1 15/12/2015 Realising the European Research Area (ERA) Key challenges European Commission Research...
-
Upload
marcus-short -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
0
Transcript of 1 15/12/2015 Realising the European Research Area (ERA) Key challenges European Commission Research...
1
21/04/23
Realising theEuropean Research Area
(ERA)Key challenges
European CommissionResearch Directorate-General
Anneli PauliDeputy Director-General
2
Outline
1. Our global position in numbers2. Ljubljana Process and ERA vision 20203. The five ERA initiatives and other ERA
building blocks
21/04/23
3
1. Our global position in numbers
21/04/23
4
The challenges: Globalisation of Research
• Over 75% of global research investment is made outside the EU
• Our share is decreasing due to new global players in S&T
• Europe must invest more while opening up to the world
5
EU is increasing its
investments in research
• All Member States respond by increasing their R&D investments in real terms (2000-2007)
• 17 Member States even managed to
increase their R&D intensity since 2000
6
Gross Domestic Expenditure on R&D (GERD) - real growth (%) between 2000 and
2007 (1)
4.8%
6.7%
6.7%
7.9%
8.8%
9.8%
11.9%
12.2%
15.6%
19.6%
24.4%
26.6%
27.2%
28.6%
31.4%
35.5%
49.6%
53.0%
60.8%
67.7%
71.8%
72.8%
77.0%
116.8%
133.4%
137.1%
146.4%
221.0%
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240
Sweden
Poland
Netherlands
Slovakia
Belgium
France
Germany
UK
Italy
EU-27
Malta
Greece
Denmark
Finland
Luxembourg
Bulgaria
Slovenia
Austria
Hungary
Portugal
Ireland
Czech Republic
Spain
Romania
Cyprus
Lithuania
Latvia
Estonia
%
7
• However the EU’s R&D intensity has stagnated …
• …while Asia’s is growing strongly and the USA maintains far higher investments
EU’s overall R&D intensity stagnates
8
R&D Intensity (GERD as % of GDP), 2007 (1)
0,45
0,46
0,48
0,53
0,56
0,57
0,58
0,59
0,60
0,82
0,86
0,97
1,14
1,18
1,24
1,27
1,42
1,44
1,53
1,54
1,63
1,65
1,70
1,76
1,83
1,87
2,08
2,53
2,55
2,65
2,67
2,77
2,90
3,22
3,39
3,40
3,64
4,74
0 1 2 3 4 5
Cyprus
Slovakia
Bulgaria
Romania
Poland
Greece
Turkey
Latvia
Malta
Lithuania
Croatia
Hungary
Italy
Portugal
Estonia
Spain
China
Ireland
Slovenia
Czech Republic
Luxembourg
Norway
Netherlands
UK
EU-27
Belgium
France
Germany
Denmark
Austria
US
Iceland
Switzerland
South Korea
Finland
Japan
Sweden
Israel
9
What are the main reasons for the R&D intensity gap with the US and
Japan?
10
GERD financed by sector as % of GDP, 2000 and 2006 (1)
business enterprise
Business enterprise
China (4)
EU-27
US (3)
South Korea (2)
Japan
China (4)
EU-27
US (3)
South Korea (2)
Japan
Source: DG Research
Data: Eurostat, OECD
Notes: (1) EU-27 : 2005.
(2) CN : The sum of the sectors does not add to the total.
(3) US : Most or all capital expenditure is not included; A breakdown for Abroad is not available.
(4) KR : R&D in the social sciences and humanities is not included.
(5) Values in italics are estimated or provisional.
