How to enhance New Member States and Candidate Countries participation in FP6+ Manfred Horvat and Josef Säckl European and International Programmes (EIP), FFG - Austrian Research Promotion Agency
Contents Introducing FFG-EIP FP6 at mid-term A snapshot from March 2005 Some factual data *) Components of an Action Plan Some conclusions at FP6 mid-term Outlook to FP7 *) Source: European Commission, DG RTD M. Horvat 2
2004 reform of R&D promotion in Austria: from BIT to FFG-EIP Board: 15 members 5: ministries 3: WKO, IV, AK 2: industry 5: employees represent. + 3 advisory members: 2 RFTE, 1 ÖGB; 1 FWF Ministries BMVIT, BMWA Board 2 Directors FFG is a company owned by the state 1993-2004: BIT Agency for Aeronautics and Space ALR Basis Programmes... BP Structural Programmmes... SP Thematic Programmes... TP International and European Programmes EIP M. Horvat 3
Introducing FFG FFG: the Austrian Research Promotion Agency a limited liability company owned by the state staff: 165 staff, budget: EURO 340 Mio FFG - a one-stop shop offering promotion of research projects advice for chossing the right national or international programme assistance for European & international Programmes stimulation of university-industry cooperation support for exploitation of research results M. Horvat 4
Introducing FFG-EIP Staff: ca 60 persons, covering all techn. sectors, financial, legal & IPR aspects National Contact Points for all parts of FP6 Target groups: UNI, IND, ROR, OTH - 28.000 persons in 14.000 organisations Activities: information and assistance for FP6, EUREKA, INTAS, eten, econtent partner and coordinator in SSAs involving partners in 44 countries FFG-EIP helps you finding partners in AT M. Horvat 5
FP6 at mid-term Marimon Report, June 2004 Evaluation of the effectiveness of the New Instruments of Framework Programme VI participation of groups from New Member States is problematic; high barriers: costs of the preparation access to information being accepted as a coordinator availability of management capacities dissatisfaction with feedback on evaluation results M. Horvat 6
FP6 at mid-term Follow up to Marimon Report Response by the Commission services Agenda of the Horizontal Configuration Task Force for Simplification & Acceleration broad ranging set of measures to improve implementation of FP6 continuous monitoring by Commission and Horizontal Configuration simplification a priority of preparing FP7 M. Horvat 7
FP6 at mid-term: 5YA - the Ormala Report 5 Year Assessment of EU FP - 1999-2003 Europe must strive for the best integration of the New Member States. Inclusion in all EU policies & instruments is a prerequisite for effectively tapping the significant human and economic potential of these countries to build a more competitive and cohesive Europe, enjoying sustained development. The Framework Programme should help accelerate the process of integration. M. Horvat 8
FP6 at mid-term: A snap shot from March 2005 Higher shares of participation of NMS & CC slightly lower shares of participation for most Old Member States different extents, to which Member States reached results in FP6 compared to FP5 participation profile of NMS improving still lower participation of NMS & CC in New Instruments participation of industry from NMS & CC particularly low M. Horvat 9
Higher shares of participations for NMS and CC03 in FP6 New member states 5,6% CC03 1,0% FP5 New member states 9,3% CC03 2,1% FP6 Old member states 93,5% Bucharest, Feb 2004: CC13 8,4% AC05 and 3 rd countries not considered! Old member states 88,6% M. Horvat 10
Higher shares of participations for all NMS and CC04 in FP6 FP5 % of Total (EU25 + CC03) FP6 % of Total (incl. NoE)(EU25 + CC03+1) 0,4% 0,6% 0,2% 0,4% 0,8% 0,1% 0,7% 0,2% 0,3% 1,1% 0,3% 0,5% 1,0% 0,2% 0,5% 0,2% 0,4% 0,1% 0,2% 0,6% 0,8% 0,4% 0,7% 1,5% 1,6% 1,5% 2,8% 3,0% 2,5% 2,0% 1,5% 1,0% 0,5% 0,0% BG - Bulgaria HR - Croatia RO - Romania TR - Turkey CY - Cyprus CZ - Czech Republic EE - Estonia HU - Hungary LT - Lithuania LV - Latvia MT - Malta PL - Poland SI - Slovenia SK - Slovakia M. Horvat 11
