European University Association’s Post

LERU welcomes the report of the Expert Group on the interim evaluation of #HorizonEurope and to guide the evolution of the European R&I #FrameworkProgramme.   We are glad that the report: 🔸 strikes a good balance between an ‘evolution’ from Horizon Europe to a future FP, and a ‘revolution’. 🔸 gives explicit support for the European Research Council (ERC), the Marie Skłodowska Curie Actions (#MSCA) and the European Innovation Council (#EIC) 🔸 calls for a vast increase and ringfencing of the #FP10 budget   However, LERU is concerned about:  🔸 the lack of details of certain new proposals 🔸 the disconnection with recent policy developments at the level of the European Commission   Read LERU's full analysis 👇

LERU Secretary-General Kurt Deketelaere comments: “The report of the Expert Group is almost fully in line with LERU’s FP10 paper and with the Letta and Draghi Reports, so from that point of view it is an interesting and important report, reinforcing a number of messages given previously. However, not surprisingly, the report does not connect with the recent policy developments at the level of the European Commission : the political guidelines for the new Commission indicate that the next multiannual financial framework (MFF) will be policy driven, not programme driven; the mission letter to R&I commissioner-designate, Ekaterina Zaharieva, does not mention the drafting of a next R&I framework programme, FP10; and the leaked DG Budget proposals for the next MFF suggest the bundling of different R&I funding sources in a European Competitiveness Fund (ECF). Therefore I repeat today my call on Commissioner Ivanova and Director-General Lemaîte to provide, as soon as possible, some clarity on the future of EU R&I funding and the role of the framework programme. LERU and many other stakeholders are very concerned with the rumours and the documents that are circulating. Some clarification on what to expect is urgently needed.”

Great read Hayden Thorne. One thing that frustrates me when it comes to R&D in Aotearoa is our short-term view of science funding as an "expense" line. Funding science is a long term investment that can generate substantial return for our economy (not to mention broader societal benefits). Take a look at the NASA Apollo mission which returned 7x for every $ invested (direct economic benefit only, and this is the conservative side of the estimates). We need to stop looking at science funding in our country as an expense, and rather a long-term investment with significant ROI potential.

We now have a name for the next research and innovation commissioner, but today's announcements raise just as many questions as they answer. Why separate R&I from education? And why no mention of Horizon Europe's successor programme in the letters to commissioners? For those wondering what to make of the new college, Science|Business has published three stories today on Ekaterina Zaharieva and the other commissioners who will have a role in shaping R&I policy. Links to the others in the article below! https://lnkd.in/euPQdSQM

Let's create a #MATRIX for #FP10! "For Europe to maintain global competitiveness and meet society’s needs through comprehensive, inclusive growth, it’s vital that a multifaceted, broad and nuanced view of innovation is built into the programme’s foundations. [...] We propose that FP10 should be called ‘Matrix’ to capture the generative, cross-cutting, interwoven qualities and competitive robustness of such a Framework Programme."

When reading this exellent article by Tobin Smith from the AAU, on cannot but agree how important it is for all countries, as for the superpower of science, to fund basic research graciously and to embrace international collaboration with confidence. Even in areas of competition among nations, ignorance of what others do, may lead to false decisions. For a small country this is even more fatal. Now let us hope that in Europe, as well as in the US, top research gets a fair treatment. Horizon Europe should be doubled, just as Finland to fund universities when increasing annually the RDI funding to reach the 4% of GDP by 2030.

Mattias Björnmalm, secretary-general of the CESAER group of European science and technology universities, told Research Professional News: “Europe’s R&I system remains far from where it needs to be to compete globally. While there has been some progress, much higher ambitions are needed.” He said the text shows the “clear limitations” of relying on voluntary action from member states, and that a legislative act on the ERA, which has been proposed by Commission president Ursula von der Leyen, “would be a welcome step” as “a legislative and mandatory approach is now essential”. “The current setup, dominated by extensive discussions around soft governance approaches, policy agendas and technical working groups, does not seem capable of driving the transformative and decisive change needed. The future of the ERA must be rooted in stronger enforcement mechanisms that engage high-level decision-makers, rather than being largely relegated to lower-tier and more technical discussions,” he said. But he added: “Unfortunately, this is largely absent” from the text. “As von der Leyen stated, we must act decisively and put ‘research and innovation, science and technology at the centre of our economy’. The swift development and adoption of a highly ambitious ERA act would be an excellent place to start.” Full text of article in Research Professional: https://lnkd.in/dW-H4E2X Full text Communication published yesterday: https://lnkd.in/dGQP8m7c

