Science and Innovation for Development

Science and Innovation for Development A study into the contribution and complementarity of EU international research and innovation cooperation with developing countries in FP7 (7-) Final Report Research and Directorate-General for Development and Cooperation Innovation EuropeAid

EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Research and Innovation Directorate C International Cooperation Unit C European Neighbourhood, Africa and Gulf Contact: Nienke Buisman E-mail: nienke.buisman@ec.europa.eu RTD-PUBLICATIONS@ec.europa.eu European Commission B-49 Brussels

Science and Innovation for Development A study into the contribution and complementarity of EU international research and innovation cooperation with developing countries in FP7 (7-) Final Report June 6 Dr. Ir Paul G.H. Engel, ECDPM Senior Fellow Prof. Giorgia, Giovanetti University of Firenze and EUI 6 Directorate-General for Research and Innovation Horizon Societal Challenge 6

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union. Freephone number*: 8 6 7 8 9 *Certain mobile telephone contractors do not allow access to 8 numbers or these calls may be billed. LEGAL NOTICE This document has been prepared for the European Commission however it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. More information on the European Union is available on the internet (http://europa.eu). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 6. Print ISBN 978-9-79-64- doi:.777/5759 KI--6-69-EN-C PDF ISBN 978-9-79-64-9 doi:.777/564 KI--6-69-EN-N European Union, 6. Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Cover images: Lonely, # 46469,. ag visuell #64486,. Sean Gladwell #685,. LwRedStorm, #4865.. kras99, #47468,. Source: Fotolia.com

CONTRIBUTION AND COMPLEMENTARITY OF EU RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COOPERATION WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN FP7 (7-) FINAL REPORT Contents. Introduction 5.. Objectives and scope of the evaluation () 5.. Outline of the report 5. An evolving policy and institutional framework 7.. Overarching EU Development objectives The European Consensus on Development 5, the Agenda for Change and the UN global development agenda 7.. EU International Science and Technology Cooperation (7-) 8.. Instruments 9.4. A simplified intervention logic. Research approach and methodology.. Analytical framework and research questions.. Research methodology.. Country and project sample selection.4. Selecting key informants 5.5. Strength of the evidence obtained 5.6. Expected outcomes of the study 5 4. Findings 6 4.. Meeting EU geographic development priorities: Do FP7 activities contribute to developing country (DC) participation in research and innovation? 6 4... The global context 6 4... The involvement of Developing Country partners in FP7 projects 6 4... Zooming in on the country sample: 5 developing countries in 5 different (sub) regions 9 4..4. Interconnectedness and centrality between sample countries and (sub) regions 4..5. A conducive environment for research and innovation: R&I networking and partnership building, R & D investments, research capacity and institutions 4..6. An emerging EU-DC global research community of practice 8 4.. Meeting EU thematic development priorities: Do FP7 research projects with partners from developing countries address thematic priorities of EU development policies? 9 4.. Meeting the EU R&I Policy Objectives (): consistency, synergy and links with EU development cooperation policy and instruments 4... To what extent FP7 research and innovation projects are consistent with EU development policy objectives? 4... To what extent FP7 project results feed into EU development policies? Synergies and links with EU development cooperation instruments 4.4. Meeting the EU R&I Results Objectives: concrete results and outputs that benefit developing countries 4.4.. Introduction 4.4.. To what extent FP7 research results and outputs feed into DC national development policies? 4

4 CONTRIBUTION AND COMPLEMENTARITY OF EU RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COOPERATION WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN FP7 (7-) FINAL REPORT 4.4.. To what extent FP7 research results and outputs feed into DC national research policies? 5 4.4.4. To what extent FP7 research results and outputs are taken up by DC business/ stakeholders innovation? 6 4.4.5. To what extent FP7 activities contribute to strengthening R&I networks and institutions in DC? 7 4.4.6. To what extent FP7 project results feed into EU development and research policies? 7 4.5. Meeting the EU R&I Policy Objectives (): contributions to EU-DC policy dialogue, capacity building, networking and partnership building 8 4.5.. To what extent FP7 activities contribute to EU-DC research and innovation networking/partnership building? 8 4.5.. To what extent FP7 activities contribute to research and innovation capacity development in DC? 9 4.5.. To what extent FP7 activities contribute to EU-DC policy dialogue? 4 4.5.4. Not all FP7 projects in which DC participate seem to be directed at partnership 4 4.6. Answering the evaluative questions 4 4.6.. Do targeted and non-targeted FP7 activities make pertinent contributions in key areas of EU development policy? 4 4.6.. Do FP7 contributions complement contributions by other activities in support of research and innovation for development? 4 4.6.. An assessment of the effectiveness, relevance, coherence and sustainability of FP7 activities with regard to EU development objectives 4 5. Strengthening EU research and innovation contributions and complementarities some reflections and recommendations 44 5.. Introduction 44 5.. In which areas and how can EU research and innovation contributions and complementarities be strengthened 44 5... Geographic and thematic alignment with overall EU development policy objectives 44 5... Contribution to R&I Policy Objectives 45 5... Contributions to EU R&I Results Objectives 46 5.. Strengthening Horizon complementarity with other EU Research and Innovation activities 47 5... Prioritize RI4D in international cooperation and develop a more strategic approach to collaboration with developing countries. 47 5... Differentiate RI4D approaches and complementary measures in accordance with country needs 48 5... Strengthen the EU-DC global research community, the participation from low and (lower) middle-income countries in particular 49 5..4. Invest in documenting and sharing RI4D experiences and lessons learned 5

