EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 18.10.2016 SWD(2016) 332 final COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT



IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Accompanying the document Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on the participation of the Union in the Partnership for Research and Innovation in the Mediterranean Area (PRIMA) jointly undertaken by several Member States {COM(2016) 662 final}

{SWD(2016) 331 final}



Table of Contents 0. Introduction 1. Section 1. Problem definition and drivers 1.1. The problem 1.2. The drivers 1.3. Who is affected by the problem 1.4. EU dimension of the problem 1.5. How would the problem evolve, all things being equal? 1.6. Fitness check /retrospective evaluation 2. Section 2. Why should the EU act? 2.1. EU right to act 2.2. Why could Member States not achieve the objectives of the proposed action sufficiently by themselves? 2.3. What would be the added-value of action at EU-level? 3. Section 3. What should be achieved? 3.1. Policy Objectives 3.2. Specific Objectives 3.3. Consistency with other EU policies 4. Section 4. What are the different options to achieve the objectives?

4.1. Analysis of the possible options 4.2. Options discarded at an early stage 4.3. Retained policy options 4.4. Stakeholders targeted by the different policy options 5. Section 5. What are the impacts of the different policy options and who will be affected? 5.1. Likely economic, social and environmental impacts of each of the short-listed options 5.2. Direct impacts 5.2.1. Rapid integration of national R&I programmes and activities in the Mediterranean area 5.2.2. Efficient and effective delivery of fully piloted and demonstrated, common innovative, integrated solutions for the sustainable management of water provision and food systems 5.2.3. Greater opportunities for food industry and other SMEs and other companies



5.3. Indirect impact 5.3.1. Large-scale aggregate economic impacts 5.3.2. Improved livelihoods for farmers 5.3.3. Improved nutrition and health for the people of the Mediterranean area 5.3.4. Greater political stability and reduced internal and external migration 5.3.5. Large-scale environmental impacts 5.4. Budgetary impacts 5.5. Affected actors, measures to comply with requirements, and potential obstacles 5.5.1. Assessment of capability and expected contribution of third countries not associated to Horizon 2020 in relation to the conditions to be met by Participating States in PRIMA under Option 2 (Article 185 TFEU)

5.6. Impacts likely to change over time 6. Section 6. How do the options compare? 6.1. Compare the options 6.2. Highlight the trade-offs and synergies associated with each option 6.3. The likely uncertainty in the key findings and conclusions and how these might affect the choice of preferred option 6.4. Preferred policy option 6.5. Conformity to principles of subsidiarity and proportionality 7. Section 7. Monitoring and evaluation of impacts 7.1. Plan for future monitoring and evaluation 7.1.1. Core monitoring indicators for the main policy objectives 7.1.2. Verification of monitoring arrangements 7.2. Monitoring and feedback process of Article 185 7.3. Monitoring and audit mechanisms Annexes Annex 1: Procedural information 1.1. Identification 1.2. Organisation and timing 1.3. Evidence 1.4. External expertise





Annex 2: Stakeholder consultation – Synopsis Report 2.1. Stakeholder consultation strategy 2.2. The questionnaire 2.3. Feedback and analysis 2.4. Stakeholder profile 2.5. Problem definition 2.6. Core objectives 2.7. R&I priorities 2.8. Actions 2.9. Impacts 2.10. Policy options Annex 3: Socio-economic outlook of the Mediterranean region 3.1. Introduction 3.2. EU vs. non-EU countries 3.3. Population: density and migration 3.4. GDP 3.5. Unemployment 3.6. Governance 3.7. Competitiveness 3.8. Trade

