Delegations will find attached the ERAC 2015 Annual Report as adopted by written procedure.

Transcription

1 EUROPEAN UNION EUROPEAN RESEARCH AREA AND INNOVATION COMMITTEE ERAC Secretariat Brussels, 8 September 2016 (OR. en) ERAC 1210/16 NOTE From: To: Subject: ERAC Secretariat ERAC delegations ERAC 2015 Annual Report Delegations will find attached the ERAC 2015 Annual Report as adopted by written procedure. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 1 DG G 3 C EN

2 ANNEX EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This first annual report from the ERA-related groups highlights the progress that has been made in the last year towards a fully operational and completed European Research Area. It contains reports from all of the ERA-related groups on their key achievements in the last year. It is the view of the Chairs of all the ERA-related groups that these achievements, taken together, have significantly encouraged and supported the implementation of the ERA priorities at European and national level. In 2015, significant efforts were made to achieve a fully operational ERA. Two achievements stand out, namely the development of an ERA Roadmap and the setting up of a more efficient and effective advisory structure for the implementation of ERA. The ERA Roadmap and an associated set of high-level indicators were developed in close partnership between Member States/Associated Countries, the European Commission and many stakeholder organisations. The Roadmap identifies a number of high level objectives and specific actions against each of the ERA priorities for the period Through this annual report, the ERA-related groups will ensure that the Council is updated on progress against the Roadmap. Additionally, work will continue to further refine the indicators and contribute to the collection of the underlying data In December 2014, the Competitiveness Council asked ERAC to make proposals for a reformed system of ERA governance. This was achieved by the deadline of 15 October 2015, and in December 2015 the Competitiveness Council welcomed the ERAC opinion on this matter and called for its swift implementation. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 2

3 One of the most important elements of the reform package was that the Chairs of all the ERA-related groups should be members of the ERAC Steering Board. This has been implemented, and the benefits of better mutual understanding and collaboration between the groups are already making themselves apparent. Additionally, the package established agreed procedures for setting up new ERA-related groups and for conducting regular and rigorous reviews of existing groups. These procedures have already been put to use with the establishment of a new Working Group on Open Science and Innovation, replacing the Knowledge Transfer Group which came to an end in The detailed work of each ERA-related group is set out in its own report. Some key points are highlighted below. Priority 1: more effective national research systems. In addition to its work noted above on the Roadmap, ERA governance and core indicators for the ERA priorities, ERAC also prepared a policy statement on the potential for public sector procurement to stimulate innovation. On 13 November 2015, ERAC adopted its Opinion on the ERA Roadmap - Core high level indicators for monitoring process - identifying one high level indicator per implementation priority identified in the ERA Roadmap enabling key decision makers to tell how far progress has been made on addressing key priorities identified in the Roadmap. Priority 2a: planning and implementation of transnational cooperation. GPC s work during the year included promoting alignment among national strategies and programmes and measuring the progress and impact of the instruments set up for this purpose. The results of the three working groups (Fostering Relationships - Alignment and Interoperability - Monitoring and Evaluating) formed the basis for the revision of the GPC mandate, whose main concept shift the focus of the GPC activity from the JPIs to the JPP. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 3

4 Priority 2b: research infrastructures. During 2015 ESFRI undertook the detailed preparatory work for its 2016 ESFRI Roadmap which provides strategic advice to the Member States on the development of research infrastructures. The Roadmap points the way to further strengthen the European Research Area through effective investments in top priority research infrastructures in Europe. The report, published in March 2016, contains 21 ESFRI Projects and 29 ESFRI Landmarks (successfully delivered ESFRI projects). Priority 3: open labour market for researchers. During the year, SGHRM continued to promote the openness and transparency of recruitment processes for researchers and, in collaboration with the Commission, strengthened the process for the main award recognising achievement in this area (the HR Excellence in Research). A particular highlight was the development of a practical checklist tool that institutions can use to ensure they are applying good practice in recruitment. Priority 4: gender equality and mainstreaming. In 2015 the Helsinki Group provided strategic input to aspects of ERA implementation (including the ERA Monitoring Mechanism) and Horizon 2020 implementation (notably on the role of NCPs in fostering gender equality in the programme), whilst also revising its mandate and work programme to ensure better alignment with the other ERA-related groups. A particular achievement was the work to support the Luxembourg presidency in the preparation of Council Conclusions on gender equality in the European Research Area. Priority 5: optimal circulation, access to and transfer of scientific knowledge. As noted above, this will be the responsibility of the newly established Standing Working Group (SWG) on Open Science and Innovation, which began its work in mid ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 4