Source: DG Research STC key figures report 2008
Data: Eurostat, OECD
Evolution of GERD financed by sector as % of GDP
1,05 1,00
1,901,69
2,202,62
1,73
2,43
0,52
0,98
0,64 0,63
0,710,76
0,60
0,55
0,57
0,74
0,30
0,35
0
1
2
3
4
2000 2005 2000 2006 2000 2006 2000 2006 2000 2006
GE
RD
fin
an
ced
by
secto
r as %
of
GD
P
Business enterprise Government Other national sources Abroad
EU-27 US Japan South Korea China
A low intensity of private sector R&D investments…
11
11,9
31,4
25,6
31,1
18,4
25,7
23,9
32
16,6
30,8
26,825,8
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
high-tech medium-high-tech
medium-low-tech
low-tech
ma
nu
fac
turi
ng
va
lue
ad
de
d -
%
dis
trib
uti
on
by
ty
pe
of
ind
us
try
EU-27 US JP
…linked to the EU’s industrial structure
12
EU’s assets in research
• The EU is still the largest producer of scientific publications
• The EU has a growing pool of researchers
• The EU is increasingly attractive for foreign research investments
13
Number of doctoral graduates in 2005 and average annual growth 2000-2005
14
R&D expenditure of affiliates ofUS parent companies abroad
R&D expenditure flows between EU-15 and the US (billion PPP$)
14,2
17,018,7 19,1
-4,4
-2,1
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
2003 2005
PP
P$
(bill
ion
)
US R&D expenditure in EU-15 EU-15 R&D expenditure in the US Balance
R&D expenditure flows between EU-15 and the USA (billion PPP$), 2003 and 2005
15
Effect of the crisis on R&D investment
• Overall private investment in R&D likely to be cut, especially in high-tech SMEs
• Public support to R&D has an essential counter-cyclical role to play
• European Council, 20 March 2009 called for « stepping up and improving the quality of investment in research, knowledge and education »
16
EU’s response to the crisis:Recovery Package / R&D aspects
• Call for Member States to increase investment in R&D and reduce patent registration and maintenance fees for SMEs
• Three Public-Private Partnerships on R&D and innovation:– Automotive: Green cars initiative (1B€ for R&D element)– Construction: Energy-efficient buildings initiative (1B€)– Manufacturing:Factories of the future initiative (1.2B€)
50/50 funding from FP7 and private partners First step: Calls for proposals planned for mid-2009
• Risk-Sharing Finance Facility (EIB / FP7): Frontloading of EC resources in 2009 to support access to credit (loans) for R&D and innovation (220M€ vs EUR150M€)
17
Money€€
researchinnovatio
n
Knowledge
18
2. Ljubljana Process & ERA vision 2020
21/04/23
19
Basics of the development of the European Research Area (ERA)
The ERA concept combines: a European "internal market" for research, where • researchers, technology and knowledge freely circulate; • there is effective European-level coordination of national and regional research activities, programmes and policies; • initiatives are implemented and funded at European level.
20
Ljubljana Process
• We need to develop a well-organised partnership between the Member States, Associated States and the Commission to exchange information and to steer all initiatives in a coherent way.
– A common long-term vision for the future of ERA as the basis for our future actions and initiatives
– An action plan and the roadmap to implement the vision– Better governance, notably with better political steering at
the ministerial level, is needed.
21/04/23 2. ERA vision & Ljubljana process
21
ERA Vision 2020
ERA Vision 2020 adopted at Competitiveness Council on2 December 2008
“By 2020, all actors fully benefit from the ‘Fifth Freedom’ across the ERA: free circulation of researchers, knowledge and technology. The ERA provides attractive conditions and effective and efficient governance for doing research and investing in R&D intensive sectors in Europe. It creates strong added value by fostering a healthy Europe-wide scientific competition whilst ensuring the appropriate level of cooperation and coordination. It is responsive to the needs and ambitions of citizens and effectively contributes to the sustainable development and competitiveness of Europe.”