Slightly lower shares of participation for most old MS FP5 % of Total (EU25 + CC03) FP6 % of Total (incl. NoE)(EU25 + CC03+1) 2,6% 2,8% 4,5% 4,7% 15,7% 16,5% 2,9% 2,3% 7,9% 7,1% 2,6% 2,3% 13,3% 12,5% 4,1% 3,5% 1,4% 1,3% 10,4% 9,9% 0,2% 0,1% 6,7% 5,8% 2,2% 1,9% 4,0% 4,4% 14,9% 13,4% 18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% AT - Austria BE - Belgium DE - Germany DK - Denmark ES - Spain FI - Finland FR - France GR - Greece IE - Ireland IT - Italy LU - Luxembourg NL - Netherlands PT - Portugal SE - Sweden UK - United Kingdom M. Horvat 12
To which extent old MS have reached FP5 results in FP6 by March 2005 M. Horvat 13 35,1% 34,3% 34,2% 26,4% 29,4% 27,9% 30,7% 27,3% 29,5% 31,1% 18,3% 28,1% 28,3% 35,0% 29,2% SE - Sweden UK - United Kingdom 60,0% 50,0% 40,0% 30,0% 20,0% 10,0% 0,0% AT - Austria BE - Belgium DE - Germany DK - Denmark ES - Spain FI - Finland FR - France GR - Greece IE - Ireland IT - Italy LU - Luxembourg NL - Netherlands PT - Portugal
To which extent NMS & CC03 have reached FP5 results in FP6 by March 2005 180% 160% 140% 120% 170,3% Extent Participation from FP5 has been reached Average EU25 + CC03 Average New Member States 100% 80% 60% 40% 90,9% 77,2% 61,3% 60,7% 52,6% 53,8% 58,4% 57,4% 52,6% 50,8% 43,4% 44,8% 20% 0% CY - Cyprus CZ - Czech Republic EE - Estonia HU - Hungary LT - Lithuania LV - Latvia MT - Malta PL - Poland SI - Slovenia SK - Slovakia BG - Bulgaria RO - Romania TR - Turkey M. Horvat 14
New Member States: relative participation profile % all countries participation (n = 26.173) % of New Memberstates Participation (n = 2.212) 1.LifeSciHealth 2. IST 3. NMP 4. Aero&Space 5. Food 6. SustDev 7. Citizens SMEs HRM Policy support Research and innovation Research infrastructures Sci&Soc INCO Coordination Euratom 6,6% 19,0% 8,8% 4,9% 2,6% 3,6% 5,0% 12,9% 1,7% 2,4% 5,2% 6,5% 9,2% 6,2% 7,3% 2,3% 4,5% 2,3% 2,4% 1,1% 1,7% 2,8% 5,4% 1,9% 2,3% 2,5% 3,5% 8,7% 10,2% 9,9% 12,9% 23,8% 0,0% 5,0% 10,0% 15,0% 20,0% 25,0% M. Horvat 15
Involvement in projects by instruments 1 SSA SME, Infrastructure, MC CA IP NoE STREP Country Group (# Participations) CC04 (n = 532) 34,6% 14,3% 11,1% 11,3% 10,3% 18,4% New Member States (n = 2.212) 27,5% 16,6% 9,2% 15,2% 8,4% 23,1% FP6 - All (n = 26.173) 11,2% 16,8% 7,8% 25,0% 12,2% 27,0% M. Horvat 16
Involvement in projects by instruments 2 Percentage of successful projects where at least one partner from the corresponding country group is participating in CC04 New Member States CA 21,8% 57,7% IP 15,6% 56,0% NoE 29,2% 69,8% SME, Infrastructure, MC 3,8% 16,5% SSA STREP Total 10,5% 10,0% 16,3% 32,4% 37,0% 41,0% 0,0% 10,0% 20,0% 30,0% 40,0% 50,0% 60,0% 70,0% 80,0% Countries from the corresponding group are involved in % of projects M. Horvat 17
Distribution of participations by types of organisations Higher Education Industry Research Center Other CC04 33,6% 13,9% 32,7% 19,7% FP6 - All countries 37,5% 17,7% 28,0% 16,7% New Member States 34,8% 10,1% 30,9% 24,2% M. Horvat 18
FP6 projects by 100 researchers (as of March 2005) 6,00 5,00 Cyprus: 24,3 proects by 100 researchers 4,00 3,00 2,00 1,00 0,00 GR EE SI BE AT IRL IT NL DK LV HU PT CS SE EU15old EU 25 Member States ES UK EU10new SK FR DE FI LT PL M. Horvat 19
FP6, ERA and enlargement: A call for action for all parties! European Commission Old & New MS Candidate Countries Developing a common ERA & Lisbon vision for 2010! M. Horvat 20