5 Priority 6: international dimension. During the year, SFIC continued to facilitate and encourage the partnership between the Commission, Member States and Associated Countries in developing the international dimension of the European Research Area and implementing the Commission s strategy for international cooperation in research and innovation. In particular, progress has been made in the country-specific WGs (Brazil, China, Russia and the US) as well as in a new WG with the objective to develop a practical overview of international STI agreements and STI cooperation activities at bilateral and multilateral level. SFIC, together with the Commission, has improved structured policy coordination and a more open and transparent approach vis-à-vis JSTCC meetings and bi-lateral dialogues and the development of the Multi-Annual Roadmaps. Europe will need to continue to adapt its research systems as the way knowledge is created, shared and communicated is currently in a process of rapid transformation. Work to make a reality of the European Research Area will need to keep pace with these developments. Over the past year, the governance structures of the European Research Area have been made stronger and more consistent. If we are to deliver on the ERA priorities, we will need to ensure that the governance process remains lean and responsive, and that our work reflects the real and evolving challenges we face. Research and innovation are essential building blocks of Europe s future competitiveness, prosperity and well-being, and it is the task of all the ERA-related groups to play our part in maximising the contribution of a dynamic European Research Area. ERAC Co-Chairs: GPC Chair: ESFRI Chair: SGHRM Chair: Helsinki Group Co-Chairs: SWG Open Science and Innovation Chair: SFIC Chair: Robert-Jan Smits and David Wilson Leonidas Antoniou Giorgio Rossi Conor O'Carroll Marcela Linkova and Ana Arana Antelo Clara Eugenia Garcia Garcia Dan Andrée ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 5

6 ERAC 2015 ANNUAL REPORT The European Research Area and Innovation Committee (ERAC) is a strategic policy advisory committee on the full spectrum of research and innovation in the framework of the governance of the European Research Area (ERA). The Council conclusions on the review of the ERA advisory structure adopted on 1 December state that the ERA-related groups "will provide a short annual update to ERAC on progress and impact against the ERA Roadmap and that ERAC will annually report to the Council to ensure that Council is regularly and comprehensively sighted on progress". This ERAC Annual report for 2015 has been prepared as a response to the request by the Council. Background ERA is one of the cornerstones of the Innovation Union flagship initiative, focusing on maximising the potential of Europe's research systems, fostering innovation, strengthening the scientific and technological bases of the Member States as well as their competiveness and capacity to address grand societal challenges. In 2015, significant efforts were made to achieve a fully operational ERA. Two achievements stand out, namely the development of an ERA Roadmap for the period and the setting up of a more efficient and effective advisory structure for the implementation of ERA. 1 Doc /15. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 6

7 1. ERA Roadmap On 20 April 2015, ERAC adopted its opinion on the ERA Roadmap This opinion responded to the Conclusions of the Competiveness Council in February 2014 on the 2013 ERA Progress Report which invited "the Member States in close cooperation with the Commission[, ]to develop by mid-2015 an ERA roadmap at European level" 3. The ERA Roadmap was developed in close partnership between Member States/Associated Countries, the European Commission and the stakeholder organisations - the ERA Partnership. The purpose of the Roadmap is to draw attention to key areas in the form of high level objectives where action is likely to pay most dividends for the majority of national research and innovation systems by spreading excellence and strengthening their ability to operate at a high level of effectiveness. The Roadmap also identifies a number of top action priorities for the key areas and specific actions which might be taken to implement these priorities. 2. Advisory structure for the implementation of ERA The December 2014 Competitiveness Council Conclusions on the 2014 ERA Progress Report invited ERAC to discuss and propose a reform of the ERA-related governance by Furthermore, the May 2015 Competitiveness Council Conclusions on the review of the ERA advisory structure asked ERAC to prepare a proposal for the ERA advisory structure by 15 October On the set date, 15 October 2015, ERAC adopted its Opinion on the Review of the ERA advisory structure 4. The December 2015 Competitiveness Council Conclusions on the review of the ERA advisory structure welcomed the ERAC opinion and called for its swift implementation Doc. 1208/15. Doc. 6945/14. Doc. 1212/15. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 7

8 Report on the progress of ERA and the impact on Europe's science, research and innovation systems against the ERA Roadmap in 2015 In its Opinion on the Review of the ERA advisory structure, ERAC agreed that the number of the ERA-related groups should not exceed the number of ERA Priorities. ERAC and the other ERA-related groups take responsibility for a designated ERA priority as follows: ERA Priority N ERA Priority ERA-related group responsible for the ERA Priority 1 More effective national research systems ERAC 2a Optimal transnational cooperation and competition GPC 2b Research infrastructures ESFRI 3 Open labour market for researchers SGHRM 4 Gender equality and mainstreaming in research Helsinki Group 5 Optimal circulation, access to and transfer of scientific knowledge New Standing Working Group on Open Science and Innovation (began its work in June 2016) 6 International cooperation SFIC The progress of ERA and the impact on Europe's science, research and innovation systems against the ERA Roadmap in 2015 will be reported in this ERAC Annual report on the basis of the ERA priorities. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 8