CONTRIBUTION AND COMPLEMENTARITY OF EU RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COOPERATION WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN FP7 (7-) FINAL REPORT 5. Introduction.. Objectives and scope of the evaluation ( ) As cooperation with developing countries is an essential part of the international cooperation strategy in research and innovation ( ), an Expert group on science and innovation for development has been set up (H WP 4-5). This study, carried out by independent experts, focuses on EU research and innovation cooperation with partners in developing countries, including emerging economies. The results of the study should help to identify venues for building a stronger European engagement with excellent research in developing countries and on issues that are of shared concern in fields such as health, food, energy, use of natural resources and others. The main objectives of the study are:. To carry out an in-depth analysis of the activities supported, including their outputs and results;. To raise visibility of investment in science, technology and innovation for development both for the EU and for developing countries.. And also to create a concise evidence-base for future policy directions in Horizon and synergies with other EU funding programmes namely those managed in the field of development cooperation. This evaluation focuses on both targeted and non-targeted activities implemented under the International Cooperation Programme in FP7 during the period 7-. Targeted activities include: Specific International Cooperation Activities (SICA), including the Africa Call, and dedicated activities with developing countries in the INCO Programme. Non-targeted activities include those that involved researchers from developing countries: collaborative research actions (CPs), Coordination and Support Actions (CSAs), Research Infrastructures (RIs), and ERA-NETs. The thematic focus of the evaluation includes those thematic areas covered by FP7 that are considered most pertinent with regard to their potential of contributing to achieving EU overall development objectives. The geographic focus is on (partners from) developing countries from Latin America, South East Asia and Africa, including emerging economies and the countries of North Africa... Outline of the report The introduction of the report states the objectives of the study, the activities to be assessed, and its thematic and geographic focus. In section, the report briefly presents the overall EU policy and institutional framework relevant to the study. After discussing the more general EU development objectives and the EU science and technology cooperation, it focuses on EU research and innovation cooperation for development through the FP7. It closes with a brief review of the DG RTD (Directorate-General for Research and Innovation) intervention logic. Section presents the approach and methodology used. It specifies the evaluation questions, judgment criteria (JCs), and indicators (INs) and the evaluation criteria to be applied to the intervention ( ). Then the sampling frame, sampling criteria and a country sample for an in-depth study of both contributions and complementarities are presented. The criteria used to select project samples per country are addressed. Finally, in line with the EC Guidelines, the strength of the evidence obtained is assessed and the robustness and possible use of the conclusions and recommendations is discussed. ( ) Terms of Reference for Expert contracts for a study entitled Science and innovation for development. European commission, DG Research and Innovation. ( ) COM() 497 ( ) Specified in EC Guidelines on Evaluation: Effectiveness, Efficiency, Relevance, Coherence and EU Added-Value.

6 CONTRIBUTION AND COMPLEMENTARITY OF EU RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COOPERATION WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN FP7 (7-) FINAL REPORT Section 4 summarizes the research findings and formulates answers to the two main evaluation questions. First it focuses on the FP7 contributions to key areas of EU development policy. Secondly it addresses, in as much as possible given the evidence available, the complementarity of FP7 contributions with other EU RI4D (Research and Innovation for Development) instruments. It concludes by answering the evaluative questions. Section 5 addresses the forward-looking questions. It starts by discussing the areas of EU development policy that hold most promise for strengthening the DG RTD contribution to EU development policy within the context of the emerging post-5 global development agenda, the Sustainable Development Goals, and for improving the complementarity with other EU RI4D instruments. It concludes by identifying opportunities for strengthening the contributions and complementarity of Horizon, formulating a number of specific recommendations for action.

CONTRIBUTION AND COMPLEMENTARITY OF EU RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COOPERATION WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN FP7 (7-) FINAL REPORT 7. An evolving policy and institutional framework.. Overarching EU Development objectives The European Consensus on Development 5, the Agenda for Change and the UN global development agenda The 5 European Consensus on Development formulates as the primary and overarching objective of EU development cooperation the eradication of poverty in the context of sustainable development ( 4 ), including the pursuit of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) ( 5 ). Sustainable development includes good governance, human rights and political, economic, social and environmental aspects. Besides, the EU shall take account of the objectives of development cooperation in all policies it implements which are likely to affect developing countries, and ensure that these policies support development objectives (Policy Coherence for Development, PCD). Development aid will continue to support poor people in all developing countries, including both low-income and (lower) middleincome countries (MICs). The EU will continue to prioritise support to the least-developed and other low-income countries (LICs) to achieve more balanced global development, while recognizing the value of concentrating the aid activities of each Member State in areas and regions where they have comparative advantages and can add most value to the fight against poverty. The European Consensus recognizes poverty is multi-dimensional; it includes all the areas in which people of either gender are deprived and perceived as incapacitated in different societies and local contexts. Poverty relates to human capabilities such as consumption and food security, health, education, rights, the ability to be heard, human security especially for the poor, dignity and decent work. Therefore combating poverty will only be successful if equal importance is given to investing in people, the protection of natural resources to secure rural livelihoods, and investing in wealth creation. The empowerment of women is the key to all development and gender equality should be a core part of all policy strategies. The most recent specification of European Development Policy, the Agenda for Change ( 6 ) specifically underscores the importance of promoting sustainable growth with regard to the environment, biodiversity and the use of natural resources, calls for investment in cleaner technologies and innovation, and recognizes the need for capacity development and exchange of knowledge to carry out and use the results of research ( 7 ). It also underscores the need for the EU and its Member States to join forces, reduce aid fragmentation and ensure policy coherence for development in their relationships with developing countries. The world has recently concluded the negotiations on the post-5 global development agenda, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The EU and its Member States have been very actively involved in the UN-led global multi-stakeholder process leading to the formulation of this agenda. The Secretary-General of the United Nations laid down its conclusions in his Synthesis Report on the Post-5 Agenda: The Road to Dignity by Ending Poverty, Transforming All Lives and Protecting the Planet ( 8 ). During the high-level plenary meeting from 5 to 7 September 5 in New York, the UN General Assembly has adopted the SDGs as the universal framework to guide development efforts in all countries from 6 onwards. ( 4 ) European Consensus on Development, 5 ( 5 ) MDGs: to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger; to achieve universal primary education; to promote gender equality and empower women; to reduce the mortality rate of children; to improve maternal health; to combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases; and to ensure environmental sustainability and develop a global partnership for development. ( 6 ) COM() 67 final ( 7 ) Evaluation of the EU Support to Research and Innovation for Development in Partner countries (7-), Inception Report, August 4. ( 8 ) United Nations, New York, December 4.

