More money, easy access

Less bureaucracy and more funding as the EU reveals detail of its Seventh Research Programme

More money and easier access have been promised as part of the European Union’s proposed research programme. In April, the European Commission adopted a proposal for the EU’s Seventh Research Programme 2007-2013 (FP7). The proposal, with its increase in research funding, was drawn up to “provide new impetus to increase Europe’s growth and competitiveness, recognising that knowledge is Europe’s greatest resource”. In doing so, its architects also had to take into consideration that the Sixth Framework Programme had been seen as overly bureaucratic, and simpler access procedures are being drawn up to address this.

Consultation on the programme, held last year, found that, while certain elements of FP6 should be retained, its successor needed to embrace change. FP7, therefore, places greater emphasis on research that is relevant to the needs of industry, to help it compete internationally, and to develop its role as a world leader. The programme will also, for the first time, provide support for the “best in Europe investigator-driven research”, with the creation of a European Research Council.

In response to the research community’s criticisms, the Commission aims to make taking part less complicated and this will be done, for example, through re-examining the participation procedures, and a rationalisation of instruments but, perhaps most significant, is that, compared with FP6, the programme’s budget will double, rising to Euro 67.8 billion over its lifetime.

The Commission points out that there is a strong element of continuity in its FP7 proposals, and that projects undertaken by consortia of partners remain at the initiative’s core. The themes for these projects will remain much as they have been under FP6. The follow-on programme will continue to develop the concept of the European Research Area, and funds will be used to develop and increase current initiatives that work well, for example, Marie Curie small and medium sized enterprise (SME) actions, collaborative projects, and Networks of Excellence.

Subtitled “Building the European research area of knowledge growth”, FP7 is divided into four main areas: cooperation; ideas; people, and capacities.

Under the “cooperation programme”, the Commission aims to attain European leadership in key areas through encouraging industry and research institution co-operation. Support will also be extended to transnational research activities, collaborative projects and networks, and to coordinating national research activities.

Nine themes of interest have been identified: health; food; agriculture and biotechnologies; nanosciences and nanotechnologies; materials and new production technologies; energy; environment (including climate change); transport (including aeronautics); socio-economic sciences and the humanities; security and space. In addition, two themes are covered by the Euratom Framework Programme; fusion energy research and nuclear fission and radiation protection.

FP7 will also focus on ideas. This programme aims to strengthen the excellence of the science base by fostering European level competition. As part of the programme, an autonomous European Research Council will be created to support “frontier research” carried out by teams, either individually or in partnership, competing at European level, in all scientific and technological fields.

People. The objective of this programme is to strengthen researchers’ career prospects and mobility. Activities supporting individual researchers, referred to as “Marie Curie” actions, will be reinforced to strengthen the human potential of European research, through supporting training, mobility and research career development.

Capacities. The capacity programme has been designed to ensure that the science community has the best possible capacities at its service. Activities will be supported that enhance: research infrastructures; regional research driven clusters; stimulating the research potential in the EU’s “convergence” regions: clustering regional actors in research to develop “regions of knowledge”’ research for, and by, small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs); “science in society” issues; and “horizontal” activities of international cooperation.

A key feature of FP7 is the significant simplification of its operation and measures are under consideration to make the programme as straightforward as possible. In order to this, the Commission has said that it will seek advice from a group of representatives, particularly from SMEs and research teams, the two groups that have faced the biggest difficulties in participating.

Much discussion has already taken place. Between 30 July and 15 October 2004, the Commission held a stakeholder consultation on its proposals, and over 1,700 organisations and individuals responded. It found that there was strong support for the six major objectives and that support was particularly strong for making Europe more attractive to the best researchers (over 95% of responses). Support was also strong for transnational collaborative research and for the new initiatives of aiding European Technology Initiatives and stimulating the creativity of basic research. Over 80% of responses favoured the development of infrastructure of European interest and coordination of national programmes.

The consultation also found however, that the way that policy and support is implemented needs to be improved, and many of the concerns raised repeated the problems identified by the mid-term evaluation of the effectiveness of the instruments of the 6th Framework Programme.

