Member-only content is available on this page. Please log in to view this content.
Discover Science Europe’s comprehensive library of resources, including the most recent publications, briefings, and position statements.
50 resource(s) found
Reaction to the Political Partial Agreement on Horizon Europe: A Good Deal but is there a Supporting Budget?
Science Europe welcomes the Political Partial Agreement on Horizon Europe, voted on today in plenary by the European Parliament. Science Europe is very pleased to see that excellence remains the core principle of the programme. However Horizon Europe’s ambitions can only be met with the appropriate funding and we therefore advise that Horizon Europe is granted a budget of at least €120bn.
In view of the upcoming trilogues between the three European institutions, Science Europe invites all parties to consider a series of elements to further improve the legislative package for Horizon Europe. The budget of €120bn proposed by the European Parliament is a very welcome proposal and should be taken up by the Council in the next Multiannual Financial Framework. Moreover, fundamental research must be included in all parts of the programme, including the European Innovation Council.
The overall funding for research and innovation in Europe needs to be increased and an adequate ring-fenced budget should be provided for Horizon Europe. In this factsheet Science Europe illustrates some of the reasons why.
The European Commission proposal for Horizon Europe falls short of acknowledging the importance of fundamental research. This factsheet demonstrates the essential role fundamental research plays, not only for research, but also for innovation.
Science Europe welcomes the overall continuity between the internal structure and funding rates between Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe. However, the proposed budget increase for the period 2021-2027 does not live up to the ambitious scenarios defended by the European Commission in front of the Heads of States and Governments in March 2018 and will not be sufficient for Europe to meet its ambitious political goals.
Science Europe sees interesting opportunities in the use of missions and cross-disciplinary Research and Innovation as part of Europe’s toolset to address societal or global challenges. However, the criteria for selecting missions so far have been too broad and more discussion is needed on the concept of missions and their introduction in FP9.
The Multiannual Financial Frameworks (MFF) determine the budget allocation of the EU over a period of seven years. Science Europe recommends strengthening science, research, and innovation by increasing their budget in the MFF for 2021–2027 and to take measures to ensure that the 9th Framework Programme for Research and Innovation will have the capacity to achieve its goals.
How can citizens best be involved in the scientific process, and how ‘Open’ can we make science? How do we ensure that the highest standards in scientific research are maintained in such a system? This report provides an overview of the main discussions at the 2017 Science Europe High-level Workshop hosted in Berlin by the German Research Foundation (DFG).
Research organisations and funders increasingly ask researchers to create Data Management Plans for their work and proposals. A lack of standardisation means that these can be time-consuming to create and difficult to compare and evaluate. Science Europe presents a framework for the creation of domain-specific protocols that can be used as standardised templates, reducing the administrative burden on both researchers, research organisations, and funders.
This is Science Europe’s response to the report ‘LAB–FAB–APP: Investing in the European Future we want’ by the High Level Group on maximising the impact of EU Research and Innovation Programmes. It outlines points of agreement, as well as additional or alternative recommendations, from Science Europe Member Organisations on how the future of European research should take shape.
Science Europe supports some of the conclusions adopted today by the EU Competitiveness Council, but is disappointed by the lack of ambition in others. The conclusions reflect the Council position on the preparation of the ninth Framework Programme (FP) for Research and Development.
Science Europe welcomes the efforts made towards the European Open Science Cloud (EOSC). In this open letter, the Governing Board of Science Europe reinforces its view that research data should be permanently, publicly, and freely available for re-use. The proposed EOSC aims to further this goal but a number of important questions still remain.
Policy Brief on Public-to-Public Partnerships and the Next Framework Programme for Research and Innovation
A more strategic approach is needed to the co-ordination between regional, national, and European research activities and to the initiatives supporting them. This briefing presents policy makers with the Science Europe view on how to better organise regional, national, and European research efforts.
This open letter issued by the international research community calls on Members of the European Parliament to halt the adoption of harmful provisions found in the current draft of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market, which could threaten Open Access and Open Science.
This report explores the challenges facing research funding and performing organisations to design and manage balanced Research Infrastructure (RI) portfolios and design effective cross-border collaborations when setting up and running joint RIs. Discussions with a broad range of stakeholders took place at a dedicated workshop co-hosted by Science Foundation Ireland and the Health Research Board.
Science Europe shares eight key principles to shape the future Framework Programme. Examples of its European added value include the ERC’s role in fostering Europe-wide competition, the support of Research Infrastructures as a fundamental part of the European research system, and the support of collaborative research to solve societal challenges that cannot be addressed purely with national efforts.
CESAER, EUA, LERU, and Science Europe release this joint statement calling on European policy makers to provide new momentum for the European Research Area (ERA). The ERA is a treaty obligation of the European Union and today, more than ever, greater commitment to research is needed to tackle the challenges that Europe faces. By strengthening the ERA, and increasing funding for research, European policy makers would be giving Europe the resources it needs to embark on another 60 years of peace and prosperity.
Research Infrastructures (RIs) are of utmost importance for Europe’s global competitiveness and this paper puts forward the case of how the focus on RIs in Horizon 2020 should be enhanced.
This briefing is a contribution to the evaluation and development of Future and Emerging Technologies (FET) Flagships under Horizon 2020. It highlights lessons learned about the added value and limitations of the current FET Flagships and provides recommendations for the development of the FET Flagship instrument.
Horizon 2020 is a unique programme worldwide; it is widely appreciated and has an ambitious agenda. It can meet expectations as long as its nature as a programme capable of supporting excellent research is reinforced. Ahead of the interim evaluation of Horizon 2020, Science Europe shares the extensive experience of its Member Organisations, many of whom have decades of experience in setting up world-leading research programmes or are among the main beneficiaries of the Framework Programmes.
Science Europe expresses strong concern that the research funding budget be maximised in Horizon 2020 so that Europe can fully realise its target of becoming a smart, sustainable and inclusive economy. Funding for research and innovation in Europe is a critical strategic investment which is essential for Europe’s long-term growth and prosperity.
This report analyses the underlying preconditions and efficiency of Lead Agency Procedure (LAP), based on the evidence available from the many LAP partnerships among Science Europe’s members. It also contains policy recommendations for research organisations so that they gain a more accurate understanding of the Lead Agency principles and are made more able to judge on its scope and limitations.
This position statement highlights the added value of Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs) as perceived by Science Europe Member Organisations, and makes two recommendations on the future of joint programming: one with regards to the evaluation of JPIs, and a second one concerning their governance. The aim is to stimulate other stakeholders – including the European Commission – to join in this discussion.
In a globalised research ecosystem, collaboration is key. This collaboration also brings challenges linked to the diversity of scientific and legal environments. The aim of this practical guide is to provide better and more efficient means for research organisations to apply a set of optional models for cross-border collaboration and to help them achieve more successful and easier implementation.
The Roadmap, approved by the Science Europe General Assembly in November 2013, is Science Europe’s action plan to contribute to the elements of a successful research system. It acts as a framework for voluntary collective activity, providing a long-term strategy for the association. The ‘Priority Action Areas’ are those in which Science Europe members believe that there is a potential to achieve tangible and substantive progress, and where they can add real value by working together.