8 CONTRIBUTION AND COMPLEMENTARITY OF EU RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COOPERATION WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN FP7 (7-) FINAL REPORT.. EU International Science and Technology Cooperation (7-) Scientific and technological research has long been recognized by the EU and its developing country partners as an important aspect of their cooperation, for example in the ACP-EU Cotonou Partnership Agreement of. An important milestone was the European Commission Communication to the Council and the European Parliament of 5 April 997 ( 9 ); it explicitly recognizes scientific and technological research as a strategic part of the European Union s Development Cooperation with Developing Countries. By setting a common overall objective and complementary actions based on priorities agreed through dialogue with the countries concerned, the strategy is expected to provide a coherent framework for both EU external policies and research policy with the developing countries. The 8 Strategic European framework for international cooperation in science and technology ( ) sets out to strengthen the EU research effort and to facilitate the use of new technologies, in order for Europe to be able to respond more effectively and more efficiently to the major challenges society is facing. Deepening the European Research Area should go hand in hand with widening it and making it open to the world, through enhanced cooperation with international partners. The main objectives are () to contribute to global sustainable development and () to foster Europe s S&T (Science and Technology) excellence, which increasingly is a basis for economic competitiveness at a time when EU companies are ever more facing competition from emerging economies. Underlying principles include policy coherence and complementarity of programmes; the EC and Member States pooling their efforts; and fostering long-term S&T cooperation with key third countries, jointly defining priority research areas for cooperation. In EU international cooperation in scientific and technological research is further integrated into the broader policies of the Union ( ), as reflected in the Europe strategy, supporting the following objectives: (a) Strengthening the Union s excellence and attractiveness in research and innovation as well as its economic and industrial competitiveness (b) Tackling global societal challenges and, (c) Supporting the Union s external policies ( ) From this moment, EU international science and technology cooperation is not just focused on research, but on the entire trajectory from research to innovation. The need for country differentiation is reaffirmed and further specified in the Horizon proposals:. The EFTA countries, EU enlargement countries and countries covered by the European Neighbourhood policy, where the focus will be on fostering integration into or alignment with the European Research Area.. Industrialised countries and emerging economies, where the main objective will be to increase the Union s competitiveness, to jointly tackle global challenges through common innovative solutions, and to develop enabling technologies by accessing new sources of knowledge.. Developing countries, where the emphasis will be on complementing the Union s external policies and instruments by building partnerships in particular bi-regional partnerships to contribute to the sustainable development of these regions and address challenges such as the green economy, climate action, improved agriculture, food security and health. This includes supporting the Millennium Development Goals and their possible successors ( ). ( 9 ) COM(97)74 final, Brussels, 5.4.997 ( ) COM(8)588 final, 4.9.8, A strategic European framework for international science and technology cooperation. Pages, ( ) COM()497 final, 4-9-, Enhancing and focusing EU international cooperation in research and innovation: A strategic approach. ( ) Ibid. ( ) Ibid.

CONTRIBUTION AND COMPLEMENTARITY OF EU RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COOPERATION WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN FP7 (7-) FINAL REPORT 9 Science diplomacy is introduced: ( ) using the dual approach of openness complemented by targeted international cooperation activities, developed on the basis of common interest and mutual benefit, optimal scale and scope, partnership, and synergy. ( 4 ) International cooperation activities in research and innovation will be closely coordinated with the Union s external policies and instruments ( 5 ). Also, international organisations and multilateral fora ( 6 ) are seen as key players in shaping the global research agendas and addressing global challenges. In sum, the new strategic approach to international cooperation in research and innovation is characterised by ( 7 ): Horizon being fully open to third country participants, allowing European researchers to cooperate with the best brains across the world; Targeted international cooperation activities with the scale and scope necessary to maximise impact; The development of multi-annual roadmaps for cooperation with key partner countries and regions; Reinforcing the partnership between the Commission, the Member States and relevant stakeholders; Promoting common principles for the conduct of international cooperation in research and innovation; Enhancing the role of the Union in international organisations and multilateral fora; Strengthening implementation, governance, monitoring and evaluation... Instruments The 7 th Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (FP7) covers the 7- period, with a total budget of 5 billion Euros ( 8 ). Cooperation with third countries is explicitly encouraged, with two key objectives: () to support European competitiveness in selected fields through strategic partnerships with third countries, and initiatives that encourage the best third-country scientists to work in and with Europe and, () to address specific problems that either have a global character or are commonly faced by third countries, on the basis of mutual interest and mutual benefit. Three specific Programmes of FP7 are of most interest to this study: Cooperation ( billion Euros) the FP7 core programme, representing two thirds of overall budget and covering a wide range of thematic areas: Health; Food, agriculture and fisheries, and biotechnology; Information and communication technologies; Nanosciences, nanotechnologies, materials and new production technologies; Energy; Environment, including Climate Change; Transport, including aeronautics, Socio-economic sciences and the humanities; Space and, Security. People (5 billion euros) supports researcher mobility and career development; it includes an international dimension outgoing and incoming fellowships, international cooperation scheme and reintegration grants. Capacities (4 billion Euros) strengthens the research capacities that Europe needs to become a thriving knowledge-based economy; it includes specific activities of international cooperation. ( 4 ) Ibid ( 5 ) Ibid ( 6 ) Including: OECD, Unesco, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem services, Food and Agricultural Organisation and World Health Organisation. ( 7 ) COM()497 final, 4-9-, Enhancing and focusing EU international cooperation in research and innovation: A strategic approach. ( 8 ) European Commission: FP7 in Brief