9 Priority 1: More effective national research systems ERAC is responsible for Priority 1 of the ERA Roadmap. The top action priority corresponding to ERA Priority 1 is "strengthening the evaluation of research and innovation policies and seeking complementarities between, and rationalisation of, instruments at EU and national levels". As far as the above-mentioned contribution by ERAC to the setting up of a more efficient and effective advisory structure for the implementation of ERA is concerned, ERAC started implementing its recommendations already in July 2015 by inviting the Chairs of the other ERA-related groups to attend the meetings of the ERAC Steering Board. Since December 2015, the Chairs of the other ERA-related groups are members of the Steering Board, a fact which should enable better coordination and cooperation among the ERA-related groups. In 2015, ERAC also contributed to the top action priority it is responsible of by establishing a set of core indicators for the monitoring of the implementation of the ERA roadmap and by drafting an ERAC opinion to mark the way forward for innovation procurement. Monitoring of the implementation of the ERA roadmap In its opinion on the ERA Roadmap , ERAC indicated that visible progress in the implementation of ERA must be made by 2020 and it should be possible to demonstrate this progress. The ERA Roadmap therefore is an integral part of the monitoring associated with future ERA Progress Reports. ERAC set up a Working Group on Monitoring the ERA Roadmap in February 2015 to develop a set of core indicators to monitor the implementation of the Roadmap. At its plenary on the 13 November 2015, ERAC approved the report by the above-mentioned Working Group and adopted its Opinion on the ERA Roadmap - Core high level indicators for monitoring process 5. The ERAC Opinion indicates that the aim should be to identify one high level indicator per implementation priority identified in the ERA Roadmap. The chosen indicators should be politically relevant and enable key decision makers to tell how far progress has been made on addressing key priorities identified in the Roadmap. 5 Doc. 1213/15. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 9

10 Innovation Procurement Innovation procurement has over the last decade become an established part of policies in many EU Member States. Furthermore, the revised EU procurement legislation combined with financing in Horizon 2020 and in structural funds have increased and widened the interest in the innovation procurement in the EU Member States. Highlighting the importance of the topic, ERAC decided in 2014 to develop the discussion further by setting up a Task Force and, on the basis of the work done by this Task Force, by drafting its proper opinion to mark the way forward for innovation procurement. The ERAC opinion was adopted on 23 June The principal aim of the opinion is to identify good practices across Europe and propose ways to promote and implement these good practices. Priority 2a: Optimal transnational cooperation and competition GPC is responsible for Priority 2a of the ERA Roadmap. After having completed the first task of its mission, with the identification and launch of the 10 Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs), the GPC explored how to best contribute to foster the Joint Programming Process (JPP). This was done first with the establishment of ad hoc working groups on key issues of the JPP, i.e. promoting alignment among national strategies and programmes, maintaining commitment to joint programming, improving relationship among JPIs and GPC, monitoring implementation of common framework conditions, measuring JPIs progress and impact. On the basis of the output of the working groups, the GPC established 3 Implementation Groups, to take action on 1) Fostering Relationships among the JPIs and the GPC, 2) Promoting Alignment and Interoperability, 3) Monitoring and Evaluating JPIs and JPP Impact. 6 Doc. 1209/15. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 10

11 Also, the results of the work of the working groups formed the basis for the revision of the GPC mandate. The revision of the mandate was accomplished according to the main concept that the focus of the GPC activity should shift from the JPIs to the JPP. After extensive discussions, the opinion on a renewed mandate 7 was approved by the GPC on 11 March 2015 and transmitted to the ERAC. Due to the ongoing debate on the ERA advisory structure, the proposal for adoption of the new mandate was postponed in view of the decision on common clauses to be included in the mandates of all the ERA-related Groups. Finally, the new draft mandate was approved by the GPC on 12 February The Implementation Groups (IG) completed their tasks and delivered 9 /are delivering their final reports. The IG on Fostering Relationships among the JPIs and the GPC provided the essential elements for the production of a document on Keeping the GPC up to the job Tasks and Profile of the GPC Delegates 10, which has been adopted by the GPC, and led to the decision of inviting, wherever possible, the JPIs Representatives to the works of the GPC, which revealed to be a very useful initiative. The IG on Improving Alignment and Interoperability performed an alignment mapping exercise which highlighted the importance of a high level national commitment, of an overarching inclusive national strategy, and of using the national budget as an instrument for promoting alignment. Interestingly, also the national governance (where it exists!) of the JPP was explored, which led to a set of recommendations which is expected to be discussed and approved by the GPC Doc. 1302/15. Doc. 1302/16. Doc. 1303/16 (Final report of the GPC Implementation Group 1 "Fostering and mentoring JPIs"). Doc. 1305/15. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 11

