SPREADING EXCELLENCE AND CROSSING THE INNOVATION DIVIDE CONFERENCE

Transcription

1 SLOVAK CENTRE OF SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION SPREADING EXCELLENCE AND CROSSING THE INNOVATION DIVIDE CONFERENCE OUTCOMES SECID 23 NOVEMBER 2016 BRUSSELS, BELGIUM SLORD Slovak Liaison Office for Research and Development

2 OUTCOMES OF THE SPREADING EXCELLENCE AND CROSSING THE INNOVATION DIVIDE CONFERENCE 23 November 2016, Brussels, Belgium BACKGROUND The conference Spreading Excellence and Crossing the Innovation Divide was organised during the Slovak presidency of the Council of the European Union in the second semester of The event was held in Brussels, Belgium on 23 rd November The overall objective of the conference was to provide a platform for stakeholders to have an in-depth discussion on the role of excellence in European research and innovation as well as opportunities presented through Horizon 2020 and European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) for crossing the innovation gap between countries, research institutions, universities, and enterprises. The event served as a forum to assess results of Teaming, ERA chairs and Twinning projects. In addition, the conference raised awareness of specific measures for spreading excellence and widening participation in Horizon 2020, namely ERA Chairs, Teaming, Twinning, Policy Support Facility. Last but not least, the conference provided a space to discuss other instruments focusing on spreading excellence and crossing innovation divide outside Horizon To achieve these goals 320 participants from 44 countries were brought together; in particular, European and national stakeholders, universities, research organizations, small and medium sized enterprises, researchers and European, national and regional government representatives. During the conference Commissioner Carlos Moedas and Slovak Minister of Education Peter Plavčan also congratulated to coordinators of 10 winning projects of Teaming Phase 2 under Horizon 2020 programme. Winners were chosen from originally 167 projects. Winning projects from Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Latvia, Portugal, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and two projects from Hungary will split 140 million Euro to create a centre of excellence helping to improve performance in R&I funding programmes. Each project will be funded up to 15 million EUR. Gap is not decreasing Source: Jana Kollar (SECID2016, 23 rd November 2016)

3 It has been also showed that the innovation performance declines in Europe. While in years performance of regions increased (green), during the period the innovation performance declined (orange). Regional Innovation Scoreboard 2016: Innovation performance in 214 regions in the EU. STATE OF PLAY Speakers and audience of the SECID conference pointed out key problems and issues behind the innovation gap and low participation of some EU13 countries in Horizon Various criteria and indicators, such as scientific and innovative excellence, quality of universities, and number of ERC grants, highly cited papers and patents define the innovation performance. Thus, the innovation divide is the gap in how well countries perform in these indicators. Following the Research Excellence Composite indicator, the European commission has identified the so called widening countries (including beside of the EU13 also Portugal and Luxembourg). When it comes to participation in Horizon 2020, from the table below is seen that the gap is not closing, but on contrary, it is even getting wider. This is happening in spite of the fact, that a gap in scientific excellence is closing and also the EU13 is improving as is business investments in R&I. Influences on participation can include R&I investment levels but also country size. With some evidence smaller countries can do quite well, as mentioned above Slovenia, Estonia, and Cyprus. However, for instance, years of involvement in the FP does not seem to be a very useful indicator. REASONS FOR THE INNOVATION DIVIDE From the current situation it is seen that the innovation gap is getting wider and participation of many EU13 countries in FP is low. The four main reasons for the innovation divide which have been raised are following: fewer investment in research and development (personnel, infrastructures) less efficient R&D systems (policy) closed networks brain drain and less attractive environment for researchers and innovators

4 Besides of these key elements, also other factors seem to play an important role in widening of the gap in scientific excellence and innovation, such as: small motivation to participate in Horizon 2020 programme, since ESIF are more attractive and easier for participants; low participation of EU13 in ERA-NET Cofund actions; lack of experienced workforce, flexibility and post docs positions; lack of interest in science which can result in a loss of interest in science at all levels including political; lack of clearer definition of scientific excellence; absence of attractive environment and support services for researchers; weak synergies between Horizon 2020 and ESIF. SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT Participants of the conference appreciated measures that have been introduced and implemented by the EC to help decrease the innovation gap. 1 Nonetheless, further efforts have to be maintained. In order to cross the innovation divide and widen the participation of EU13 in Framework programmes it is essential that all actors and stakeholders in research and innovation take their part. Therefore, based on some ideas put forward by some participants, the SECID Conference calls on all stakeholders to be open to these suggestions which could significantly contribute to the reduction of innovation divide and increase the scientific excellence. 1. Reforms European Commission was asked to look into: 1. Further simplification and consistency between existing or newly emerging programmes. 2. Smaller projects which can help increase participations of newcomers. 3. Strengthening of those instruments which have synergies with structural funds in their design, such as Teaming. 4. Introduction of a new selection (ranking) criterion which could serve as a geographical glass ceiling. This criterion would be established for selection of those projects for funding, which have received the same evaluation score, but are more geographically balanced. This criterion could be also applied for newcomers. Member States: 1. National reforms that would ensure a targeted and full use of the funding options provided by ESIF for capacity building in R&I which can be done through: 1.1 Better participation of EU13 countries in ERA-NET Cofund actions and Public-Public Partnerships under H2020 which help establish networking structures, improve capacity building and help increase quality of research at national level. 1.2 Higher complementarity between different instruments targeting R&I communities and industry. 1 These measures cover a variety of complementary needs, namely institutional excellence (Teaming), strengthening a specific research field via focused and intense partnerships (Twinning), unlocking research potential and implementing structural changes (ERA-Chairs), involving researchers in knowledge creation and development by joining open and evolving science and technology networks (COST) and by support to design, implement and evaluate reforms (Policy Support Facility).

