POSITION OF THE NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF ITALY (CNR) ON HORIZON 2020 General view CNR- the National Research Council of Italy welcomes the architecture designed by the European Commission for Horizon 2020 (H 2020) and considers its structure innovative and suitable to promote European science, technology and innovation. CNR judges the proposed budget appropriate to reach the pre-fixed targets, even though it expresses its concerns about possible reductions resulting from the future budgetary negotiations. The financial plan of H 2020 does not show a significant increase, compared to the budget of the previous Framework Programme, as it includes different funding sources previously managed separately. Even a minor reduction of its budget could prevent H 2020 from reaching its ambitious goals to be the largest open funding scheme for research & innovation in the global scenario and could damage its capability of attracting the best talents in Europe. CNR shares with the Commission the belief that excellence should be the driving concept for selecting the projects to be funded by H 2020; however an early rationalisation of H 2020 pillars operational synergies with the Structural Funds and the Joint Programming Initiatives is strongly requested. Regarding international cooperation, CNR looks with favour on the new approach toward a more coherent and integrated policy, though the relationships between actions under H 2020 and instruments associated to external policies should be clarified. Comments on Governance CNR is concerned about possible overlapping of objectives and themes not only within the 3 priorities, but also due to the horizontal approach adopted in H 2020; appropriate coordination and governance are thus needed. The proposed interaction among different pillars - and also among their internal activities - entails, in fact, a complex implementation plan in which relevant stakeholders are fully involved and a structured decision flow aimed at drawing up and at finalizing the Work Programmes will have to be pursued. CNR asks the Commission to focus on 1
the creation of new and transparent mechanisms regulating the decision flowchart for the preparation of the Work Programmes. In particular, the roles and the different elements being part of the decisional chain including National Delegates/Advisory Groups should be wisely governed. CNR considers indeed beneficial to explicitly introduce in each Work Programme an Impact Assessment statement and related actions (including ex-ante evaluation for the allocation of funds) in order to envision the expected benefits at economic and social level. Considerations on the Rules for Participation Many of the novelties included in the proposal for H 2020 are appreciated by CNR and in line with the Commission s engagement toward simplification (i.e. unification of reimbursement rate for direct and indirect costs, easier access for SMEs,...). However, it is also desirable to have the non-recoverable VAT included among the costs eligible for refund and, in addition, the flat rate of 25% for the indirect costs is considered as the lowest acceptable limit. It should furthermore be noted that the difference between the 100% and 70% reimbursement rates (depending on the project) can jeopardize the collaboration with industries; CNR therefore asks for a steady 100% reimbursement rate for the public non-profit organizations as an appropriate measure to avoid further separation between academic and industrial research. Comments on the pillars 1. Excellent Science 1.1. ERC-the European Research Council The ambitious objective of reinforcing the dynamism and creativity of European excellence in research is completely supported by CNR. However the budget intended for ERC is considered rather high compared to the amounts allocated for other priorities. CNR also suggests to increase transparency and attention in the evaluation processes. Possible duplications of ERC and FET projects have to be avoided while synergies or alignments should be favoured. 1.2. FET- Future and Emerging Technologies CNR agrees to include FET in the first priority set and is in favour of a strong coordination with the other two priorities, especially KETs. Due to their multisectorial and multi-disciplinary nature an innovative governance is necessary for a proper exploitation. 2
1.3. MCSA- Marie Curie Sklodowska Actions Mobility of researchers is of paramount importance for the building of ERA and for H 2020 success. CNR is in favour of a more consistent increase of budget for MCSA in order to guarantee a larger involvement of human resources in R&I and to further support initiatives at European level for the development of research careers and employment prospects for scientists in Europe. CNR discourages the increasing trend toward co-funding. 1.4. RIs - Research Infrastructures H 2020 should strongly support open access to excellent existing Research Infrastructures (also through e-access) and the pooling of competences around them, in order to fulfil an effective integration in ERA. In this view, considering the increasingly important role of RIs for the advancement of knowledge, in capacity building and in the development of technology & innovation, the proposed budget for RIs is considered insufficient. 