21/04/23 2. ERA vision & Ljubljana process
22
21/04/23 3. The five ERA initiatives
ERA
World-class research
infrastructures
Effective knowledge sharing
Opening of the ERA to the world
Single labour market for researchers
Well-coordinated research programmes
and priorities (joint programming)
Excellent research
institutions and universities
ERA building blocks
23
3. The five ERA initiatives and other ERA building blocks
21/04/23
24
European Partnership for Researchers
Key Challenges:
– Ensure quality and availability of researchers across Europe and raise the attraction of Europe to the best research talents world-wide
• Increasing competition, globally and with other economic sectors
• Demographic developments affecting Europe's research workforce
• Europe's goal to increase public and private investments in R&D
– Mainstream mobility between institutions, between sectors and across borders, based on the “brain circulation” paradigm
21/04/23 3. The five ERA initiatives
25
European Partnership for Researchers
Response to challenges:• A partnership between Member States, Associated States and the
Commission to accelerate progress, building on reforms and actions underway
• A common framework to help focus the efforts on shared objectives and key areas of common interest
• A balanced approach: better careers and more mobility• New voluntary measures to promote the Charter & Code principles
(The European Charter for Researchers, the Code of Conduct for the recruitment of Researchers) at institutional level (“HR Strategy for Researchers”)
• The Gago/Biltgen report of December 2008 with further ideas for implementing the Partnership pointing out the importance of education in science.
21/04/23 3. The five ERA initiatives
26
European Partnership for Researchers
Focus actions at national and European level in four key areas:• Open recruitment and portability of grants• Meeting social security and supplementary pension needs of mobile
researchers• Attractive employment and working conditions• Enhancing training, skills and experience of researchers
Next steps:• Member States to plan/act at national level based on common objectives• Continue progress at European level through the ERA Steering Group on
Human Resources and Mobility and its four Working Groups (Working Conditions & Recruitment; Social Security & Pension Rights; Training & Skills; Monitoring & Indicators)
• Member States to provide first reporting on progress end of 2009 and the Commission to provide a global assessment on actions & results in 2010
27
European Partnership for Researchers
The “Charter & Code” (C&C)
• Signatures: Around 100 signed declarations representing nearly 1000 research organisations spread over 27 countries: Ministries of Research Universities (individual and representative bodies), funding bodies.
• Impact: e.g. Improvement of working conditions of young researchers, Reform PhD and post-doc grant system, New Trainee Statute, National funding bodies linking funds to C&C, Working groups on specific issues: pensions etc.
Next step: the « HR Strategy for Researchers »
21/04/23 3. The five ERA initiatives
28
Key Challenges :– Science and Technology must contribute to solving major societal
challenges– Benefits not optimised due to compartmentalisation of public research
funding in the EU – National research programmes have their place… but are not
equipped to tackle major European societal problems by themselvesResponse to challenges :– Commission Communication on Joint Programming in research adopted
by Council Conclusions (2008) – Member States engaging
• Voluntary and on the basis of variable geometry • …based on a common vision on how to address major societal
challenges• …in the definition, development and implementation of common
strategic research agendas
21/04/23 3. The five ERA initiatives
Joint Programming in Research
29
Council Conclusion on Joint Programming, 2/12/08
Template for presenting JPIs to the GPC, June 2009
2A. Theme addresses EU or global challenge 1a. JPI Addresses EU or global Challenge
2B. The theme is sufficiently focused 1b. Theme of JPI is sufficiently focused
1. … sufficient & effective MS commitment; 2a. Commitment from Member States
2b. Do proposing MS develop Common Vision?
2C. Clear and realistic objectives… 3. SMART Objectives to address the Challenge
5A. JP has potential for good public RTD 4. Key research questions addressed by JPI
5A. Benefits for EU citizens & competitiven. 5a. JPI has benefits & impact for EU citiz. & comp.
