Future Research and Innovation Funding of theEuropean Union
Position Paper of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft · German Research Foundation
Kennedyallee 40 · 53175 Bonn, Germany · Postal address: 53170 Bonn, Germany
Phone: + 49 228 885-1 · Fax: + 49 228 885-2777 · postmaster@dfg.de · www.dfg.de

DFG

Introductiona) Innovation and basic research go hand inhand. Basic research provides the underpinnings for all applications and is the first link of
the innovation chain. Thus, it is important tohonour the significance of basic research in theEU Research Framework Programmes havepolitical concept of the Innovation Union (pub-evolved into an important networking instru-lished 6 October 2010). The DFG welcomes

ment for research in Europe. Even though, as

the fact that the Treaty of Lisbon assigns to thea matter of subsidiarity, the overwhelming

EU clear responsibility for basic research. Byshare of research funding is granted at theestablishing the ERC, the 7th Researchnational and regional levels, the significance ofFramework Programme embodies this respon-the Research Framework Programmes forsibility. The research community considers theEuropean research is growing steadily.

ERC a successful model. It must therefore be

As a representative of the scientific community,

developed significantly further in the future—

the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft takes it

both structurally and financially—in order to

as its duty to continually contribute to the im-secure the foundation of Europe’s innovative

provement of the framework for science andpotential over the long term.

especially for academic research in Europe. In
this spirit, the DFG sets forth in this paper itsb) Future EU research and innovation funding will

recommendations and expectations regarding

need to serve the goal of building the Euro-the most important aspects of upcoming EU

pean Research Area. Europe can only main-

research and innovation funding, possibly antain and strengthen its scientific and economic

8th Research Framework Programme.

position in the world if it continues to improve

The present position paper builds on a couple

the framework for science and research acrossof previous DFG statements. In a short paper

the union. This includes overcoming the frag-released in January 2010, the DFG has al-mentation of the European research landscapeready stated its basic position on the 8th Re-

wherever it is scientifically detrimental, e.g.

search Framework Programme. The present

when it comes to mobility. The creation of syn-paper also builds on a statement by the EU-ergies between the different approaches andROHORCs and the ESF of July 2009, entitledlevels of research funding in Europe should

EUROHORCs and ESF Vision on a Globallycontinue to be pursued as a guiding principle.

Competitive ERA and their Road Map for Ac-

At the same time, the European Researchtions, and on a DFG strategy paper published

Area benefits from its productive diversity. Di-in late 2008, entitled The DFG and the Euro-

versity and competition—also among researchpean Research Area: Position and Outlook.

funding organisations—promote the quest for

The individual recommendations regarding

the best solutions and are thus important driv-

future EU research and innovation funding

ers of progress.

ensue from certain basic positions of the DFG:(a) the inseparability of innovation and basic
research, (b) the commitment to the European
Research Area, (c) the demand for continuity
and simplification, and (d) the demand forproximity to science.

c) The European Union should provide funding
instruments for research projects that could
include cooperation partners in several European countries. In order to better exploit theinnovation potential of Europe’s research, thefunding should be flexible and compatible with

larger consortia in the same way as with small
and medium-sized teams. It is these, above all,who bring with them the urgently needed potential for innovation. To gain access to thispotential, EU research and innovation funding
should attract the best researchers with userfriendly regulations at all levels. Currently, theEC financial regulations constitute a major
obstacle here. Obviously, researchers must be
held accountable for their use of taxpayer
money; however, this should be done according to rules that are appropriate for scientificprojects rather than for agricultural subsidies orlarge industrial consortiums.
d) Science-driven and science-oriented decisionmaking and administrative processes should
increasingly be implemented. Aspects of quality and cohesion must be kept separate. Proposal reviewers must be selected even morestrictly based on their scientific qualifications.
Effective quality-assurance mechanisms, inwhich representatives of the scientific community are actively involved, should be established here. The ERC has been a first step inthis direction. But a wealth of pertinent experience that should be leveraged is available inmany other places as well, especially at thenational level.
In the spirit of these four basic positions, theDFG would like to set forth the following specific recommendations and expectations for
future EU research and innovation funding withregard to early career support for researchers,
approaches for funding collaborative research,and the funding of research infrastructures.

1. Early Career Support forResearchers

vent closed-shop effects. Furthermore, thenumber of doctoral researchers should be increased to ensure the critical mass necessary
for a self-supporting international network ofdoctoral researchers, which is a key factor for

Early-stage researchers must be funded by

the success of international doctoral pro-way of science-driven procedures. EU-grammes. In addition, more flexible-use fund-doctoral programmes must be expanded

ing is needed, e.g. for coordination. Finally, theand better funded. Their diversity must befunding period should be extended.

preserved. The DFG observes the COFUND
activities with constructive criticism.