CONTRIBUTION AND COMPLEMENTARITY OF EU RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COOPERATION WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN FP7 (7-) FINAL REPORT The types of projects by which FP7 is implemented, called Funding schemes, are:. Collaborative projects (CPs), carried out by consortia made up of participants from different countries and from industry and academia;. Networks of excellence, carried out on the basis of a joint Programme of Activities by research institutions that combine and integrate a substantial part of their activities and capacities in a given field, creating a European virtual research centre in this field.. Coordination and support actions (CSAs) cover not the research itself but the coordination and networking of projects, programmes and policies. 4. Individual projects, funded by the European Research Council 5. Support for training and career development of researchers 6. Research for the benefit of specific groups in particular SMEs, civil society organizations and their networks..4. A simplified intervention logic The intervention logic emerging from the analysis of development-oriented EU research and innovation international cooperation policy documents and instruments is sketched in Annex. It can be approximated as follows: EU Scientific and Technological Research and Innovation policy aims at strengthening the Union s excellence and attractiveness in research and innovation competitiveness, tackling global societal challenges and, supporting the Union s external policies, development included. Recognizing that scientific and technological research is a strategic part of the European Union s Development Cooperation with developing countries ( 9 ), DG RTD under a number of FP7 programmes developed activities that can support the European Union s development policy. Some of these are specifically targeted at supporting development processes, others not. Such development-oriented ( ) activities support collaboration with researchers in developing countries, with the aim of contributing to research, capacity building, networking and innovation in developing countries and tackling global challenges commonly faced by developing countries. Expected contributions are specified as RTD policy and results objectives. These eventually are expected to contribute to achieving FP7 general objectives and EU R&I international cooperation objectives. For further detail and underlying assumptions, refer to Annex. ( 9 ) COM(97)74 final, 5.4.997 ( ) Development-oriented RTD activities are defined as activities that involve partners from developing countries; support research in developing countries and/or research on issues commonly faced by developing countries (this study).

CONTRIBUTION AND COMPLEMENTARITY OF EU RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COOPERATION WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN FP7 (7-) FINAL REPORT. Research approach and methodology.. Analytical framework and research questions This study is in part an FP7 ex-post evaluation study and in part a foresight study. It aims to draw lessons from experience in order to provide future policy options. The analytical framework underlying our study is presented in Annex. It focuses on the contributions made to development processes, as defined in EU results and policy objectives, through R&I support by FP7. And interrogates the pertinence of and complementarities between these different contributions, and where possible also with R&I support activities through DG DEVCO (Directorate- General for International Cooperation and Development). The ex-post evaluation part is designed according to EC best practice guidelines. The synthesis of lessons learned and policy options is designed in a more open-ended manner. Each part is guided by two specific research questions. Part I: Evaluative questions:. Do targeted and non-targeted FP7 activities make pertinent contributions in key areas of EU development policy?. Do FP7 contributions complement contributions by other EU activities in support of Research and Innovation for Development? Contributions are the ways in which FP7 activities contribute in key areas of EU development policy. These key areas have been defined in line with the overarching EU policy and results objectives (cf. ToR (Terms of Reference), p. 4). As a result, we look specifically for contributions in the following areas: () Geographic coverage: how far are geographic priorities of EU development policy addressed? () Thematic coverage: how far are thematic priorities of EU development policy addressed? () Meeting the EU R&I results objectives: do results feed into DC (developing countries ) national development and research policies, are they taken up by DC business/stakeholders for innovation and/or do they help strengthen DC R&I networks? (4) Meeting the EU R&I policy objectives: do activities support to EU-DC policy dialogue, strengthen DC R&I capacity development, strengthen EU-DC R&I networking/ partnership building, help create synergies and links with EU development cooperation instruments and/or show consistency with EU development policy objectives? EQ interrogates the relevance, coherence, effectiveness and sustainability of the contributions identified ( ). EQ interrogates the strategic alignment, overlap, differentiation and/or interaction between FP7 activities and other EU RI4D programs. Where possible, EU visibility will be looked at. Investigating the efficiency of individual RI4D interventions is not a component of this study, it would require much more in-depth analysis of call and granting processes which is outside the scope of this study. Also, looking at EU added value would require another study that includes looking at the activities of all EU Member States in the countries where EU RI4D activities take place. Part II: Forward-looking, synthesis questions:. In which areas and how can EU research and innovation contributions and complementarities best be strengthened with a view to more effectively achieve EU RI4D development objectives in the context of Agenda? 4. How can Horizon complementarity with other EU RI4D programmes/activities be strengthened in order to further advance towards achieving EU development objectives in the light of Agenda? ( ) Relevance of contributions: do FP7 activities make contributions that are pertinent to key areas of EU development policy? Coherence of contributions: are FP7 activities aligned/consistent with EU (sustainable) development policy objectives? Effectiveness of contributions: do FP7 activities produce results that effectively contribute to EU policy and results objectives? Sustainability of contributions: do FP7 activities contribute to outcomes that are sustainable over time?

CONTRIBUTION AND COMPLEMENTARITY OF EU RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COOPERATION WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN FP7 (7-) FINAL REPORT The evaluation matrix, specifying the evaluation questions, judgment criteria, indicators and sources of information is added as Annex. It also provides some specifications for the more open, forward-looking questions... Research methodology The research questions posed require analysis of information and data at four different levels:. Project level results and impacts Covering aspects such as the relevance and significance of project outcomes; achievement of objectives; impacts on stakeholders outside the partnerships; and, examples of best practice or path-breaking studies. Country level interactions and complementarities Covering aspects such as the linkages and interactions achieved between different projects, both RTD and DEVCO, and the efforts made to achieve those.. Regional and global interactions and complementarities covering aspects such as geographic and thematic spread, intensity of R&I cooperation, research partnership and leadership from developing countries. 4. Impact of the programme as a whole Covering aspects such as the impacts of the programme on EU development and research policy and on shaping the European Research Area. The methodological approach involved: (i) desk research; (ii) network and bibliometric analysis, particularly with regard to regional and international level interactions; (ii) stakeholder interviews, particularly regarding country level results and interactions; (iv) country case studies, focusing on a limited number of countries and projects per country; (v) analysis and synthesis of findings and production of reports... Country and project sample selection An overview of the activities represented in this study Statistical information on FP7 grants involving participants from developing countries was provided by the EC ( ). A total of 84 grant agreements were listed for Africa, Latin America and South East Asia. These grants represent 4 % of all grants with third country participation and 4 % of the total EU contributions to Third Countries. They are situated in 7 countries, making an average of grants per country. FP7 grants to developing countries cover 7 % of total partner research costs, slightly higher than is the case for all Third Countries (68 %) Between targeted and non-targeted activities, FP7 made use of three main funding schemes that involved partners from developing countries: collaborative projects (CP), Coordination and Support Actions (CSA) and Benefit Specific Groups (BSG). The distribution of funded projects is balanced between collaborative and coordination and support actions. Specific International Cooperation Action (SICA) has been introduced to promote the participation of International Cooperation Partner Countries. ( ) Initiatives under Article 85 have not been included.