5 1.3 Improvement of transitions and better synergies between instruments. 1.4 Better use of Policy Support Facility which is designed to implement and evaluate national and regional research and innovation policies. 1.5 Use of Seal of excellence for successful projects but which cannot be financed from Horizon Increase investments in research and innovation at national level. Introduce new competitiveness funds. 2. Improvement of the system of awarding excellence researchers. Institutions and Universities: 1. Institutional reforms at universities and research organisations which will support effective communication across departments, better cooperation with international partners and open recruitment. Internal changes should also help make the institutions and universities attractive place for young researchers and scientists. 2. Bigger activity of universities and institutions in the Member States and in the regions which also covers better communication and cooperation among local institutions and universities, industry and SMEs within the region. For this purpose an introduction of better integrated strategies would be useful. 2. Budget and remuneration European Commission was asked to look into: 1. Higher budget for the specific measures in H2020/FP9 (Teaming, Twinning, ERA Chair and COST) to fulfil ambitious goals and expectations. 2. Adoption a better remuneration model which would account for specificities of national research policy and system traditions. 3. Simpler and better financing for SMEs in FP. This could be done through shorter projects of lower financial value. Member States 1. Rapid increase investments in R&I at national level, since one of the main factors of the innovation divide and gap in the scientific excellence is national investment in research and innovation. 2. Adoption of flexible, modern and attractive remuneration models which will attract the best researchers and innovators and help retain them in the country. Institutions and Universities 1. Introduction of special postdoctoral funding schemes which could attract the researchers of a high quality. Such a scheme could be, for example a programme for duration of 3+1 years, which would give researchers a bigger certainty and therefore a greater incentive to stay in the country. 2. Better use of existing schemes, such a MCSA Co-funds. 3. Brain circulation and attracting talents European Commission 1. Reassessment of existing scheme to provide even better support for universities and other institutions to attract and maintain high quality human resources for example 2 ERA Chairs at the same time in one institutions (bigger impact).

6 Member states 1. Simplification of legal and administrative issues better information and access for researchers, and better administration support for coming researchers. 2. Creating an attractive environment for researchers and research infrastructure that fulfils their expectation. Institutions and Universities 1. Investment in young people and talents and offering younger researchers a realistic prospect for making a career at home. 2. Better support for those researchers coming back from mobility. 3. Creating a toolbox of best practices and sharing know-how. This can be done by following the best practices existing in successful institutions. 4. Better support universities especially in Central Europe with regards to best practices such as research career development, gender initiatives and trainings (model to follow CELSA). 5. Better networking of each universities and institutions and better supporting of mobility, mainly though: 5.1 Active participation in different European networks and umbrella organizations. 5.2 Short term scientific missions which will be beneficial both to hosting organization and visiting researcher. 5.3 Participation in international conferences since they provide the option of interacting with different networks. 5.4 Preparation of Welcome packages for newly starting PhD students which can help them to better orientate not only in local conditions and internal strategies of the institution but also in funding opportunities. 4. Investment in excellence European Commission 1. Opening up infrastructures at European level; networks and investing in knowledge ((Ex.: Knowledge Centers or Communities of Practice (JRC)) Member States 1. Improvement of national programmes and schemes contributing to reducing innovation disparities, for example: 1.1 Fellowships for science managers 1.2 Better use of ESIF funds for national programmes and projects 1.3 Bilateral and multilateral cooperation through smaller research projects 1.4 Better support for participation in Horizon 2020 at national level 2. Introduction of some practices from EU grant schemes into national grant instruments which would help participants gain experiences that could subsequently be used in the preparation of international projects. For example, international peer review, grants written in English, etc... Institutions and organizations 1. Introduction of trainings and courses not only for researchers but also for administrative staff. 2. Better institutional support for researchers in term of preparation of projects.

7 Disclaimer This project has received funding from the European Union s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No Ideas and suggestions set out in the paper were put forward by participants of the conference and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the European Union or organizers. Neither the European Union institutions, bodies and organizers nor any person acting on their behalf or may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained in this report.