On 25 January Neth-ER and VLEVA organised the event “Shaping the next EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation: From Horizon 2020 to FP9”. A keynote speech by Rosalinde van der Vlies from the European Commission and a speech by MEP Anneleen Van Bossuyt provided the basis for fruitful discussions between European stakeholder organisations about excellence, citizen involvement and synergies.
14.30 - 15.00: Coffee & welcome by Jan Buysse, Director VLEVA
15.00 - 15.30: Keynote speech Rosalinde van der Vlies: presentation of the Commission's communication on the interim-evaluation of Horizon 2020
15.30 - 16.00: Reaction from Anneleen Van Bossuyt, MEP
16.00 - 17.00: Panel discussion moderated by Fried Kramer, Director Neth-ER
- Business Europe: Alexandre Affre, Industrial Affairs Director
- EURASHE: Armando Pires, Vice-president
- ALLEA: Kerstin Sahlin, Professor of Public Management, Uppsala University
- EARTO: Joan Guasch, Director for Public Programmes, EURECAT
- Science Europe: Mathilde Reumaux, Senior Policy Officer
17.00 - 17.05: Wrap-up
17.05 - 17.30: Networking drink
The event took place at VLEVA, Kortenberglaan 71, 1000 Brussels.
The role of excellence in FP9, how to involve citizens and the creation of synergies between research, innovation, and education were some of the topics for discussion during the seminar: “Shaping the next EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation: From Horizon 2020 to FP9” organised by Neth-ER and VLEVA on 25 January. A keynote speech by Rosalinde van der Vlies, Head of Unit Better Regulation of DG RTD and a speech by Anneleen Van Bossuyt, member of the European Parliament, paved the way for interesting discussions between stakeholder organisations BusinessEurope, EARTO, ALLEA, EURASHE, and Science Europe.
FP9 should continue the Horizon 2020 success story. There are three criteria for FP9: impact on society, impact on citizens and EU added value. A bigger budget than the Horizon 2020 one is needed. The question arises if lower funding percentage is a solution for the low success rates.
Stakeholders in the panel agreed that excellence should be the main criterion for the selection of projects and that geographical location of partners should not matter. Other criteria, like impact, can be relevant as well, depending on the type of instrument or programme. According to the panel, it needs to be clear what the definitions of excellence and impact are.
According to the stakeholders in the panel the involvement of citizens in science is beneficial as it increases impact and trust. The question remains: how exactly should citizens be involved? The panellists argued that not all citizens need to be directly involved and a one size fits all approach does not work. Citizens should be involved in those areas whith the highest added value. Education was seen as an important link to involve citizens in research.
The views of panellists differed on synergies between research, innovation and education. According to the panellists, synergies with the Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) are desirable to widen the participation in the programme and increase its impact. However, concerns were raised in the panel that building synergies should not be an excuse to allocate a lower budget to FP9. Furthermore, the autonomy of researchers should not be undermined. Strengthening synergies with the Erasmus+ programme was viewed as favourable by the panel.