3.9. Inequality Annex 4: Mapping of on-going programmes in areas to be addressed by the PRIMA Joint Programme (other than Horizon 2020) Annex 5 : Analysis of FP7 Projects in the Themes of the PRIMA Operational Objectives 5.1. Introduction 5.2. Investment in FP7 PRIMA related projects 5.3. Participation of non-EU Mediterranean Countries in PRIMA-related FP7 projects 5.4. List of projects per Operational Objective Annex 6: Screening of the options Annex 7: Who is affected by the initative and how Annex 8: Synergies Annex 9: EU Relationships in R&I with Non-EU PRIMA Participating States Annex 10: Analytical models used in preparing the impact assessment 0.Introduction Water provision and food systems in the Mediterranean area are unsustainably managed The sustainable management of water provision and food systems constitutes a key challenge for the Mediterranean area, which is generally characterised by high levels of hydric stress as no less than 180 million people in the region are considered 'water poor'. This challenge is being exacerbated by climate change Climate change is increasingly causing severe water shortages in the region, with major impacts on agriculture, since most of the water available in the region is used for irrigation, thus resulting in decreasing and irregular crop yields. This puts additional pressure on the natural resources of this area, such as land, water and biodiversity, and on the capacity of countries to provide clean water and affordable food to their inhabitants. This challenge has important societal impacts including instability and external migration

As a result, important downstream effects occur in society, affecting negatively nutrition, health, livelihoods and standards of living, and levels of wellbeing. This social and economic stress, in turn, constitutes a key cause of instability and becomes a cause of migration, both internally, leading numerous farm families to move to cities and, externally, driving part of the population to migrate in particular towards Europe. Mediterranean countries account for 7% of the world population and 10% of world GDP. Water crises constitute the number one risk that could undermine economic growth, impacting upon several countries or industries within the next 10 years. A recent World Bank report highlights that the Middle-East and Northern Africa regions could see their growth rates decline by as much as 6% of GDP by 2050 as a result of water-related losses in agriculture, health, income, and property. The EU absorbs 50% of the agricultural and agro-food exports from the Southern and Eastern Mediterranean Countries while it accounts for 38% of their agro-food imports. Migration is high on the agenda of the EU There can be no doubt that Europe is confronted with its largest refugee crisis in recent history. In 2015, the number of irregular migrant sea arrivals in Europe was almost five times the number of 2014, increasing from 215,000 to around 990,000. It is estimated that around 3,500 people died in 2014 and 3,700 in 2015 attempting to cross into Europe. On 7 June 2016, the Commission adopted a Communication on establishing a new Partnership Framework with third countries under the European Agenda on Migration (COM(2016)385 final), which describes the challenge as follows: "Despite increased efforts by the EU, deaths in the Mediterranean Sea occur on a daily basis. Europe is currently experiencing unprecedented migratory flows, driven by geopolitical and economic factors that will continue, and maybe intensify, over the coming years and indeed it is a global challenge with more than 60 million displaced persons worldwide. They are fuelled by unscrupulous smugglers who seek to benefit from the desperation of the vulnerable. Europe is duty bound to respond; to address the fate of migrants and refugees; to show its citizens that migration, including on the scale we see today, can