12 After the establishment by the EC of the Expert Group on Evaluation of Joint Programming to Address Grand Societal Challenges, the activity of the IG on Monitoring and Evaluation which initially was meant to measure the impact each JPI, the GPC and the JPP as a whole have on the relevant societal challenges, was mainly concentrated on the establishment of minimum conditions for JPIs to be used both for possible new JPIs, as well as for the assessment of the existing ones. The IG has presented its proposal on minimum conditions for JPIs at the GPC plenary meeting in February 2016 and is planning to deliver its final report early in An excellent synthesis of the GPC view of the state of art and vision for the near future can be found in a presentation given by the GPC Vice Chair at the P2P Conference in Brussels, January 2016 (see Annex IV to doc. 1304/16). Briefly, a genuine joint programming of research strategies, programmes and activities is at the core of the full implementation of the ERA in the priority area of the societal challenges; joint funding activities are not per se making a genuine joint programming process to develop and grow; a stronger effort of the national scientific communities and an effective political will of the decision makers are required for aligning strategies, programmes and activities on major societal challenges, at the Members States, Associated Countries and EC level; most likely, a more visible role of the JPIs within the H2020 (as it started happening) could contribute to effectively developing JPIs as strategic hubs for the European research on major societal challenges; a MLE conducted within the PSF (started in February 2016) is expected to find solutions for increasing MS/AC and EC commitment to the joint programming process and to the JPIs, for enhancing alignment of strategies and programmes, and for improving interoperability among MS/AC instruments and with the EC instruments. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 12

13 Priority 2b: Research infrastructures ESFRI is responsible for Priority 2b of the ERA Roadmap. ESFRI activities in 2015 focused on the development of the 2016 ESFRI Roadmap. The Roadmap development process included the following steps: Assessment of Implementation of projects which entered the Roadmap in 2008 and 2010 Collection of new proposals submitted to the 2016 ESFRI Roadmap Evaluation of proposals consisting of scientific assessment and the assessment of maturity Selection of ESFRI Projects and ESFRI Landmarks to be included in the Roadmap Preparing the landscape analysis of large-scale research infrastructures in Europe Drafting of the 2016 ESFRI Roadmap document The ESFRI Roadmap 2016 consists of three Parts. Part 1 provides the outline of the ESFRI strategic considerations in the development of research infrastructures in Europe as well as gives an overview of projects included in the Roadmap, the methodology, lessons learnt and the outlook into the future. The Roadmap contains 21 ESFRI Projects and 29 ESFRI Landmarks, whose detailed descriptions are included in Part 2. The twenty-one ESFRI Projects consist of nine from the 2008 Roadmap, six from the 2010 Roadmap, five new projects plus one reoriented project that were selected from among twenty eligible proposals that were submitted in March ESFRI selected these new projects following evaluation by a) the Strategy Working Groups with respect to their scientific excellence, pan-european relevance and socio-economic impact and b) with respect to their degree of maturity as benchmarked against an assessment matrix developed by the ESFRI Implementation Group (IG). ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 13

14 Twenty-nine ESFRI Landmarks are the successfully implemented ESFRI projects delivering science services or effectively advancing in their construction. Two of the 20 eligible new proposals to the ESFRI Roadmap 2016 have been evaluated and assessed as already under construction and therefore appear as ESFRI Landmarks. This list demonstrates successful delivery of the Innovation Union Flagship Initiative that 60% of the strategic European RI identified by ESFRI in 2010 should have completed or launched the construction by 2015 with the support of the Member States and the European Commission (EC). Four more proposals were considered scientifically excellent and of high pan-european relevance, but do require further refinement before meeting the maturity criteria to enter the Roadmap. As such, they are stated as emerging projects that are encouraged to re-submit more mature proposals in future Roadmap updates in open competition with all other new proposals in all fields. Two other excellent proposals have a very strong complementarity with ESFRI Landmarks and were therefore identified as potential opportunities for developing common science programmes. These projects are mentioned and briefly described in the Landscape Analysis which makes up Part 3 of the Roadmap. provides the current The Landscape analysis provides the current context, in each domain, of the operational national and international research infrastructures open to European scientists and technology developers through peer-review of competitive science proposals. It represents an impression of the European RI ecosystem. This responds to the invitation by the Competitiveness Council to broaden the view of ESFRI beyond the Roadmap list of projects. It has been produced by the five Strategy Working Groups (SWGs) of ESFRI that are composed of well-recognized scientists and are coordinated by a member, or a permanent expert, of the ESFRI Forum. The e-infrastructures landscape, transversal to all domains, has been elaborated by the e-infrastructure Reflection Group (e-irg). The Landscape Analysis is a key ingredient of the new ESFRI evaluation methodology as it supports the understanding of the impact of new projects. It does not represent in any way the view or prioritization of ESFRI or of any Member State for commitments or future investments. ESFRI in no case acts as an advocate of specific potential future projects. ESFRI and its Member States have taken note of it. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 14