3. Added value to current RTD (Nat. & EC) 5c. JPI brings added value to current RTD
5B. Higher efficiency & impact of public R&D 5d. JPI increases RTD efficiency & impact
4. Involvement of regional, national & EU stakeholders + private sector, scientific communities & funding agencies
5e. JP approach is the most appropriate means to facilitate collaboration at European level
5f. JPI would contribute to overcome legal & practical barriers for transn. cooperation
POSSIBLE CRITERIA FOR IDENTIFYING "MATURE" JPIs
Joint Programming in Research
30
Council Conclusion on Joint Programming, 2/12/08
Template for presenting JPIs to the GPC, June 2009
6a. JPI involves participating countries
4. Involvement of regional, national & EU stakeholders + private sector, scientific communities & funding agencies
6b. JPI involves relevant regional, national, international and EU stakeholders, including, where appropriate, the private sector
6c. Adequate human, scientific and technical resources are available for JPI implementation
6d. Availability of existing & new infrastructure
6e. Indication of MS contributions
6f. Indication of approximate duration
6g. Indication of milestones to be reached
6h. Indication of possible future governance (management) structure
5C. Involves area’s key public initiatives 6i. Indication of implementing agencies
6j. Indication of openness to additional MS
7. New criterion: JPI is considered “mature”
POSSIBLE CRITERIA FOR IDENTIFYING "MATURE" JPIs
Joint Programming in Research
31
General Timetable
From 13/2 to 4/12/09 7 Meetings of Joint Programming Group Throughout 2009 Consultation of Stakeholders by Member
States, proposals to GPC End 2009 Identification of Joint Programming themes by
the group, for the December 2009 CouncilCommission prepares proposal for Council Recommendation on the basis of themes identified by the Joint Programming Group (e.g. Neurodegenerative diseases in 7/09)
2009-2010 Council adopts Recommendation, launching the selected Initiatives
Setting up of management structures, development of visions, drafting of the Strategic Research Agendas, pooling the resources, analysis of the potential of existing instruments or the need for new ones. Commission supports as deemed necessary.
… by end 2010 Implementation. Launch of first joint activities, first report to Council
P
H
A
S
E
1P
H
A
S
E
2
Joint Programming in Research
32
World-class research infrastructures
- Essential for Europe’s researchers to stay at the forefront
of research development- Key component of Europe’s competitiveness in both basic
and applied research
Key Challenges:- To overcome fragmentation in Europe in the field of Research
Infrastructures- To improve the efficiency of services and access to European
Research Infrastructures- To cope with their increasing cost and complexity - To further develop and better exploit the potential of e-
infrastructures
21/04/23 3. The five ERA initiatives
33
Response to challenges:- Integration of existing Research Infrastructures- ESFRI roadmap for new Infrastructures (updated on
December 9, 2008)- A new Community legal framework for a European Research
Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC) providing a legal personality to ease the setting up of European Research Infrastructures (Valid as of 28 August 2009)
Next steps:- Implement the ESFRI roadmap (national support)- Continue developing a Research Infrastructures policy at EU
level
World-class research infrastructures
21/04/23 3. The five ERA initiatives
34
Application / assessment process
assessment by Commission with help
of independent experts
Agreement between partners
Application N°revision x
Preparation of application
results communicated to
applicants
Proposed EC decision
(positive or negative) on
the ERIC establishmentOpinion of
Management Committee
EC Decision
Publication in the Official Journal, if decision
to set up the ERIC
Submission to Commission Tracking
system
Final draft decision
possible pre-submission advice by the EC
Regulation,Guidelines
4-8 months
World-class research infrastructures
35
Opening of ERA to the world
Key Challenges:
– Globalisation and global challenges (e.g. climate change, energy security)
– Rise of "non-traditional" research partner countries and research locations ("new global S&T players")
– Facilitation of knowledge transfer at global level
– The need to ensure equitable and fair access to IP generated in international R&D collaborations
– The need to avoid duplication of activities between the Member States and the European Community with third country partners
21/04/23 3. The five ERA initiatives
36
Opening of ERA to the world
– Europe has thousands of links with other parts of the world on many levels: national and European bilateral agreements, inter-institutional collaborations and researcher to researcher contacts.