be managed in a sustainable way. [… ] Since the adoption of the European Agenda on Migration a year ago, much has been done, not least beyond the EU's borders. […] However, much more needs to be done. The EU is still faced with a humanitarian crisis. Third countries and EU partners are housing millions of refugees, many of them unaccompanied minors, forced to leave their homes, and economic migrants who aspire to come to Europe. Reports suggest that there are tens of thousands of migrants in Libya today, looking for ways to enter the EU, with the number of arrivals increasing every day". The Communication proposes a comprehensive response to the refugee crisis: "To respond in a meaningful way, the EU must use all means available and set itself clear priorities and measurable objectives". On the one hand, "development and neighbourhood policy tools should reinforce local capacity-building, including for border control, asylum, counter-smuggling and reintegration efforts". On the other hand, "in parallel, work is needed to tackle the root causes of irregular migration and forced displacement by applying sustained, medium and long term policies and to better use existing processes and programmes". With respect to tackling the root causes of irregular migration and forced displacement, the Communication presents many very concrete ways forward. The Communication states, for instance, that "all EU policies including education, research, climate change, energy, environment, agriculture, should in principle be part of a package, bringing maximum leverage to the discussion". The PRIMA Joint Programme is of key importance for addressing the migration challenge By delivering common innovative solutions for the sustainable management of water provision and food systems that are adapted to the realities of the region and are easily transferable across it, notably by focusing on the development of close-to-market pilots and demonstrators, the PRIMA Joint Programme is ideally situated to address some of the root causes of migration, one of the work streams put on the agenda by the Communication. The PRIMA joint programme is also clearly situated at the interchange between research, climate change, environment and agriculture policies, again fully in line with the logic proposed by the Communication. Finally, the PRIMA Joint Programme constitutes a prime example of the new development cooperation model championed by the Commission insofar as it involves private investors, leverages limited budget resources, and focuses on SMEs and sustainable infrastructure. Coherence between PRIMA's thematic focus and related institutional drivers The PRIMA Joint Programme fits into an institutional context which, at the highest political level, highlighted the need to strengthen EU cooperation with Southern Mediterranean Countries in the key sectors of water resources and food systems and related areas. PRIMA anchors key regional challenges in research and innovation (R&I) with broader socio-economic and geopolitical objectives. Recent relevant institutional actions in policies of the EU other than R&I are described below. Water diplomacy (Foreign Affairs Council Conclusions dated 22 July 2013) The effects of climate change and demographic and economic development coupled with stress on water quality, availability and management represent existing major security challenges that are likely to give rise to tension and conflict over access to water over the next decade. In this context, the EU's role in promoting water diplomacy across the world and more specifically in trans-boundary waters in Europe is recognised as highly important, including by promoting water initiatives with countries in the EU Neighbourhood and other countries identified in the EU water security mapping. Review of the European Neighbourhood Policy (Foreign Affairs Council Conclusions dated 14 December 2015)