15 The main messages of the 2016 ESFRI Roadmap with respect to the impact of developing pan-european research infrastructures and the role of ESFRI in strengthening the European Research Area are the following: Enhancing and optimising RIs and their access by scientists and innovation developers is a key ingredient of competitiveness as well as a necessary basis for tackling the grand societal challenges. The dialogue between ESFRI, the science stakeholders, the European Commission and the relevant players at regional, national and international level contributes to fostering scientific excellence and competitiveness of the European Union, the Member States and the Associated Countries. The lifecycle approach to RI, better coordination and interaction between national and ESFRI Roadmaps and optimal interplay between regional, national and European RI funding instruments are key to ESFRI s future success in structuring the ERA. Modelling the socio-economic benefits of RI is challenging. Cost Benefit Analysis methods, well established in sectors like transportation or energy, have recently been applied to research infrastructures. Science diplomacy aspects may also be relevant. One needs to look over years of the lifecycle of a research infrastructure to model the long-term impact. All indicators show that the impact is highly positive and, as a matter of facts, international competition for hosting large RIs is strong. The knowledge-based economy is effectively stimulated by strengthening the links between RIs, higher education and research institutions with economic players like industry, services and utilities. The internationally competitive environment and the continuous turnover of visitors and users at RIs create a unique training potential for young researchers, technicians, managers and advanced technology developers. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 15

16 ESFRI will further strengthen the pan-european RI system for excellent science and effective innovation and develop concepts, methods and recommendations for the cross-disciplinary integration of knowledge generated and curated in RIs. A major effort is needed in ICT resources linking the RIs among themselves and allowing the broader social, technological and economical innovation players to acquire information from multiple sources in an effective, efficient and sustainable way. ESFRI is fully committed to act as a reliable partner at the global level in the practical development of scientific and political initiatives aimed at internationalisation of new or existing infrastructures that appear ready to move to a global operation involving access, data policy, and lifecycle management and to consider international governance in a variable geometry. ESFRI has developed and applied a lifecycle approach to its assessment of the RIs in this roadmap. This approach will be further refined and extended to a complete economic analysis. Consistency in methodology and terminology will be pursued at the international level. With the 2016 ESFRI Roadmap update, the process now incorporates the necessary steps to further strengthen the RI ecosystem in the years to come. ESFRI will continue to update its roadmap over the coming years, offering opportunities to new projects in all fields of science. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 16

17 Priority 3: Open labour market for researchers SGHRM is responsible for Priority 3 of the ERA Roadmap. High level objective/rationale What are we aiming for and why? We are looking to achieve a truly open and excellence driven ERA in which highly skilled and qualified people can flow seamlessly across borders, between sectors (academia, industry) and between academic disciplines to where their talents can be best employed to advance the frontiers of knowledge and support innovation in all parts of Europe. This will promote the growth and innovation agenda by ensuring that research is an attractive career option across Europe and that researchers are properly equipped with skills which enable them to work successfully in different sectors. This priority has strong cross cutting linkages with other priorities (e.g. Priority 4 on recruitment and career issues, Priority 2a on transnational cooperation) Top Action Priority identified though Member State consultations Using open, transparent and merit based recruitment practices with regard to research positions. How does this contribute to the objective? Lack of open recruitment makes a research career less attractive, hinders mobility and discourages gender equality, thereby hindering the implementation of the ERA. Actions to promote this At National level, governments and relevant stakeholders (in particular research funding institutions) should consider how participation in national funding schemes could also be used to promote uptake and effective implementation of the ERA principles (openness, transparency and merit based recruitment as articulated in the Researcher s Charter and, in particular, the Code of Conduct for Recruitment) by research performing institutions. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 17

18 Research performing institutions should be encouraged to review their current recruitment processes in a reflective and self-critical way and amend them where necessary to improve their openness and transparency as benchmarked against the ERA principles. In cases where this is relevant they should also consider how to best to remove legal barriers (e.g. civil servant/fonctionnaire status) or other hindrances to the incorporation of researchers in public sector research establishments and Universities and define new structures and approaches to a research/academic career. At European level, consider how participation in Horizon 2020 actions might be used as a way of promoting and reinforcing uptake and implementation of ERA principles e.g. through the Model Grant Agreements. Other issues identified as priorities in the consultation process Improving inter-sectoral mobility between public and private sector research bodies in both directions and at all career stages. This might be addressed in a number of ways, including adoption at national level of Innovative Doctoral Training principles, generalising the adoption of the European Framework for Research Careers and strengthening initiatives on the professional development of researchers, particularly at an early stage in their careers. Consideration of new forms of (and approaches to) mobility might also be relevant, with a view to promoting more balanced talent circulation across Europe instead of uni-directional mobility. There were four meetings of the SGHRM in 2015 on 14 January, 13 May, 17 September and 9 December. All of the meetings provide regular updates from the Commission on relevant issues related to the Council. There are full details provided at each meeting on developments concerning Priority 3. These include developments of the EURAXESS services and RESAVER for example. Regular updates on ERAC are also provided by those SGHRM delegates who are also delegates to ERAC. Delegates also provide information on national initiatives, usually within the context of the ERA roadmap on relevant activities. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 18