CONTRIBUTION AND COMPLEMENTARITY OF EU RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COOPERATION WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN FP7 (7-) FINAL REPORT Table : FP7 grants to Third and Developing countries Total nr. of grants EU contribution % of costs covered All third countries 5, 8,756,7,9 68% Africa, including North,6,7,75,45 75% South America 7,97,58,88 7% South East Asia 5 755,854,758 64% Developing countries,84 6,49,865,44 7% Percentage to DCs 4% 4% Indeed, in Africa this seems to make a big difference. The Collaborative schemes are those usually considered more appropriate to create new knowledge and innovation since they exploit best the synergies between research centres of different countries and therefore the different skills. The BSG schemes are still very few, with a prevalence of those for Civil Society Organisations (CSO) in Latin America () and those for Small and Medium Enterprises in Africa. Table clearly shows that the Coordination and support actions (CSA) are the preferred scheme. Selecting the country sample Table : Overview of total number of grants to partners in DC per FP7 funding scheme Targeted Specific Int. Coop. Activities South-America Africa South-East-Asia Totals SICA CP-SICA(-INFSO) CP-FP-SICA CP-IP-SICA 8 8 8 4% % 6% 87 7 47 4% 7% 6% 4 6 7% 7% % 76 77 % % % Subtotal targeted activities: 89 9% 44 6% 6 9% 655 % Non-targeted Collaborative Research Actions CP CP (generic) CP-FP CP-FP-INFSO CP-CSA-(-INFRA/-PP) Mostly INFRA CP-IP(-INFSO) CP-TP 4 95 4 4 6 % 4% 5% 58% 4% 4% 58 8 8 45 6 55% 48% 6% % 47% 4% 4 8 5 % 9% 4% % % 4% 6 4 69 96 7 % % % % % % Coordination and Support Actions Subtotal CP 6 4% 56 46% 6 % 554 % CSA CSA-CA CSA-SA 49 8% % 9 8 57% 59% 6 44 5% 9% 4 474 % % Subtotal CSA 6 % 5 58% 5 % 876 % Others MC, ERC, BSG included 47 47% 46 46% 6 6% 99 % Subtotal non-targeted activities 544 6% 8 5% 7 % 59 % Totals targeted & non-targeted activities: 7 4% 6 56% 5 % 84 %

4 CONTRIBUTION AND COMPLEMENTARITY OF EU RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COOPERATION WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN FP7 (7-) FINAL REPORT For the purpose of this study, developing countries in Africa, Latin America and South-East Asia should be looked at (ToR, p.). The sampling procedure was therefore implemented for the total list of 84 grant agreements that include partners from developing countries in those regions and provide reasonable information on these Southern partners. A first look at the data suggested a very different intensity of relationships between and within different areas and countries (even in the same area) and EU partners. We aim at exploiting these differences and represent in our sample, different situations. Preliminary analysis of the data further suggests that emerging countries would need a specific study, because of the huge number of projects they are involved in, not just as participants but also as coordinators and because of the amounts received, as well as because of the interactions with their own funding and research centers. Such a study would be very worthwhile, given the possibly important role of the emerging economies as intermediaries in research and innovation activities with developing countries, but this goes beyond the regional scope of the present study. In what follows, therefore, just three emerging countries are included in the country sample for the developing regions covered. For the selection of the country sample, we have used the following criteria:. In line with the Terms of Reference, we focus on grants to FP7 participants from developing countries in Africa, Latin America and South-East Asia.. Countries are chosen to account for the variation in density of the EU R&I support they receive. As much as possible we selected in each geographic area, one country with a high density connection, one medium and one low.. Equally, we aim at heterogeneity of national research partners from the point of view of linkages with other partners, including at least one country, which has no coordinators and shows few links. 4. We ensure adequate geographical spread: the sample should cover each of the three developing regions considered relevant to EU development policy: South East Asia, Latina America and Africa. 5. Given the importance of Africa we decided West, East and Southern and North Africa needed to be represented. 6. Francophone, Anglophone and Lusophone Africa need to be represented, while maintaining sufficient coverage across the other geographic areas. 7. We aim at including a number of countries also covered by the DEVCO R&I Evaluation in order to be able to (potentially) trace interactions and linkages between the two. 8. We avoid outlier countries, not representative of their region/area. Applying these criteria we selected: Table : Selection of sample countries (RG: 8 July 5) Region: East and Southern Africa West Africa North Africa South America South East Asia Kenya (KE) Burkina Faso (BF) Egypt (EG) Brazil (BR) Vietnam (VN) Country: South Africa (ZA) Nigeria (NG) Tunisia (TN) Argentina (AR) Thailand (TH) Mozambique (MZ) Ghana (GH) Morocco (MA) Peru (PE) India (IN) NB: The countries marked green were visited by one of the experts as part of the DG DEVCO R&I Evaluation; information on complementarity between FP7 and DEVCO programmes was collected. Selecting the project samples A guided sample of around projects per sample country was selected from the full list of 84 grants provided. Of course, only projects were considered with at least one participant from the country selected. Projects for which adequate information was available, preferably a documented evaluation, a mid-term review (both very rare) or