The Council welcomed the Review of the European Neighbourhood Policy as a key political priority for the EU in coming years. This include the crucial role of R&I for socio-economic development in the neighbourhood, while assisting in modernising and diversifying economies in Neighbourhood Countries by facilitating increased participation in EU Initiatives. The Council also embraces the approach towards differentiation and greater mutual ownership which recognises that not all neighbourhood partners aspire to the degree of closeness with the EU. This is reflected in the willingness of Neighbourhood Countries in aligning policies with and committing to the EU in joint actions such as PRIMA. Sustainable Development Goals (Foreign Affairs Council Conclusions dated 26 May 2015) Reference is made to the commitment in Horizon 2020 to support sustainable development both within the EU and in cooperation with international partners as well as the need to foster science, technology and innovation as part of the overall approach towards poverty eradication and sustainable development post-2015. Migration (Foreign Affairs Council Conclusions dated 12 October 2015 and 17-18 March 2016) The conclusions acknowledge that the migration crisis within and beyond the EU neighbourhood is exacerbated by poverty, poor socio-economic development in addition to violations of human rights and call for a strong EU external migration and asylum policy. In addition the Council renewed its commitment to mobilise all instruments and policies to support efforts to address the root causes of migratory flows, poor socio-economic conditions and climate change. While the conclusions do not directly imply actions in R&I, it refers to key pressures on Neighbourhood countries particularly, Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey and Iraq and countries hosting the majority of Syrian and Iraqi refugees. European climate diplomacy after COP21 (Foreign Affairs Council Conclusions dated 15 February 2016) In the overall context of climate diplomacy the Council refers to the development of a climate diplomacy action plan, including efforts to address the nexus of climate change, natural resources, including water, prosperity, stability and migration. Institutional background The initial institutional thrust that led to the PRIMA Joint Programme is attributed to the Euro-Mediterranean Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation held in Barcelona in 2012 with the aim of strengthen Euro-Mediterranean cooperation in R&I as part of the broader objectives of the Union's external policy towards the Southern Neighbourhood, which was in the midst of events in the region, then referred to as the Arab Spring. The conference, which was attended by some 350 high-level scientists and policy makers from more than 30 countries, concluded that European and Mediterranean countries needed to establish a true partnership at a regional scale to address key common challenges, including water availability and management, innovation and institutional coordination across the Mediterranean on the basis of co-ownership, mutual interest and shared benefit. Euro-Mediterranean cooperation would be stepped up with a view to establishing long-lasting, sustainable and structuring coordination mechanisms between the EU, its Member States and Mediterranean countries, such as through an initiative pursuant to Article 185 TFEU. As a result this process was pursued during successive Council Presidencies, including during the Nicosia informal Competitiveness Council in July 2012, which launched the preparation of PRIMA and led to the selection by participating Member States and Southern Mediterranean Countries of a focus on water availability and management, and its implications on food systems. The informal Competitiveness Council held in Athens on 13 May 2014 and the Competitiveness Council held in Brussels on 26 May 2014 both confirmed a broad political support for strengthening Euro-Mediterranean cooperation with the proviso that appropriate instruments would be established for this purpose. The Italian Presidency of the Council made PRIMA a priority and secured long-term financial commitments by the countries participating to PRIMA. Finally, the Competitiveness Council of 5 December 2014 invited the Commission to assess whether the participation of the Union in the PRIMA Joint Programme on the basis of Article 185 TFEU would be justified by the scope of the objectives pursued and the scale of the resources required. In its Conclusions, the Council welcomed in particular the focus of the PRIMA Joint Programme on developing and implementing innovative and integrated solutions for the sustainable management of water provision and food systems in the Mediterranean area. The Council regarded this as a priority challenge to be tackled in order to improve the health, well-being and socio-cultural conditions of the populations of the Mediterranean Area and to boost economic growth. Therefore, on 23 December 2014, Member States and third countries of the Mediterranean Area invited the Commission to participate in a Joint Programme initiative called "Partnership for Research and Innovation in the Mediterranean Area" (PRIMA), based on Article 185 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and focused on the development and adoption of innovative integrated solutions for improving the efficiency, safety, security and sustainability of water provision and food systems in the Mediterranean area. Subsequent to these Competitiveness Council conclusions and the formal submission of the proposal for the PRIMA Joint Programme, Commissioner for Research, Science and Innovation Carlos Moedas asked the Commission services to commence the preparation of an impact assessment on available policy options to tackle the aforementioned challenge including an initiative based on Article 185 TFEU. On 29 February 2016, an Addendum to the PRIMA proposal providing further information and clarifications on the initiative was received by the Commission from the PRIMA Joint Programme. On 15 June 2016, details were received by the Commission from the PRIMA Joint Programme concerning the foreseen Dedicated Implementation Structure (DIS) as well as their choice of a central grant management system. Geographical scope According to the information included in the PRIMA Proposal (2014) and its Addendum (2016), 19 countries are involved in the PRIMA Joint Programme: 11 Member States: Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, France, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal, Slovenia and Spain; 3 third countries associated to Horizon 2020: Israel, Tunisia and Turkey; and 5 third countries not associated to Horizon 2020: Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Morocco. Among these countries, 14 countries (Cyprus, Czech Republic, Egypt, France, Greece, Israel, Italy, Lebanon, Luxembourg, Malta, Morocco, Portugal, Spain and Tunisia) have agreed to jointly undertake the PRIMA initiative by committing ex-ante 200 million EUR in cash over a 10 year period starting in 2018 (see Table 1).