2. Industrial leadership CNR acknowledges the importance of H 2020 mission aimed at promoting the European leadership for what enabling and industrial technologies are concerned and will consequently support the introduction of any measure intended for placing at the action s core those research and innovation activities jointly decided by industry and research community. However, as previously stated, different reimbursement rates for research and innovation activities can discourage public research performing organizations from carrying on joint innovation actions with SMEs. CNR wishes to emphasize that several KETs could be addressed toward the same goal and recognizes the role of integrated solutions provided by industrial technologies in tackling the societal challenges. CNR asks for a better synergy in preparing the Work Programmes. Concerning the Space specific objective, CNR is strongly in favour of including GMES in the EU Multi-annual Financial Framework with appropriate dedicated funds. 3. Societal challenges CNR welcomes the Commission s proposal conceiving a new approach more focused on the problem solving rather than on the technologies supposed suitable for their solutions. CNR agrees on the selection of the Societal Challenges because they are well linked to the Italian Flagship Projects where CNR is involved as a Leading Research Institution. However the overall budget planned for the Societal Challenges appears insufficient for reaching their envisaged targets and the Commission, to widen the involvement of research and technology organizations, should promote 3
synergy/alignment among all the actions and instruments (PPP, KET,... ) appropriate to tackle them. From a thematic point of view, CNR suggests specific and more underlined roles for the protection and fruition of the Cultural Heritage as well as for Natural Hazards and Disaster Mitigations (monitoring, emergency control, management,... ), which now seem to be simply or mostly limited to climate changes. Both these topics are of paramount importance for social cohesion and security of European citizens. Regarding the specific challenge Health, demographic change and wellbeing, CNR expects further efforts in the searching and testing of new drugs and diagnostics in the field of personalized medicine, in order to urge enterprises and research institutions to focus on more-targeted solutions by means of molecular profiling aimed at achieving effective health care with reduced adverse side effects. The challenge Food security, sustainable agriculture, marine and maritime research and bio-economy is well defined to be tackled as a whole. Due to the wideness of this theme, CNR is confident about the allocation of a proper budget specifically devoted to implement appropriate measures to effectively address different investigation areas, spanning from food security and sustainable agriculture to marine & maritime research and blue-growth. For Smart, green and integrated transport an explicit mention should be included for smart ports, blue technologies and maritime transport. In Climate action, resource efficiency and raw materials Water Management and Risk Assessment have to be faced considering both natural and anthropogenic pressures/impacts. Moreover, as far as Inclusive, Innovative and Secure Societies is concerned the aspects related to inclusive society and to innovative society cannot be delimited into in a single challenge, but should be taken into consideration as part of each societal challenge. On the opposite, themes, activities and services necessary for the construction of a safe and secure society, should be specifically exploited in the above mentioned societal challenge. In this scenario also researches on cultural identity can be seen as a contribution to cohesion and security. Comment on EIT- European Institute of Innovation and Technology CNR believes that EIT can actively support the synergies among the different contexts of the Innovation triangle and create the conditions for developing innovative education and training. Nevertheless, before increasing the budget for EIT, the first results obtained by the 3 ongoing KICs should be further evaluated, taking into account the priorities of the proposed new KICs from the H 2020 perspective. While it is true that KICs might add value to similar initiatives in the spirit of H 2020 - such as Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs), European Innovation Partnerships (EIPs) and Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) - it is essential for EIT and KIC activities to be coordinated and harmonized in advance in a clear and transparent 4
way. The setting up of a regular EIT Stakeholder Forum, bringing together the community of stakeholders, is seen by CNR as a positive initiative. As a general rule, it is necessary to keep in mind that EIT and KIC actions should work, above all, as a leverage to attract funds from the private sector, where EU contributions must indeed act just as seed money. Final remarks To reach its goals H 2020 does not require only a complex and integrated approach in terms of disciplines, sectors and stakeholders: it is indeed necessary to converge the efforts from Member States and EC and increase their efficiency using all instruments, programmes and actions (including Structural Funds, Public Procurements, JPIs... ). Moreover in order to ensure a wider participation of Countries and stakeholders in joint actions, especially in this time when financial resources are limited but valuable research skills do exist, CNR strongly suggests to consider eligible "in kind" resources. In order to assure the best impact of H 2020 also on civil society, CNR considers dissemination of results very important and believes that, in addition to the contributions flowing in from research performers, the involvement of the Technology Districts/Clusters, Science Cities/Centres and other actors has to be promoted. Rome, May 16 th 2012 5