19 The SGHRM has always sought practical methods to implement policy through the Framework Programmes. There is a particular link with the Marie Sklodowska Curie Actions and the European Research Council as both are concerned with the career development of researchers. For that reason there are representatives from DG EAC (Marie Sklodowska Curie Actions) and the European Research Council at all of our meetings. This ensures strong channels of communication between the work of the SGHRM and the activities of these programmes within Horizon It should not be forgotten that the work of the SGHRM is relevant to both the European Research Area (ERA) and the European Higher Education Area (EHEA). This is particularly so at the point of intersection during the doctoral stage of a researcher s career. The link to DG EAC ensures that there are strong links maintained with initiatives within the European Higher Education Area (EHEA). There were a number of significant advances made by the SGHRM in 2015 towards realising an Open Labour Market for Researchers. The Working Group established in 2014 on Open Recruitment presented a report that was approved by the SGHRM. This report provides a highly valuable tool (OTM-R Checklist) for institutions planning to ensure the openness and transparency of their recruitment processes for researchers. In parallel, there was an Expert Group (with members from the SGHRM) working with the Commission to strengthen the process for the HR Excellence in Research Award (HRS4R). This new strengthened process will incorporate fully the OTM-R report and checklist providing an essential tool for institutions engaged in the HRS4R process. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 19

20 REPORT of the Working Group of the Steering Group on Human Resources and Mobility (SGHRM) under the ERA on Open, Transparent and Merit-based Recruitment of Researchers OTM-R By ensuring that the best person for the job is recruited, open, transparent and merit-based recruitment of researchers (OTM-R) improves the effectiveness of national research systems, guarantees equality, especially for under-represented groups, and boosts trans- and international co-operation. This in turn promotes optimal circulation of scientific knowledge. Individual researchers, research performing organizations, research funders, and ultimately the whole European Research Area (ERA), benefit from OTM-R, which represents the main pillar of the European Charter for Researchers and, obviously, the Code of Conduct for their recruitment. The EU Member States, when asked in 2015 how to achieve an open labour market for researchers within the ERA, identified Using open, transparent and merit-based recruitment practices with regard to research positions as the top action priority. In fact, a lack of open recruitment is recognised as hindering mobility, the matching of talent to opportunities and gender equality, thereby preventing the ERA from reaching its full potential. For this reason, national governments and relevant stakeholders (in particular research funders) have been invited, within the framework of the ERA Roadmap recently adopted by the Council of Ministers, to consider how the rules for national funding schemes could better promote the uptake and effective implementation by RPOs of the principles of OTM-R as articulated in the Charter and Code. The aim is to also encourage RPOs to participate in the Human Resources Strategy for Researchers and to review their current recruitment processes in a reflective and self-critical way, amending them where necessary to improve their openness and transparency as benchmarked against the Charter and Code. In this connection, the ERA Steering Group on Human Resources and Mobility established an ad hoc working group in 2014, with the aim to develop an OTM-R Package to assist RPOs to carry out, on a voluntary basis, a review of their current recruitment policy and practices and revise these, where needed. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 20

21 The working group counted on the participation of representatives from several Member States and Associated Countries, as well as stakeholder organizations including the Voice of Researchers, the European Universities Association, the League of European Research Universities and the Conference of European Schools for Advanced Engineering Education and Research. Based on existing tools, primarily the Charter and Code and the European Framework for Research Careers, but also the national legislation in place, the working group developed an OTM-R Package, of which the core instrument is the toolkit : a step-by- step guide to improve the RPOs recruitment procedures and practices. The first tool is a checklist, through which RPOs can easily perform a review of their current procedures and practices. All the building blocks of the recruitment process, from the advertising phase to the appointment phase, should be scrutinized, in a simple and straightforward way, using the checklist questions as a basis. The resulting revised recruitment process has to be made public, both internally and externally. Moreover, all personnel involved in the recruitment process must be appropriately trained on the new procedures. This in turn should be embedded in the existing quality assurance system of the organization, without any unnecessary administrative and/or bureaucratic burden. The working group has accomplished its mandate in a spirit of unlimited collaboration and cohesion and expresses the confident hope that, despite the well-known and unavoidable heterogeneity of the starting points throughout the ERA, all RPOs can find something useful in the package to maintain and even improve the attractiveness of Europe as an ideal place for research professionals to live and work. In this connection, it is important to consider that the whole set of employment conditions being offered to applicants (for example, the type and duration of contracts, the salary and benefits, etc.) represents a key element of attractiveness. This report addressed directly issues on how to improve the openness and transparency of the recruitment of researchers. It includes a practical tool (OTM-R Checklist for Institutions) Note that the report and checklist is available on EURAXESS ( ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 21