CONTRIBUTION AND COMPLEMENTARITY OF EU RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COOPERATION WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN FP7 (7-) FINAL REPORT 5 a final report (available in about one third of the cases) were selected. An adequate coverage of FP7 thematic areas was ensured. For a more detailed treatment of country and project sample selections please refer to Annex 4..4. Selecting key informants Interviews were used to identify and/or complement information obtained from the study of secondary materials on the indicators as defined in the Evaluation Matrix (Annex ). Key informants were very difficult to access due to the period in which the interviews had to be done (Summer 5). Eventually, 5 EU officials in developing countries responded to the questionnaire and 4 were interviewed during complementary field visits..5. Strength of the evidence obtained Limitations existed in the gathering of evidence due to the character and timing of this study. A desk study only, the researchers access to information was limited to what has been reported and/or evaluated. Nevertheless, our inquiry into the literature, statistical information, the CORDIS (Community Research and Development Information Service) database and the views expressed by key informants yielded much relevant information to address the evaluative questions. But independent evaluation reports on outcomes and results at the country and project level proved scarce. As a result, we used the project description (intentions) or if available, the project summary report (self-assessment) as evidence for concrete results and outputs. This limits the rigour with which we are able to answer the evaluation questions included in our study. However, it provides an adequate basis for the forward-looking part of our study, aimed at identifying ways to improve the consistency and synergies between EU research and development programmes..6. Expected outcomes of the study Summary of outcomes expected according to main objectives of the study: Main objective : In-depth analysis of activities supported, including their outputs and results: ) An evidence-based overview of the areas in which FP7 contributes to the implementation of EU development policy and, the types of contributions made, their adequacy, coherence, consistency in view of EU R&I development objectives. ) An evidence-based overview of the complementarity between FP7 contributions and contributions by other EU RI4D activities, notably those financed by DG DEVCO. Main objective : To raise visibility of investment in science, technology and innovation for development both for the EU and for developing countries: ) Insight in the ways in which FP7 activities are coherent with and contribute to achieving the EU s development objectives Additional purpose: To create a concise evidence-base for future policy directions in Horizon and synergies with other EU funding programmes: 4) Identification of key areas where FP7 makes pertinent contributions and, synergies with other development programmes/instruments are plausible 5) Formulating lessons learned on how to promote coherence, contribution and synergies between Horizon activities and other EU RI4D instruments/programmes NB: Main objectives and purpose of the study are given in the ToR, p.

6 CONTRIBUTION AND COMPLEMENTARITY OF EU RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COOPERATION WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN FP7 (7-) FINAL REPORT 4. Findings 4.. Meeting EU geographic development priorities: Do FP7 activities contribute to developing country (DC) participation in research and innovation? 4... The global context Fig shows the complexity of the EU FP7 grants network. Countries are connected if they share at least one project, and only countries involved in more than projects as well as projects encompassing at least one EU country and one non-eu country are represented. The size of the circle is proportional to the total number of projects the country is involved in, i.e. larger circles mean a larger number of projects. Different colors are used for different geographical regions. Fig : The complex network of FP7 funding, all countries involved NB: colors identify different areas green: EU countries, Orange, Russia and neighboring countries, blue, Asia, dark blue, Middle East (Turkey and Jordan), Pink South Pacific, Australia, New Zealand, red Africa, Brown Americas.. Source: own elaboration on data from e-cordis The figure clearly shows that the EU funding is channeled to EU countries (green) and many partner countries, including developing countries and emerging economies, though with different intensities and amounts. It shows core EU countries are involved in more projects (the size of the circle is larger for France, Germany, UK than for Latvia, Slovak Republic, etc.) and allows us to visually identify the main research partners outside EU (US, Turkey, Russia, China, South Africa, show a larger circle i.e. are involved in more EU projects). This graphical representation of the entire FP7 network allows us to appreciate the complexity of the links established and the cautious way in which EU financing for Research and Innovation is extending to developing and emerging countries. 4... The involvement of Developing Country partners in FP7 projects Confining the attention to EU FP7 grants where developing and emerging countries are somehow involved, both as partners and coordinators, also reveals a good degree of heterogeneity (Fig ). In this subset of countries, the leading recipients of EU funding under FP7 are few. Russia, China, South Africa, India, Brazil, Ukraine, Morocco, Argentina, Egypt and Tunisia are the first ten countries when counting the number of projects they are involved in (See Annex 5) ( ). These ten countries account for around 5 % of the total FP7 grants to emerging and developing countries; the first three (Russia, China and South Africa) represent % of the total funding. The remain- ( ) Please note that the US is a major recipient (see Fig ) but does not belong to the sub set of emerging and developing countries. It has therefore been excluded in Fig and related comments.