The other 5 countries (Algeria, Croatia, Jordan, Slovenia, and Turkey) are expected to contribute to the PRIMA initiative as observers (see Figure 1). Participating State Cash (M EUR) In-kind (M EUR) Duration (Year) Italy 50 50 10 Czech Republic 10 10 10 France 40 40 10 Luxembourg 1.5 1.5 10 Malta 5 10 Morocco 20 20 10 Portugal 2.5 5 Spain 30 10 Cyprus 2 10 Egypt 15 3 10 Greece 5 5 10 Israel 5 5 Lebanon 4 2 10 Tunisia 10 10 TOTAL 200 131.5 Table 1: Institutional level: financial commitment by Participating States (Ministries). It is important to distinguish considerations relating to the geographical scope of PRIMA Joint Programme, as an initiative promoting a partnership for R&I in the Mediterranean Area in the domain of water provision and food systems, and the voluntary adhesion of Participating States (of which 9 are MS, 2 are countries associated to Horizon 2020 and 3 are third countries in the Southern Mediterranean - see Table 1) to pool national resources into a joint programming proposal as submitted to the Commission in order to assess the Union's participation therein. Indeed, the PRIMA Joint Programme was subscribed to by a number of Participating States, which includes countries outside the EU, and with whom the EU cooperates closely in many domains including R&I. In this context, the Commission's role is to assess the Union's participation in the joint programme prepared by all of the Participating States. This approach follows closely the EU strategy for research and innovation cooperation which promotes bi-regional cooperation with Neighbourhood Countries to establish regional-specific strategic approaches that maximise R&I impact by enhancing regional cooperation in key sectors of mutual interest. This is why it is important to target these countries. Also, as mentioned in the Communication, region-specific actions serve the broader objectives of the Union's external policies. The participation of EU Member States in the PRIMA Joint Programme is driven by the common challenge of climate change (with a migration as a consequence) that is affecting the Mediterranean area. Water stress affects one third of the EU territory all year round. During summer months water scarcity is more pronounced in Southern European basins but is also becoming increasingly important in Northern basins, including UK and Germany. Water is already becoming a tangible problem in Southern Spain, Italy, Southern France, Greece or EU islands like Malta or Cyprus. EU Member States have been carrying out R&I activities in the field of water provision and food systems, improving their overall innovation capacity. Sharing knowledge with Southern Mediterranean third countries would allow adapting the developed innovation to the anticipated impacts of climate change that third countries are experiencing with greater severity. In this sense, EU could act as a living lab for testing innovative solutions. EU MSs participating in PRIMA are also involved in bilateral cooperation activities in the field of research and science with many of the Southern Mediterranean third countries. On the other hand, the participation of Southern Mediterranean third countries to the PRIMA Joint Programme is key towards addressing the region-wide challenges associated with the unsustainable management of water provision and the agri-food value chain. The inclusion of third countries in the PRIMA Joint Programme is particularly crucial for the following reasons: R&I activities cannot be implemented without fully mobilising and involving local knowledge and expertise; the results achieved through these R&I activities cannot be quickly disseminated and valorised into new products, processes and services if local stakeholders are not involved; third country governments should be involved so that they can adapt their domestic research and innovation programmes and take account of results in the design of new policies. It is important to point out that the research expertise of third countries is of high level and relevant for achieving the critical mass. On this basis, the largest possible scale comprising all countries in the Mediterranean area is considered to benefit the PRIMA Joint Programme and its scope both in water and food policy coordination and in market-related technology transfer opportunities. This is also relevant to broader objectives of the PRIMA Joint Programme relating to addressing long-term impacts of migration into the EU. It has to be noted that adhesion to the PRIMA Joint Programme by Participating States is on a voluntary basis and is not driven by the EU as such. Thus, while Algeria, Turkey and Jordan were closely associated with the preparation of the PRIMA Joint Programme, at the time of submitting the proposal, these countries chose to keep observer status without participation in the programme. Of the remaining countries in the region, only Libya and Syria have not engaged in PRIMA Joint Programme as a result of political and security crises. The PRIMA model of partnership based on equal footing among participant states has the potential to increase third counties buy-in of public and private stakeholders, foster scientific and diplomatic links among participants (science diplomacy), scale up the deployment of potential of innovative solutions, thus expanding and integrating national R&I investments. Region-specific challenges leading to geographical scope of PRIMA A succession of joint EU-MED initiatives and EU funded projects have shaped regional cooperation and led to identification of region-specific challenges in the areas addressed by PRIMA. These are summarised below: Poor governance of water for planning and adaptation to global changes, including lack of engagement of stakeholders; Non equitable water allocation and unsustainable water management;