22 The SGHRM develops new policy and initiatives through working groups that focus on a specific topic related to Priority 3 and work to an agreed mandate. The Working Groups (WG) are chaired by a SGHRM member and are composed of SGHRM delegates, representatives from the relevant Commission services, external experts (nominated by the SGHRM) and major European stakeholder organisations (e.g. EUA, LERU). The WGs are expected to report back within a defined timeline, usually 6 months. In 2015, a work programme for was agreed that would focus on intersectoral mobility, asymmetric mobility and welcoming non-eu researchers to Europe. This led to the establishment of the two Working Groups with the following titles, 1) WG on Inter-sectoral Mobility and Skills (Chaired by J Weideman NO) The objective is to identify barriers for mobility of researchers across sectors, and to discuss how they may be overcome. One significant barrier is transferable skills, which are often requested from industry and business, but not a regular part of training of PhDs and post docs. The advent of Open Science and Open Innovation is highly relevant. Both advocate the advancement of knowledge and innovation through a collaborative approach. It will look what can be done to overcome these obstacles, and what could be the role of the European Commission, national research councils, research institutions (HEIs) and potential employers in the private and public sector. 2) WG on Welcoming culture for researchers (Chaired by C Cabello-Valdez ES) Focus on how to deal with asymmetric flows of researcher mobility, including particularly services for incoming researchers to Europe. The WG will look at measures and innovative transnational mobility initiative in order to take into account the asymmetry of researcher mobility brain drain within Europe and include the issue of diaspora researchers ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 22

23 It will also consider welcoming issues on a European level and exchange best practices and strategies of the Member States. Minimum standards and operational recommendations for countries but also research performing organisations welcoming to EU and Third country researchers. Their recommendations will include suggestions and strategies for implementation: these should be addressed at different levels (for example: EU, MS, EURAXESS, RPOs, etc.) and in specific circumstances (science4refugees). These groups will report back to the SGHRM mid In the December meeting there was a concentration on researchers in the context of Open Science and how this impacts on existing policy, the European Charter for Researchers, for example. The SGHRM will continue this discussion throughout A summary of the key issues discussed at each meeting are given below: January 2015 Meeting (ref. SGHRM/140115/4) Discussion of the Work Programme for May 2015 Meeting (ref. SGHRM/130515/01) Election of Chair Future Policy Initiatives - basis for Work Programme Report on the Working Group for Open Recruitment Discussion on the follow up to the Innovative Doctoral Training Principles Report recommendations. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 23

24 September 2015 Meeting (ref. SGHRM/170915/01) ERAC governance and related ERA groups ERA roadmap indicators Approval of the final Report on the Open, Transparent and Merit-based Recruitment of Researchers (OTM-R) New Challenges for an Open ERA Approval of Expert Group Report on the Evolution of the HRS4R December 2015 Meeting (ref. SGHRM/091215/01) Approval of the mandates for two new working group, WG on Inter-sectoral Mobility and Skills WG on Welcoming culture for researchers Future mobility policy the future of ERA new steps and commitment Open ERA for Innovation, for Science and to the World ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 24

25 Priority 4: Gender equality and mainstreaming in research The Helsinki Group (HG) is responsible for Priority 4 of the ERA Roadmap. INTRODUCTION Established in 1999, the Helsinki Group has over the years 1) provided advice to the Commission on the development of gender equality initiatives and measures within the different policies and frameworks related to science, technology and innovation at European, national and regional levels; 2) contributed to creating awareness at European and national levels of European and national activities related to gender equality in science, technology and innovation, and 3) provided a forum for best practice exchange among member states and associated countries related to advancing gender equality and gender mainstreaming in science, technology and innovation in the ERA. In the course of 2015, the Helsinki Group on Gender in Research and Innovation (hereafter referred to as the HG) launched its transition towards becoming an ERA-related group, to advise the Council and the European Commission on gender equality and gender mainstreaming in research and innovation. The HG is in the process of finalizing its new mandate and drafting a work programme to align itself to other ERA-related groups. Its annual report of activities for 2015 focuses on the implementation of the following objectives, which are in line with the commitments in the European Research Area (ERA) and in Horizon 2020 (H2020): Gender equality in research careers Gender balance in top-level and decision-making positions Integration of the gender dimension in research content and programmes ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 25

26 I. MAIN ACHIEVEMENTS and SUMMARY In 2015 the HG convened twice at its 32 nd and 33 rd meeting, as per its mandate. The HG successfully launched preparatory work for its transition to an ERA-related group by attending, in particular, to the requirements relating to its governance structure. With respect to implementation of gender equality and gender mainstreaming, the HG provided strategic advice on the ERA implementation (the ERA Progress Report, the ERA Monitoring Mechanism), on the implementation of Horizon 2020 (the role of NCPs in fostering gender equality in H2020, evaluation of the gender dimension and gender equality in projects submitted to the H2020). The HG also contributed to advancing gender equality and gender mainstreaming in Europe by supporting the LU presidency in the preparation of Council Conclusions on supporting gender equality in the European Research Area, actively contributing to the drafting of She Figures 2015, and by sharing best practices from MS and AC level. II. ACTIVITIES 2015 HG activities in 2015 followed the dual priority of transitioning to an ERA-related group and providing strategic advice on gender equality issues related to the implementation of ERA, Horizon 2020 and fostering gender equality in European research and innovation. To coordinate the work in these two priorities, the HG set up two sub-groups, the Subgroup on ERA Governance and the Subgroup on Horizon ERA Governance At its 32 nd and 33 rd meetings the HG took active steps to prepare for the transition to an ERArelated group under the guidance and coordination from the sub-group on ERA governance. The sub-group focused on addressing core issues related to the implementation of ERA: the Mandate, the Work Programme, chair election, and communication and collaboration with other ERA-related groups. At its meeting of 17 and 18 November 2015 the sub-group established 3 Working Groups: Working Group on ERA Roadmap which is responsible for drafting the HG Work Programme and monitoring the implementation of the ERA Roadmap Priority 4 by MS; the ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 26