Considering the great diversity of funding
structures within Europe, a doctoral pro-From administration to selection to implemen-gramme that works equally well for all member

tation, doctoral programmes must reflect thestates is all but inconceivable. However, EU-primacy of research. The administration ofdoctoral programmes must complement thedoctoral programmes should therefore be han-support offered by the national funding organi-dled by the Directorate-General for Research.

sations. Such programmes are particularly

Proposalits

helpful when they facilitate the mobility of doc-

highly competitive nature and lengthy process-toral researchers within larger multinational

ing times, should include two-steps—mustnetworks (e.g. Marie Curie Initial Training Net-focus on scientific quality even more strongly

works, ITN), or the development of interna-than in the past. Structural criteria, such as thetional doctoral programmes through one-stop

requirement to cooperate with industrial or

funding rather than complicated matching-

non-university partners, should be handled

funds schemes.

selection—which,considering

more flexibly to make programmes equallyaccessible and attractive to all disciplines, regardless of their specific needs. Particularly inthe humanities, such a requirement presents avery high entry hurdle. But even for application-oriented disciplines, mandatory cooperation should be made more flexible, e.g. by allowing ad-hoc partnerships. Finally, the implementation of a doctoral programme should bedriven by scientific criteria alone. Doctoral researchers should be recruited in transparent
procedures only on the basis of their scientificqualifications.
EU-doctoral programmes must be expanded
and better funded because early-stage researcher training in Europe continues to require special support. The overall budget forthese programmes must grow in order toachieve acceptable approval rates and to pre-The COFUND scheme is an interesting model
for supporting national funding organisations inenhancing their post-doc programme activities
when their budgets are restricted. This scheme
might open access to more user-friendly financial management: the participating organisations could exert their own regulations that areapproved and appropriate for scientific projects.

2. Different Approaches toFund Collaborative Researchment of the scientific community in topic selection and implementation. To this end, transparent participation schemes along the entire
process must be established. In addition, all
Joint Programming subject areas should cover
the entire range from basic research to appliedresearch, because only strong basic research
can keep a discipline dynamic and attract thebest and most creative researchers.

When it comes to making the European

When it comes to implementing science-driven

Research Area a reality, the DFG is commit-and science-oriented decision processes forted to the European Research Grant Union

Joint Programming, it makes sense to takeof the EUROHORCs. Topics for Joint Pro-

advantage of the experience of ERA-Nets.

gramming must be selected through a sci-

ERA-Nets have accumulated valuable experi-

ence-driven process. ERA-Nets can support

ence on issues concerning the participation ofthis and should be continued by future EU

large consortiums in programme development

research and innovation funding.

and on how to operationalise wide-ranging
topics into clearly defined calls for proposals.

To be successful and competitive, European

In some instances they have establishedscience needs dependable structures for thethemselves as the European voice of researchfunding of networked research. The DFG isfunding organisations for certain subject areas.

therefore committed to building the European

Here they are well positioned to mediate be-

Research Area. Along the lines of the EURO-

tween the bottom-up initiatives from the re-

HORCs Road Map (EUROHORCs and ESF

search community and the strategic priorities

Vision on a Globally Competitive ERA and theirof policymakers and society. But even beyond

Road Map for Actions), the DFG wants to es-

that, ERA-Nets have triggered a comprehen-tablish the European Research Grant Union.

sive and rewarding learning process in theThis would entail further development of therealm of international research-funding coop-

EUROHORCs instruments “Money Follows

eration and should therefore be continued.

Researcher” and “Money Follows CooperationLine” to all EUROHORCs partner organisations. Furthermore, the new lead-agency procedure, following its test phase, would be Europeanised by the EUROHORCs. The ultimate
vision is that grant approvals will be mutuallyacknowledged by all participating organisations
and redeemable in the country where the investigation is carried out.
In parallel to these endeavours, the EU member states have initiated Joint Programming inresearch. As a minimum standard, Joint Programming should ensure appropriate involve-3. Funding of Research Infrastructures

structures must be advanced further. Openaccess und back access are gaining in significance across all disciplines. The future EU
research programmes should therefore provide
for measures to fund and further develop thesefeatures. To make existing, decentralised research infrastructures available for Europeand even world-wide use, an incentive system

The European Union should provide for thefunding of existing and new research infrastructures. The corresponding measures
must be coordinated closely with key players and funders. Universities should bestrengthened as pillars of research infrastructure; standardisation should be pursued; and the re-use of data should be en-is needed that complements basic national
funding with additional grants for internationalisation. Such internationalisation requires thatresources be made available for support bymeans of professional facility management.
Networking should drive specialisation at individual locations, thus enabling optimum responses to enquiries.

abled.
International networking of research infrastrucVia information infrastructures, research dataand publications are often accessible worldwide at no charge, even though the local operations that make this possible are quite
costly. To ensure sustainability, mechanisms

tures requires standardisation. In order to gaininteroperability, suitable data formats must beidentified at the international level. Standardisation should be promoted at the European
level as should the exchange of best practices.

must be developed to enable cost-sharing at
the national, European and international levels.

The re-use of data, the supply of services andThe corresponding measures within future EU

the access to research findings must be facili-

research and innovation funding must be coor-

tated by providing them in a form that allows

dinated closely with the other players and fun-for their possible integration into various re-ders.

search contexts. This entails, for example,
distributing data, services and research find-As carriers of research infrastructure, universities should be strengthened, since they hostnumerous sophisticated if not unique infrastructures for research and higher education.
Given the enormous variety of infrastructuresat universities, they provide optimum conditions for modern integrated approaches and for
sharpening the profiles and priorities of theuniversities. Researchers must be enabled touse these infrastructures in efficient, simple
and customised ways.
Local research infrastructures must be mademore available to external users. International
networking and virtualisation of research infra-ings under open licenses to indicate whether
and on what conditions they may be reused inother countries or contexts.

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
German Research Foundation
Kennedyallee 40 · 53175 Bonn, Germany
Postal address: 53170 Bonn, Germany
Phone: + 49 228 885-1
Fax: + 49 228 885-2777
postmaster@dfg.de
www.dfg.deMarch 2011