Poor holistic vision of water resources; Need to increase competitiveness of research in water quantity management, water use efficiency as well as management of non-conventional waters; Unsustainable food production – ecosystem and nutrition; Need to develop smart rural arid and semi-arid areas (and to develop innovative adaptation solutions). Figure 1: PRIMA Size and Scale External expertise and consultation In the context of the preparation of the impact assessment, a Group of External Experts (Expert Group) was set up in October 2016 composed of 9 experts coming from Mediterranean and non-Mediterranean Member States and third countries (see Annex 1). The findings of the Expert Group report were cross-verified with findings from other sources (e.g. literature review carried out by Commission services, results of the online public consultation) and duly taken account of in the elaboration of the impact assessment. For the consultation strategy, an online Public Consultation was launched on 1 February 2016, closing on 24 April 2016, and was complemented by dedicated events, in particular a 'Public Consultation Stakeholder Event' in Malta on 17 March (see Annex 2).

1.Section 1. Problem definition and drivers 1.1.The problem As already mentioned in the introduction above, water provision and food systems in the Mediterranean area are unsustainably managed. This challenge is exacerbated by climate change and has important downstream societal impacts including instability and external migration. The unsustainable management of water provision and food systems in the Mediterranean area is due to a number of factors including political instability, climate change, and the rapidly growing population. A key reason, however, is the lack of a set of common innovative solutions that are adapted to the realities of the region and easily transferable across it, and have been fully piloted and demonstrated on the ground. These solutions are not forthcoming because the overall level of R&I investment in the Mediterranean is not commensurate with the size of the regional challenge; investment levels also differ greatly between countries. Funding is not well focused on addressing the water and food challenge, and the relevant stakeholders involved – for instance, private sector ones – do not always have sufficiently strong R&I capabilities. Finally, the R&I and collaboration efforts between EU Member States and Southern and Eastern Mediterranean countries are too fragmented (mostly governed by bilateral agreements) to have any significant impact. The challenge of unsustainably managed water provision and food systems is complex because of the interrelation between water and food and because of its cross-sectoral and transnational nature. Addressing the challenge requires trans-disciplinary research and integrated solutions that take into account not only innovation per se but also other factors such as the technology adoption behaviour of rural communities, economic constraints, or the legally and institutionally stable frameworks that may favour the adoption of the most appropriate measures,. - The World Bank estimates that by 2025 climate change will be responsible for shortfalls in crop yields and water availability that will affect 1.4 billion people worldwide. Unless some significant technological break-through occurs, water shortages will have a major impact on agriculture, especially in those countries, like in the Mediterranean region, where most of the available water is used for irrigation, placing additional pressures on the natural resources of this region, such as land, water, and biodiversity, and on the capacity of countries to provide affordable food and good quality water to their inhabitants. - The 2011/2012 EU Development Report (ERD) "Confronting scarcity: Managing water, energy and land for inclusive and sustainable growth" calls for public support for research on innovative technological solutions to address the sustainable management of water, energy and land in developing countries, including Southern-eastern Mediterranean Countries. - In the Mediterranean area, the competition for water use between agriculture, drinking water and other uses, such as tourism-related activities, becomes increasingly severe. Water used for irrigation represents 60% of the total water quantities used for human related activities in the Mediterranean area, and this percentage extends to more than 80% of total water use in Morocco, Greece, Egypt, Cyprus, Tunisia and Turkey. - Mediterranean countries have a strong and growing interest in agro-food, a basic sector identified as one of the major contributors to the region's ecological footprint. The Mediterranean region uses two and a half times more natural resources than what its ecosystems can provide. Therefore, promoting innovation and knowledge creation across all of the agro-food related sectors, and along the whole food supply chain, can be considered as a crucial factor for Mediterranean economies in need of new and more sustainable production processes and business opportunities. Existing R&I systems and investments in the Mediterranean area are fragmented, and not commensurate and adequately integrated to cope efficiently and effectively with the complexity and the size of the regional the challenge, and to deliver the urgently needed innovative and integrated solutions for the sustainable management of water provision and food systems. Concretely, there is a lack of common innovative solutions fully piloted and demonstrated on the ground, adapted to the realities of the region, and easily transferable across it. Stakeholders responding to the online public consultation organised by the Commission agreed that the difficulty involved in implementing innovative solutions related to insufficient cooperation between countries and actors is the most urgent issue for R&I in the Mediterranean area. More funding for R&I is also called for, though slightly less critical. Respondents called for more synergies among actors and countries and put particular emphasis on the importance of raising awareness about issues related to climate change.