CONTRIBUTION AND COMPLEMENTARITY OF EU RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COOPERATION WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN FP7 (7-) FINAL REPORT 7 ing is spread over 9 countries in the different areas of the world. Heterogeneity concerns not only the number of projects but also other variables: for instance, South Africa and India get a similar amount of money for R&I under FP7, but India coordinates over three times as many projects as South Africa. Argentina gets one third of what Brazil receives and is involved in half as many projects, but coordinates twice as many (for a more detailed analysis see Annex 5). Fig : Developing country partners participating in FP7 research projects. NB: Each node represents a country. Node size is proportional to the number of collaborations with other countries (degree). Colors identify different areas: Green is Europe; Red, South America; purple: Asia; brown: Africa. Source: own elaboration on data from e-cordis Let us now consider three specific areas separately, representing (in different ways) developing and emerging countries: Africa (further divided into West, East-Southern and North Africa), South America and South-East Asia. In South America, sixteen countries receive FP7 grants (Fig ), but three (two of which in our sample), Argentina, Brazil and Mexico, get almost 6 % of the total grants for the area. In Africa, which is the area with the highest number of grants, the first five countries: South Africa, Morocco, Egypt, Tunisia and Kenya account for 55 % of the grants while the 45 % is spread among the other thirty-nine countries. North Africa as a sub region and South Africa, account for the bulk of the FP7 partners in the continent. In South-East Asia we observe a lower number of countries involved with respect to the other areas. This descriptive analysis shows FP7 engages partners from developing countries in line with the geographic priorities expressed in the European Consensus 5. Further reflections, however, suggests that FP7 participation tends to concentrate in Higher Middle Income Countries (MICs) and emerging countries, with very few Low Income Countries (LICs) and (lower) middle income countries particularly in Africa, following close behind (Kenya, Senegal, Uganda, Tanzania). Most LICs participate rather marginally. While this does reflect the differentiated approach chosen for the European international S&T cooperation, to engage with different types of countries in different ways, it also confirms engagement with low and (lower) middle income developing countries is rather tentative. As a result, overall FP7 funding clearly favours (higher) MICs, and in particular emerging economies, while European Development policy as defined in the European Consensus of 5, calls for prioritizing support to Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and other LICs ( 4 ). This is an area of improvement, but as we shall see, the involvement of LICs depends crucially on the presence of a critical mass of researchers, research and innovation institutions. Without human capital and an enabling institutional environment for research and innovation, the likelihood of research and innovation funding not contributing to the desired development impact is very great. Table A in Annex 5 reports for all emerging and developing countries (and areas), not only the number of projects and the relative amount but also the role played by partners from the country, that is, whether they are coordinators or simple partners in the corresponding FP7 projects. It emerges clearly that while emerging ((higher) middle income) countries provide coordinators for some projects (across different subjects and areas), very few ( 4 ) See also chapter.. Overarching EU Development Objectives for more detail.

8 CONTRIBUTION AND COMPLEMENTARITY OF EU RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COOPERATION WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN FP7 (7-) FINAL REPORT developing countries provide coordinators ( 5 ). Out of the five leading countries, all middle-income or emerging, China coordinates 4 projects, Russia, India 5, Ukraine 5 and Argentina ( 6 ). These five countries account for more than the 5 % of the total of FP7 project coordinators from third developing or emerging countries ( 7 ). LICs coordinating projects are really few: Kenya ( projects), Ghana, Senegal and Uganda (one each). The only notable exception is the Palestinian Territory that coordinates five FP7 projects, mostly on issues related to water. Clearly, to provide a coordinator to a EU project, a country needs to have in place a higher level of domestic capacity available than to just participate and only middle income countries are likely to satisfy this condition. This is a second important area of improvement. Investments in R&I in low-income countries are likely to pay a very high dividend if they contribute to enabling the country to construct and/or strengthen its enabling environment for research and innovation. A final element of interest for this introduction is to check whether different countries, even in the same geographic area, behave differently in collaboration at regional level and whether they extend their collaboration in the South to countries of other emerging and developing areas. Fig, showing the South-South engagement, presents some interesting features. It suggests an important role for Russia in South Africa, for Brazil in Sub Saharan Africa, as well as very strong links amongst North African countries. Indeed, Morocco and Tunisia have been intensively collaborating in research and training amongst themselves and North Africa seems to be the area where regional cooperation is stronger. A different feature is to look at the behaviour of countries in the same continent (area) that attract a similar number of projects (e.g. Brazil and Argentina, both in our sample) but behave very differently when it comes to involve other developing/emerging countries as partners. While Argentina tend to mainly get involved with other Latin American countries, through its participation in FP7 research projects Brazil builds strong links to Sub Saharan Africa countries. Indeed this seems to be in line with the principle of South-South cooperation and the use of Science Diplomacy by Brazil (highlighted in the Interviews ( 8 )). As we shall see in what follows, the heterogeneity of countries behaviour will help us answering the question to what extent FP7 contributes to EU-DC and DC-DC research networking and partnership building ( = R&I Results Objective) and, whether and how these can complement contributions by other EU activities in support of Research and Innovation for Development. Fig : FP7 projects involving partners from emerging and developing countries, only connections between Southern partners NB: Each node represents a country. Node size is proportional to the number of collaborations with other countries (degree). Colors identify different areas: Red: South America; light Orange: Russia and neighbours, blue: Asia; Pink Middle East, Dark Blue: Australia, New Zealand, Brown Africa. Source: own elaboration on data from e-cordis ( 5 ) For the world bank classification into LICs, MICs, see http://econ.worldbank.org/wbsite/external/datastatistics/,,contentmdk:44~menupk: 6456~pagePK:645~piPK:6475~theSitePK:949,.html#Low_income ( 6 ) While China, India and Ukraine are classified by the World Bank as Lower Middle Income, the Russian Federation and Argentina are classified as Higher Middle Income. ( 7 ) Note that out of these important leaders/ coordinators we only selected Argentina, India and Egypt in our sample. ( 8 ) In the interviews, however, it was also pointed out that the Brazil involvement in Sub Saharan Africa is mainly a South South teaching involvement. See Annex 8.