Stakeholders were consulted via an on-line questionnaire, and a total of 1,727 responses were received. 7% came from large companies, while some 26% came from universities and higher education institutes. 8% of responses came from SMEs. If analysed by country, the highest number of responses came from Germany (258) followed by the UK (157).

Strong support was voiced for creating European centres of excellence through collaboration. Large companies were particularly in favour of this objective and a high number of additional comments were received. A common concern, however, was that there should be a lower number of partners in consortia and a greater focus on smaller projects than has been the case under FP6th. Once again, there were calls for simplification and less bureaucracy.

There was also strong support for improving the co-ordination of national research programmes.

Government views
The views of national governments were also sought in drawing up the proposal. In November last year, the UK government published its position paper on the Commission’s initial approach to FP7. It argued that FP7 should address those areas that really mattered - basic research, industrial research, and research in support of policy, making clear the various aims and objectives of these areas. To achieve these aims, it said, the Framework Programme had to be simplified to make it more user friendly for industry and science.

The UK proposed that the bulk of funding for FP7 should be concentrated on industrial competitiveness, where the long-term research agenda should clearly reflect the needs of the industrial users. The UK also favoured establishing a European Research Council.

The Commission has also held numerous meetings with groups of scientists, scientific organisations and other umbrella bodies, at political or technical level, to discuss its ideas for the new programme and to involve the views of the wider community as much as possible.

By focusing more on themes and less on instruments, the programme should become more flexible and adaptable to industry needs, the Commission believes, as well as becoming more straightforward for participants. With a greater focus on developing research that responds to the needs of European industry, there will be projects in fields of major public interest on subjects identified through dialogue with industry, in particular via the European Technology Platforms.

Another new element will be the development of “regions of knowledge”, bringing together a region’s potential research partners - such as universities, research centres, enterprises and regional authorities - to strengthen their potential. FP7 will also include a “Risk-sharing Finance Facility”, designed to foster private investment in research by improving access to European Investment Bank loans for large European research actions.

International cooperation, which has been a separate part of the programme, will be integrated into all four programmes. In the same vein, the EU Science in Society action will retain specific tasks, but all parts of the FP7 programme will contribute to anchoring science more closely to the needs of society.

Reflecting how complicated accessing support can be, the Commission has concluded that simplifying administrative and financial procedures will be key to FP7’s success. How to implement this change is being considered at every level. The proposals include:
· Rationalising the funding schemes - using a simpler set of funding requirements
· Using simpler, less bueaurocratic language that is jargon-free
· Reducing the number and size of documents
· A reduction in the number of requests to participants and instituting a lights submission procedure
· Reducing a priori controls (ie controls before a project is approved)
· Increasing the autonomy of consortia
· Streamlining the selection process
· Exploring new funding modes and simplifying the cost-based funding system

In February this year, an expert panel presented its evaluation of the previous five years of European Research and Development programmes. It found that these programmes had made a major contribution to developing Europe’s knowledge base and had had a positive effect on potential innovation, but it also found that if this effect was to be continued, more resources would have to be made available. The panel also recommended more industry participation, especially from SMEs, streamlined and simplified administration; and more emphasis on radical innovation and risk-taking.

There are several reasons why the Commission has proposed an increase in resources for the budget are several. It says that spending at EU level has a leverage effect on other sources of private and public funding. Therefore, a Euro 70 billion programme at European level, although a small proportion of the overall amount needed, will, nonetheless, help to encourage greater overall spending. Each Euro of European money invested in research will lead to an additional Euro of private investment. However, against this needs to be weighed the concern that emerged during consultation that any increase in expenditure by the EU could result in a reduction of expenditure by national funding bodies.

The Commission also says that Europe’s political, economic and scientific context requires new actions that must be given sufficient funds if they are to work. Alongside this, there are already a significant number of high quality proposals that have to be rejected due to a lack of available funds. An increase in resources at European level would give an added boost to a whole range of scientific activities at European level that have, up to now, been left aside.

By Mark Clements