic advice should be directed at various levels, including relevant EU Councils, such as the Agriculture and Fisheries Council, the Competitiveness Council and the Foreign Affairs Council configuration, as appropriate Deliverables Based upon the strategic approach described above SCAR will produce distinct and concrete products including : Deliverables arising from the Foresight Process Futures Scenarios. Recommendations on the main priorities for national and European research in the bioeconomy domain, working in a 30 year time horizon. Recommendations for priority areas of multilateral cooperation through e.g. ERA-NETs, JPIs or instruments not related to Horizon Conferences to disseminate the outcome of the Foresight Process. Deliverables from SCAR Collaborative Working Groups Studies and recommendations on the feasibility of, and operational requirements for, multilateral cooperation in specific research areas, leading to more intensive cooperation in, for example, new ERA-NETs. Mapping and analyses of countries current activities in these areas including existing bottlenecks and barriers and enablers. Possible strategic research agendas in these specific areas. Deliverables from SCAR Strategic Working Groups Mapping and analyses of current research and innovation policies and related issues (e.g. R&D systems, barriers, enablers) in the participating countries with a view to identifying common strategic goals and initiatives, normally covering larger domains than the Collaborative Working Groups. Based on these, the production of concrete advice for countries and the Commission on strategic research endeavours. Possible strategic research agendas (SRA) in the chosen domain (though this is usually the role of the CWGs). Advice on, and promotion of, the alignment of Member States and European R&D policies, going beyond the EU Horizon 2020-related instruments (e.g. roadmap, strategy), based on the mapping and analysis exercises. Advice on strategic convergence of areas currently distant from each other, e.g. Agricultural Research and Agricultural Research for Development, where there is the potential to increase synergies and/or reduce unnecessary duplication. Deliverables from ad-hoc groups Advice on ERA-NET Co-fund prioritisation under Horizon Research policy advice on an ad-hoc basis including within short timeframes Instruments SCAR will continue to use the well proven mechanisms mentioned previously, whilst ensuring that they remain fit for purpose. Appropriate terms of reference, regular reporting and other process tools are important for the proper functioning of current mechanisms, such as CWGs, SWGs and the foresight activity. The SCAR Committee (through its plenary meeting) and the SCAR Working Group are responsible for monitoring the efficiency and effectiveness of these instruments. However, it is important to be aware of the resource implications of each new activity. This is an issue for all countries but particularly for countries with a lower level of person-time and/or other resources to allocate. SCAR should consider such

24 24 4 th SCAR FORESIGHT CONFERENCE implications and determine if the proposed work could be carried out through an existing process (e.g. CWG/SWG), or whether new activities should start only when others have been completed. Mandates for new activities need to be specific in terms of what will be addressed and the timescale, activities that are closely associated could be pooled, and impact could be improved by better dissemination of information at the national level. A hierarchy of instruments exists. The Foresight Process organises regular surveys to provide the basis for futures scenarios that are used in the identification of research needs in the longer-term. This may result in proposals for new CWGs, SWGs, ERA-NETs, JPIs, etc., or identify priority activities for existing networks by supplying a longer term outlook. The SWGs will continue to contribute to medium to long-term research and innovation policy, and the CWGs will develop Strategic Research Agendas, highlighting priority research topics through mapping activities and gap analyses, all of which potentially lay the groundwork for future ERA-NETs. Further consideration is needed of the potential for SCAR to increase its provision of strategic research and innovation policy advice within the widened bioeconomy domain. Different approaches may be possible a Strategic Working Group dedicated to this task is one option though issues such as adequate country representation and sufficient coverage of the bio-economy area would need to be addressed, for example, by including representatives of relevant CWGs/SWG. Other options might include systematically integrating such strategic work into the core business of the SWGs, where there is a relevant activity, linking this to the SCAR WG/SCAR Plenary, or to include it in the activities of the SCAR WG. The efficient and productive functioning of all SCAR instruments depends on a consistent and active membership along with the development of trust, relevant networks, and the voluntary input of resources by all concerned. Evidence of the benefits will motivate people to participate and widen the pool for new capacity and ideas Highlighting the benefit Country benefits SCAR has been fortunate to have a core group of committed members who contribute significant time to its activities. However, given the limited or non-participation of a significant number of countries, the Committee cannot be considered as being adequately representative. To improve this, the benefits of participation must be clearer, particularly for those organisations that do not have a dedicated presence in Brussels. Alongside the opportunity to help shape European agricultural and wider bioeconomy research/innovation policy, SCAR membership facilitates networking and exchange of knowledge and experience with organisations across Europe and beyond and also provides a significant source of information regarding upcoming European Commission activities and a strong link to the Commission itself. Active participation of countries could be promoted, for example, by : Production of information that provides a concise overview of SCAR, highlighting its overall impact and including examples of how Member States and Associated Countries have benefitted from participation (including country testimonials). Rotation of the location of SCAR Plenary (and SCAR WG) meetings with at least one WG meeting hosted in the country of the presidency in each 6-month period. This would need to be tested to ensure it does not result in reduced participation. A membership task force could be established to look at the various enablers and barriers to participation and potential mechanisms to get more countries actively involved. There is a need for greater recognition at national level of the role of SCAR and its activities and outputs. Some countries have already achieved this with SCAR representatives well placed to contribute to the development of national priorities