– However, there is currently no strategy at European level exchange of information about the activities deriving from these contacts, nor to permit an adequate level of cooperation and coordination among the activities.
“A Strategic European Framework for International S&T Cooperation“
– based on a long term partnership between the Member States and the European Community
– aiming for a more coordinated approach between Member States and the European Community activities
21/04/23 3. The five ERA initiatives
37
Opening of ERA to the world
Strategic Forum for International Cooperation
• Member States, Associated States and the European Commission collaborate to identify common priorities which could lead to coordinated or joint initiatives and positions vis-à-vis third countries and international fora.
• Has established two Task Forces:- Information Sharing- Priority Setting/ Global Challenges
38
Knowledge transfer and IP management
Key Challenges:– To enhance the impact of public research on European socio-economic
growth by strengthening knowledge transfer between Public Research Organisations (PROs) and the private sector at national, European and international levels.
– To improve the management of intellectual property arising from research by PROs (including universities), and the development of relations with the private sector.
Response to challenges:– Commission Recommendation and Code of Practice (2008) including key
principles for improving national Intellectual Property (IP) and knowledge transfer policies, and guidance for PROs to set up institutional policies and knowledge transfer systems.
– Council Resolution endorsing and supporting Recommendation and Code of Practice adopted in 2008.
21/04/23 3. The five ERA initiatives
39
Knowledge transfer and IP management
Next steps (1):– Member States and Commission: CREST working group. The group has
identified priorities for the next two years including:• Identifying indicators for measuring progress in implementing the
Recommendation and Code of Practice; • Reviewing and reporting on initiatives taken at national levels to
implement the Recommendation and Code of Practice;• Identifying specific issues related to international knowledge transfer (i.e.
beyond the EU) including the development of practical guidelines where appropriate;
• Reviewing how the Recommendation and Code of Practice are promoted in relevant EU initiatives.
21/04/23 3. The five ERA initiatives
40
Knowledge transfer and IP management
Next steps (2):– Stakeholders and Commission: “Knowledge transfer forum” to discuss
implementation of the Code of Practice, exchange best practices, and work on issues of common interest (e.g. international aspects, model contracts). An DG Research expert group has been created to produce studies on issues relating to knowledge transfer, to support the work of the forum. The next meeting of the forum is planned for October 2009.
– Member States and Stakeholder events to discuss national implementation of Recommendation and Code of Practice, actions to develop national policies and guidelines.
– Stakeholder events to disseminate Code of Practice– Commission will monitor progress and report in 2010, based on
indicators and national reports.
21/04/23 3. The five ERA initiatives
41
Research institutions – Excellent research institutions, including universities: key players in
the knowledge-based economy development, at the heart of the knowledge triangle
– No separate ERA initiative, but elements firmly incorporated in the initiatives, e.g. on researchers and on knowledge transfer
– Commission Communication “Modernisation agenda for universities: education, research and innovation”: research excellence, governance, funding, partnerships with business, knowledge exchange, networking,…
– Largely in hands of Member States and research institutions themselves; European level and national actions politically endorsed by the November 2007 Council resolution on the modernisation of universities for Europe’s competitiveness
21/04/23 3. The five ERA initiatives
42
Beyond the five initiatives
• The five initiatives and their future implementation mark important milestones in the further development of ERA but there are many other issues to be addressed
• Other current initiatives contributing to advancement of the ERA:– ERC (external review made, Commission Communication in October)– European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT)– European Strategic Energy Technology Plan (SET)– Maritime research strategy– European Technology Platforms (ETP)– JTIs, Art. 169s– Strengthening of synergies between FP7, CIP and Structural Funds
• Member States and stakeholders encouraged to identify other challenges and initiatives
21/04/23 3. The five ERA initiatives
4343
We need a more research and
innovation intensive, integrated and attractive
European Research Area
Excellent Research Attracts
http://ec.europa.eu/research/era