CONTRIBUTION AND COMPLEMENTARITY OF EU RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COOPERATION WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN FP7 (7-) FINAL REPORT 9 The analysis so far shows that the thrust of FP7 activities is broadly in line with the expressed geographic priorities of EU Science and Technology Cooperation ( 9 ). However, there are many areas of improvement: first of all, to prioritize LICs instead of just MICs, as put forward in the European Consensus in 5; second, to provide incentives to countries to establish a framework that will allow them to exploit positive externalities (i.e. involve more research centers and universities in LICs when possible, which in turn means to invest more in R & D as percentage of GDP), and third, to encourage collaboration within regions and between Southern partners, so as to achieve on the one hand a higher regional level of interconnectedness and on the other hand stronger connections between developing countries. 4... Zooming in on the country sample: 5 developing countries in 5 different (sub) regions From our country sample we looked at the way partners from different countries and different regions engage with FP7. It confirms a differentiated approach with the highest engagement from BRICs countries. They participate in most calls, receive most grants and, as a consequence participate in most FP7 projects (Table 4). Table 4: Country sample quintiles corresponding to number of FP7 projects participated in Q5 Q4 Q Q Q Mozambique Nigeria 7 Ghana 4 Argentina 99 Brazil 69 Peru 4 Thailand 4 Kenya 69 Egypt India 8 Burkina Faso 5 Vietnam 4 Tunisia 88 Morocco South Africa 9 Average score:. 6. 66.7. 8.7 NB: : HH (very high) corresponds to the first quintile Q); H (high) to the nd (Q); M (medium) to the rd (Q); L (low) to the 4 th (Q4) and LL (very low) to the 5 th quintile (Q5). In table 4 above, the level of engagement per country has been indicated per quintile, from HH (very high) to LL (very low), also used in table 5 below. Besides Brazil, India and South Africa (in Q, i.e. with very high cooperation), only North African countries and Argentina are firmly engaged. The countries of West Africa and the other countries in the BRIC s regions are not and secure only few grants. Some show even or less unique partners in the country, often coinciding with a low level of research infrastructure, capacity and institutional development. ( 9 ) See paragraph., page 7: i.e. ST cooperation recognized as strategic part of the EU s Development cooperation with developing countries and: Deepening the European Research Area ( ) and making it open to the world through enhanced cooperation with international partners.

CONTRIBUTION AND COMPLEMENTARITY OF EU RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COOPERATION WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN FP7 (7-) FINAL REPORT Table 5: Partner, country and regional engagement with and support from FP7 Region/subregion/country FP7 engagement EU financial support received FP7 engagement level Calls participated in Grants received in country Projects participated in Unique country partners In-country collaboration index Dispersion index (UP/grant) EU contrib/country EU contribution per UP Coverage of country praticipant project costs H/M/L Nr. Nr. Nr. Nr../../. Euro Euro Argentina H 64 9 99 55..46 4,68,7 65,789 77% Latin America & Caribbean Brazil HH 84 4 69 9..4,45,66 56,6 7% Peru LL 8 4.7.79,974, 8,64 77% Subtotal LAC 7 7 9 68.7.45 5,45,,84 75% North Egypt H 66 5 8.5. 4,77,9 57,55 84% Morocco H 6 6 8.5.,969,7 498,96 8% Tunisia M 64 88 5.7.5,556,54 46,7 79% Subtotal North Africa: 75 54 89 7.. 4,97,4 85,956 8% West Burkina Faso LL 8 5 5..54 8,475,8 565,6 77% Africa Ghana M 4 54 4 6.6. 8,,554 5,597 8% Nigeria L 4 7..67,668,67 8,4 8% Subtotal West Africa: 9 95 5.8.46,45,4 98,96 8% East and Southern Kenya M 4 77 69 5..45,584,59 59,558 79% Mozambique LL 5 4..,55,79,85,4 8% South Africa HH 9 4 9 68.6.8 4,77,8 55,544 69% Subtotal E&S Africa 47 4 79 6.. 5,7,66 47,748 77% Total Africa 6 87 66 4.7.7,859,77 4,7 79% India HH 84 8 8 9.5.9 8,97,6 57, 77% South East Asia Thailand L 4 5 4.4. 7,5,74 7,57 8% Vietnam L 8 48 4 7.7.77 5,69,585 5,88 76% Subtotal SE Asia 46 79 65 56.4.4 5,58,95,654 78% Totals Country sample 678,557, 588 4,486,978 64,774 77% NB: Engagement level is defined by the number of FP7 supported research projects partners from a country participate in: HH (very high) corresponds to the first quintile, H (high) to the nd, M (medium) to the d, L (low) to the 4 th, and LL (very low) to the 5 th quintile. The in-country collaboration index is the number of grants divided by the number of projects country partners participate in, and the dispersion index is the number of unique partners from the country divided by the total number of grants secured.

CONTRIBUTION AND COMPLEMENTARITY OF EU RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COOPERATION WITH DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN FP7 (7-) FINAL REPORT The in-country collaboration index tells us that generally in one out of five projects more than one country partner participates. The exception is India that shows more in-country collaboration with on average more than one Indian partner in half the projects it participates in. The table also shows that dispersion that is, different projects are implemented with different country partners is lowest in Mozambique where only national partners participate in projects, leading also to the largest EU financial contribution per partner. Total contributions per country vary widely, from.9 million in Peru to 8 million in India, as do the contributions per partner, from 5 thousand in Vietnam to.58 million in Mozambique. On average the EU contribution contributes 77 % of the country participants project costs, varying from 69 % in South Africa to 84 % in Egypt. No obvious relation is noticeable between the type of partner country supported and the proportion of project costs covered. 4..4. Interconnectedness and centrality between sample countries and (sub) regions Fig 4: The network of the selected sample NB: Each node represents a country. The size of the circle indicates the number of projects the country participates in. Each line represents a link with a different developing or emerging country in the same continent or in a different one. Color code: South America in Red, South East Asia in Purple and Africa in Brown. Note the number of African involved but the small size of most African countries. Refer to country Report in Annex 7 for a deeper visual analysis at country level for the countries of our sample. Source: own elaboration on data from e-cordis Figure 4 shows the interconnections of the sampled countries, which are partners in a FP7 programme, with other developing and emerging countries in the same region or in others. The networks are much less intense that in other graphs, but still interesting. Many links for instance are originated in Brazil and arrive in Sub Saharan Africa. This is not true for Argentina or Peru. India is much more connected to Vietnam and the Philippines than to other countries. The information given in the graph can be complemented by table 6 ( ). It confirms the role of especially the Low Income Countries in the FP7 research projects is fairly marginal. The first three with the largest numbers of projects and partners South Africa, India, Brazil are middle income countries and emerging economies, with middle income countries Morocco, Argentina, Egypt, and Tunisia following behind. Kenya in fact is the first low-income country in the list. As mentioned above, the number of coordinating roles, the number of projects as well as the total number of research institutions and universities participating is very heterogeneous. ( ) For individual country graphs, refer to Annex 7 Country Review.