27 Working Group on Governance which is responsible for drafting the mandate and proposing the governance structure of the HG; and in response to the invitation by the Council to enhance cooperation among the groups the Working Group on Cooperation with other ERA-related groups which will be responsible for coordinating with other groups. At its meeting of 18 November 2015 the sub-group negotiated the detailed procedure for co-chair and vice-chair election which was presented to the HG plenary and adopted. European Research Area advisory structure Following the Council conclusions on the review of the European Research Area advisory structure, the HG nominated its representative to participate in the 2015 ERAC Steering Board meetings. New mandate At its two 2015 meetings the HG and specifically the Sub-group on ERA Governance developed the detailed contents of its updated mandate in line with Council Conclusions of 29 May 2015 on the review of the European Research Area advisory structure, with a particular focus on its governance structure and scope of activities to enhance implementation of Priority 4 of the ERA at national levels. The new mandate will be finalized and approved in April Chair and Vice-Chair Election At its November 2015 meeting, the HG adopted a procedure for the election of its co-chair and vice-chair. The chairing position will be shared with the EC on the basis of equal partnership. The HG also discussed the content of the Work Programme for the upcoming period in line with the mandate. 2. Progress on gender equality in the ERA The HG provided strategic advice and opinions to the Council and the Commission on the development of gender equality in the European Research Area. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 27

28 Development of indicators for Priority 4 gender equality for the ERA monitoring mechanism During the year, the HG took active participation in the working group on monitoring the ERA Roadmap of the European Research Area and Innovation Committee (ERAC). In particular, the HG contributed to debates on the design of indicators to assess the ERA implementation. The HG holds that the indicator of the proportion of women in Grade A positions should be supplemented by additional indicators such as the proportion of women among PhD graduates (ISCED 6), the glass ceiling index, and the proportion of women scientists in the total scientific workforce). Additionally, given the recognition of cultural and institutional changes as the key element of the gender equality framework in research and innovation, the HG holds that the proportion of institutions implementing gender equality plans in the overall number of research performing institutions should be included among the monitoring mechanisms. LU PRES conclusions on advancing gender equality in the ERA The HG welcomed the initiative of the Luxembourg Presidency in advancing the agenda of gender equality in the European Research Area. HG members were actively involved in negotiating support at the national level for the Council Conclusions of 1 December 2015 on supporting gender equality in the European Research Area. Sharing information on ERA Roadmap preparation With a view to facilitate the preparation of priority 4 in national ERA Roadmaps and to sharing experience across countries, the HG exchanged information about the state of preparation of ERA Roadmaps at national level, and the members involvement in contributing to national ERA Roadmaps in priority 4 gender equality and gender mainstreaming. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 28

29 Best practice exchange The HG contributed to brainstorming and information exchanges amongst EU/Member States and Associated Countries during Helsinki Group meetings and to this end invited relevant experts. These exchanges served to reinforce sharing of measures and policies that had been developed and implemented at local, regional, national and European level. EIGE online tool The European Institute for Gender Equality launched a tender in 2015 on Integrating Gender Equality into Research Performing Organisations (RPO) and university. Research, Practices and Setting of on-line Tool on Gender Equality Plans (reference EIGE/2015/OPER/07). The HG contributed to this work by reviewing and, where needed, supplementing country fiches drafted by national experts contracted for the tender. 3. Gender Equality in European Research Funding for Research and Innovation The HG recognizes the vital role of Research Funding Organizations in promoting gender equality and the need to integrate gender equality and the gender dimension in the evaluation mechanisms in support programmes of Research Funding Organizations. Following the launch of Horizon 2020 where gender equality and gender dimension play a vital role, the HG reviewed the state of implementation of these priorities, and addressed two issues in particular: the evaluation of gender issues in Horizon 2020 and the role of national contact points in ensuring that appropriate level of information is made available on gender equality and gender dimension in Horizon Evaluation of gender issues in Horizon 2020 The HG reiterated the need to pay specific attention to the evaluation of gender issues in Horizon It highlighted the challenges to proper evaluation of projects submitted for calls for proposals with flagged up topics, and the need to put in place a robust monitoring and evaluation mechanism to assess its implementation in Horizon In this respect the HG stressed the need for the Commission and MS to actively engage with the NCP structure at national level, in order to ensure appropriate degree of dissemination of information on gender issues in H2020. ERAC 1210/16 MI/evt 29