A need for strategic intelligence develop FP towards learning organisation ensure possibility of piecemeal improvement A need for in-depth analysis of results consider more than success rate, avoid simplistic view analyse more complex reasons for outcomes of Calls reflect weaknesses of participants vs weaknesses of FP6 activate strategy & operational networks programme delegates, national research managers National Contact Points (NCPs) integration, cooperation and learning at all levels implement a rolling Action Plan for enlargement M. Horvat 21
Components of an Action Plan 1 Utilise Specific Support Actions for NMS & CC information & awareness & training, visibility, general integration, industry and SME participation use Competitive Calls of IPs and NoEs screen opportunities offered by IPs and NoEs involve more evaluators from NMS & CC learning from evaluating utilise tacit practice of participants create strategic EU RTD intelligence services M. Horvat 22
Components of an Action Plan 2 Improve visibility and accessability CORDIS National R&D and Innovation service national presentations in Brussels use opportunities of JRC Enlargement Action e.g. fellowships, workshops use strategy for new research infrastructures new ESFRI road map use Marie Curie fellowships to establish and deepen RTD cooperation mobility portal, national protals M. Horvat 23
Components of an Action Plan 3 New efforts to mobilise research potential systematic awareness and information campaigns stimulate integration into ERA-NETs after the evolutionary phase: a need for strategies developing strategic alliances with universities & research centres in NMS & CC initiative of Austrian Research Centres Seibersdorf utilise bi-lateral programmes and Twinning M. Horvat 24
Example of good practice: Budapest declaraction on IST Budapest, 9 January 2004 *) regular and systematic interaction between EC and NMS &CC at policy level to evaluate integration, identify strategies and actions immediate attention to NMS & CC in IST Calls redefined strategic objectives, opening of running projects, Specific Support Actions individual and joint actions EC and NMS &CC definition of Work Programmes, geographic balance, promotion of appropriate instruments *) see: 5Year Assessment of RTD in IST, Jan 2005 M. Horvat 25
Some conclusions at mid-term Implementation of corrective measures by Commission Task Force Simplification and Acceleration redefined balance between new and traditional instruments improved Evaluation Summary Reports awareness of project officers in contract negotiations Specific Support Actions consideration of FP6 experience in FP7 proposal M. Horvat 26
Outlook to FP7: building a Europe of knowledge FP7 to create ERA while supporting new Lisbon strategy synergies research, education, innovation utilizing Structural Funds to support RTD the Barcelona 3% agenda as a driving force: 3% by 2010: AT, BE, DE, DK, FR, IR, NL, SE, SF, SI 1,5% - 2% by 2006 or 2010: CZ, EE, ES, GR, HU, IT, LT, LV, PL, PT below 1,5 %, no or different quantitative target: CY, MT, SK, UK M. Horvat 27
Outlook to FP7: new opportunities for NMS & CC A balance between continuity and innvoation priority: Cooperation & collaboartive projects Frontier research strengthened Marie Curie scheme new research infrastructures re-inforced research for SMEs strengthening research potential in NMS & CC Specific Support Actions simplification M. Horvat 28
FP7: strategies of FFG-EIP mobilising the full participation RTD potential continuous improvement of services stimulation activities in new areas, e.g.: Technology Platforms Basic Research Security and Aerospace further stregthening of collaboration with NMS, CC and Western Balkan Countries a systematic awareness and information campaign starting after April 6, 2005 M. Horvat 29
Thank you for your attention! Prof. Manfred Horvat, Director Josef Säckl, Monitoring and Statistics Division for European and International Programmes (EIP) Austrian Research Promotion Agency (FFG) Donau City Strasse 1 A 1220 Vienna, Austria Tel +43 5 7755 4001, Fax +43 5 7755 94011 email manfred.horvat@ffg.at M. Horvat 30