Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1697750964476.pdf (Georgia)
EU Twinning project Supporting inter-sectoral collaboration possibilities between Research and Industry “New STI Funding Instruments: Technology Transfer and Commercialization Needs” Virtual workshop, 22 June 2022 This slides was created with the support of the European Union, which does not necessarily mean that it reflects the views of the European Union.

Only project partners are responsible for the content of the publication.
EU Twinning in Science-Business links Looking back to previous workshops (2021/22)  12 March 2021: Funding instruments for enhancing innovation activities in Georgia  31 March 2021: Funding instruments for enhancing innovation activities in Georgia  24 June 2021: STI Funding Instruments: Needs for companies (World Café)  30 June 2021: STI Funding Instruments: Perspectives  14 July 2021: STI Funding Instruments (SWOT analysis) )  21 July 2021: STI Funding Instruments: Comparison of applied calls  9 March 2022: New STI Funding Instruments (Technology Transfer)  14 March 2022: Introducing ideas about a possible matchmaking tool to SRNSFG What funding instruments are currently offered?
C2 workshopFunding instruments (31 March 2021) V V .

V N/A N/A V V V V V N/A N/ & l a n o g e r i l a n o i t a n l e v e l Communication & Information (mailings, awards, etc.)

Brockerage (ideas, contacts, vouchers, B2B events, success stories etc.)
Staff qualification & Mobility Pilots, feasibility studies, Stand alone projects Cooperation projects Networks, hubs, cooperation structures Transfer of knowledge & technology, support for market entry EU Twinning in Science-Business links Introduction to the method “World Cafe” Rotation: 3 working groups Round (25 min): random dissemination Virtual Table 1: Emmanuel Glenck Virtual Table 2: Jörn Grünewald Virtual Table 3: Kirsten Kienzler Round (15 min): Moderators will move to next virtual table Round (10 min): Moderators will move to next virtual table Back to plenary: participants will be automatically transferred to plenary 1.
Virtual • Table • • 2.

Virtual Table 3.

Virtual Table EU Twinning in Science-Business links Results for your consideration What needs to be done in order to support R&D cooperation between research and business actors?

EU Twinning in Science-Business links • What is the current situation in Georgia (applied research, funding)?

• Which problem(s) and gap(s) should be solved?

Please set priorities • What measures could be taken?
EU Twinning in Science-Business links Question 1: What is the current situation in Georgia (applied research, funding)?
• Various funding schemes for applied R&D and technology transfer (GITA, Shota Rustaveli Foundation) • Lack of funding for applied R&D projects • Lack of possibility to fund companies costs in joint R&D projects with academia • Lack of interest of private sector in applied R&D (businesses do not want to make money in science, they think it is superfluous), therefore also in research sector • Lack in commercialisation process in R&D organisations (tech transfer), first efforts for TT (pilot programme in GITA ended in June 2022), meetings with universities should be beneficial for R&D community, projects above TRL 4 difficult to find (Shota Rustaveli Foundation), goal: TRL 5, 6 or even higher.
Question 2: Which problem(s) and gap(s) should be solved?

Set priorities EU Twinning in Science-Business links • TRL higher than 4?

Project owner with own resources… • Business expect end-products/-services • Lack of communication between academia and business • Lack of follow-up and common understanding in „both worlds“ EU Twinning in Science-Business links Question 3: What could be the measures to be taken?
• New applied grant call in preparation and pretty soon announced (Shota Rustaveli Foundation: support projects with TRL from 2 up to 4 ?

too low, too far from market potential!

); what about higher TRLs (at least up to 6)??

• Facilitate collaborative research agreements with (a) non-Georgian organisations (e.g.
EU) or (b) R&D projects funded by business • Raise more interest from business for tech transfer with more communication between academia and business (presentation of GITA results), more meeting between scientists and business representatives (share needs and offers) ?

round tables • Show examples of companies/producers how markets work (requirements to trade with EU, business can improve the quality of their products if they are involved in R&D projects with academia ?

scientific controlled!