On 26 June 2024, the European Research and Innovation Area Committee (ERAC) adopted an Opinion on ‘Guidance for the next Framework Programme for R&I’. The Opinion represents the first official stance of the EU’s member states on the tenth Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (#FP10), in anticipation of the European Commission’s proposal in mid-2025. The European University Association (EUA) welcomes this document, which echoes many recommendations from the Association’s own vision for FP10. In its reaction to the Opinion, EUA highlights the recommendations that are of crucial importance for FP10 from the perspective of universities. The Association also offers additional suggestions to further strengthen these recommendations and encourages ERAC to better leverage its unique role in in actively contributing to FP10 budget discussions. https://bit.ly/3S6ZBg3 EUA especially welcomes the committee’s calls to: - Ensure more predictability and stability in the FP10 budget. 💶📊 - Provide a well-balanced mix of support for basic research, applied research and innovation ⚖️🔬💡 - Improve the consultation process with member states and stakeholders. 🗣️🤝 - Reduce the complexity of the programme by maximising the potential of existing instruments and evaluating the introduction of new measures. 🛠️📉 - Strengthen measures in attracting and retaining new talent and developing skills. 🌟👥 - Dedicate the FP10 budget exclusively to funding R&I. 🎓💰 - Reflect on the future role of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT) and its links with other instruments. 🌐🏫 - Make synergies a priority in the design of EU funding programmes and strengthen alignment with national R&I funding. 🤝🔗 - Capitalise on the full potential for excellence across the EU. 🌟🇪🇺 - Ensure inclusive, diverse, open and strategic international cooperation in addressing global challenges. 🌍🤝 - Achieve greater simplification for applicants. ✍️📑 - Ensure greater efforts to embed knowledge valorisation across EU R&I ecosystems. 📚💡 - Strengthen the integration of Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH). 🧠📖 #research #innovation #EUResearch #EIT #KnowledgeValorisation #ResearchImpactEU

Shared scientific facilities are vital for advancing #research across disciplines, yet they continue to be neglected in discussions about Framework Programme 10 (#FP10). Katarina Bjelke, Director General of the Swedish Research Council, highlights the need for significant investment in these infrastructures to maintain Europe's global #competitiveness. She calls for a strategic focus on developing and maintaining these facilities to improve collaboration and research quality as the EU prepares for FP10. 💡 More: https://lnkd.in/eycugZjy

“We need to really step up our game when it comes to research, innovation, science and technology,” Björnmalm said. But he stressed that if the proposal goes ahead, “It should be about putting research, innovation, science and technology at the heart of competitiveness.” Such a move would shift the EU away from debates about the specific budget for its traditional R&I programmes, he suggested. While the current programme has a budget of €93.5 billion for 2021-27, and many are calling for its successor to get €200bn, a more overarching fund could bring €1 trillion to €1.5tn into play, albeit with not all of that going to R&I. But Björnmalm added that he also saw “a lot of risks” in the proposal, and this more fearful response has been the more common one so far. -- Need for care -- As rumours swirled, the European Research Council’s president, Maria Leptin, told RPN she was worried that radical change would affect the autonomy of the ERC. Meanwhile, MEP Christian Ehler stressed that funding might “become more politicised”. “I agree that we should be very careful to consider these aspects as well; the core here is to make sure, even more than in the past, that leading researchers and innovators are in the driving seat when it comes to key science and technology efforts,” Björnmalm said. “Of course we want to have a very strong and even strengthened European Research Council (ERC), we want to have a more independent Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA), a more independent European Innovation Council (EIC).” He added that “if you manage to put leading researchers and innovators as part of the implementing effort” and ease access to funding for beneficiaries, then R&I “can contribute across so many more areas” for the EU than it does today. If this leadership role can be secured, he said, “I think we should be very open to the opportunities that an exploration in this direction could provide us with.” Full details free-to-read in Research Professional 👇 https://lnkd.in/erkU34Rx