Use knowledge available) • Public database on R&D infrastructure (in discussion) to show what is available for business and R&D cooperation projects, question about (non-)monetary rights • Information about R&D intensity in Georgia (related to GDP), which regulations in which sectors to make better products/services What specific contents and activities regarding technology transfer and commercialization should a new SRNSFG call cover?
EU Twinning in Science-Business links • Funding also for companies (GITA) • Support for commercial companies => joint call SRNSFG and GITA • Support for prototyping (contacting enterprises) • Support for development of ideas / more mature projects (higher TRLs) • Support spin-offs • Include funding by industry • Networking and information activities (e.g.

involving business associations) • Awareness raising amongst researchers (understanding business needs) • Specific events (e.g.
fair trades) • Support regarding practical issues of commercialization (hiring experts…) EU Twinning in Science-Business links Practical issues regarding a grant call (modes of funding, rights of participants etc.)
(1) • Signing agreement with Foundation: IPR/Patents share of 10% or more going back to the Foundation (in previous calls) is too high - > should be lowered or deleted (see also good example with GITA calls, ISTC calls or EU calls) as it is not attractive; • IPR distribution between science side and companies is a challenge (negotiations and specific partnership agreements!)
(comment: at least 20% of the share should go to the research team, not to the Foundation in the latest calls) • From previous AR grant call: “The right to patent an invention created under the project belongs to the Foundation and the grant recipient.

Accordingly, even if the invention is patented by the grant recipient, the Foundation will have exclusive rights under the patent.
The percentage of profit from the exercise of exclusive rights under the patent is defined as follows: 85% - to the grant recipient (35% - a legal entity, 50% - a group of scientists - individuals) and 15% - the Foundation as the grantor.
In this regard, the relationship between the grant recipient and the grantor shall be regulated by the agreement, concluded after the receipt of the patent; incentive for participation in calls”; Updated AR grant call: “The rights to the created invention within the project belong to the individuals and legal entities involved in the project.

Intellectual property rights are regulated by mutual agreement between the persons involved in the project.
At least 30% of the profits from the use of the exclusive rights under the patent shall belong to the inventor/inventors, 10% to the Foundation and 60% to the leading, participating and partner organizations of the project by mutual agreement.

The Foundation is obliged to apply the profit to the science and technology development in Georgia.
Under these obligations, the Foundation is also entitled to pass patent-specific rights to the inventor/inventors" EU Twinning in Science-Business links Practical issues regarding a grant call (modes of funding, rights of participants etc.)
(2) • Funding for science was rather small (70.000 Lari/a = 35.000 EUR with steps up to 150.000 Lari in latest call), difficult to fit scientific activities into this budget and to meet international standards or serious cooperation with business; funding for companies should be included to be used as incentive to participate in Foundation calls (see also GITA funding schemes) -> law on Grants needs to be changed • Direct procurement of equipment/reagents… via tenders differs by research entities; is very bureaucratic, time consuming and difficult for e.g.
non-university organisations) (other forms: ISTC is purchasing for the beneficiary and is taking 10% of grant for this service); also it is not attractive for companies to go through the procedures with procurement requirements of universities (e.g.
other special regulations or changes of legal status of consortia); in GITA calls, the companies and start-ups can decide independently what to purchase EU Twinning in Science-Business links Practical issues regarding a grant call (modes of funding, rights of participants etc.)

(3) • Criteria for procurement put emphasis on economic purchase (price) - > other criteria would be useful to include (e.g.

quality of equipment) • Mechanism of getting funding to organisations/beneficiary (e.g.
no formal academia; for fully taxed organization national grants are not attractive) - > look at different organization forms to increase attractiveness of calls • Legal status of (some?)

state research organisations (e.g.


medical organization) – can apply to EU calls but are not eligible to apply national calls (NGOs are eligible) -> look at different organization forms and widen eligibility criteria • Networking: not clear idea of what the Georgian business is interested in – more brokerage and networking events (e.g.
see GITA networking events); could be also as a preparatory funding prior to bigger grants • Governmental support for globally relevant issues such as health research and health care systems – specific support and funding for SDGs topics should be reflected in the funding schemes • Streamline Foundation and GITA applied calls to allow cascade funding or joint funding to receive benefits • Inclusion of young scientists – salary equity in comparison to senior scientists in regulations should be revised EU Twinning in Science-Business links Practical issues regarding a grant call (modes of funding, rights of participants etc.)
(4) • Conditions of funding (or not funding) should be clear and transparent to avoid interference of other legal authorities in decision making process for funding – the decision of SRNSFG should be final.

• The value of academic freedom should be respected.

Scientists and all other stakeholders should be secured that the composition of their research teams cannot be changed by external parties, once the decision for funding has formally been taken.
EU Twinning in Science-Business links Slide for Feedback & Comments • What would you like to add, criticize, specify?

EU Twinning in Science-Business links მადლობა ყურადღებისთვის Thank You!