1.2.The drivers The drivers behind the inadequacy of R&I systems in the Mediterranean area to deliver the needed innovative and integrated solutions for the sustainable management of water provision and food systems are as follows: Uneven R&I resources in the Mediterranean countries For instance, average R&D intensities in the region are extremely low: 1.29% for the EU Member States participating in the PRIMA Joint Programme (compared to 2% for the Member States overall) and 0.54% for the Southern and Eastern Mediterranean countries (excluding Israel, for which the R&D intensity is 4.21%). Limited coordination of R&I policy programming between Mediterranean countries For instance, in the field of water and food, more than 17 different bilateral and 11 transnational R&I collaboration programmes have been identified as being in operation in the region in a not well-coordinated manner. Lack of long-term strategic R&I agenda and multi-stakeholder governance For instance, though of key importance for the rapid dissemination and valorisation of research results, less than 10% of research activities in the Mediterranean region are carried out by private actors. Stakeholders responding to the online public consultation organised by the Commission recognised the importance of addressing as main drivers of the problem: (i) the lack of coordination and cooperation between Mediterranean countries and research organisations and the duplication of research efforts (64.1% of replies); (ii) the lack of cooperation between academic and non-academic actors (62.8%); and (iii) the insufficient investment in R&I (61.2%). Problem driver 1: Uneven R&I resources in the Mediterranean countries Table 1.1 shows the R&D intensity as well as the number of researchers per million inhabitants in the EU and South and Eastern Mediterranean third countries involved in the PRIMA Joint Programme. It shows that the performance in terms of R&D inputs (investment and researchers) is uneven: R&D Intensity: A wide variation exists across the 17 Mediterranean countries involved. Only three countries had R&D intensities above 2.00% in 2013 (the EU average was 2.02%) and eleven countries had R&D intensities below 1.00%. Amongst the Third Countries, only Israel had a very high R&D intensity (4.21%). The other seven countries had intensities below 1.00%. The average for all Middle East and North African Countries was 0.36% in 2013. Researchers per million people: This indicator as well shows a wide variation across countries, ranging from high figures for countries like France to low figures for all third countries with the exception of Israel in the period 2011-13. Member States R&D Intensity (R&D as % of GDP), 2013a Researcher Intensity, 2013b Third Countries R&D Intensity (R&D as % of GDP), 2013a Researcher Intensity, 2013b Croatia 0.81 1,529 Algeria 0.10 - Cyprus 0.48 775 Egypt 0.68 544 France 2.23 4,153 Israel 4.21 8,282 Greece 0.8 2,628 Jordan 0.43 - Italy 1.26 1,974 Lebanon 0.22 - Malta 0.89 2,107 Morocco 0.73 852 Portugal 1.37 4,152 Tunisia 0.68 1,393 Slovenia 2.59 4,217 Turkey 0.94 1,169 Spain 1.24 2,653 aR&D Intensity (R&D as % of GDP) was obtained from the World Bank, the UNESCO Science Report: towards 2030, Institute for Statistics (2015), Knoema and investinlebanon.gov.lb. All figures are for 2013 apart from these for Tunisia (2012), Morocco (2010), and Lebanon (2006). bResearcher Intensity (Researchers per million people) was obtained from the World Bank. All figures are for 2013 apart from those for Israel (2012), Tunisia (2012) and Morocco (2011). Table 1.1: Country indicators of R&I capacity





Problem driver 2: Limited coordination of R&I policy programming between Mediterranean countries The EU has supported R&I on water provision and food systems in the Mediterranean area through past Framework Programmes for Research, and Technological Development. In FP6 and FP7, for instance, this has been done through several funding instruments involving different levels of coordination and cooperation. There are, for instance, past and also still on-going Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs – Table 1.2), whose aim is to pool national research efforts to address major societal challenges that cover scientific areas related to water and agro-food (e.g. JPI FACCE, JPI Water and, to a lesser extent, JPI Healthy Diet for a Healthy Life and JPI Oceans). A number of Coordination and Support Actions (CSAs) have also been established with the aim of better coordinating research efforts in the Mediterranean area. The most relevant initiatives are the six Mediterranean ERA-NETs funded under FP7 (Table 1.3): three of them (MIRA, MED Spring, ERA METMED) were funded in the International Cooperation (INCO) programme while the other three (FORESTERRA, ARIMNet, and ARIMNet2) were funded under the 'Food, Agriculture and Fisheries, and Biotechnologies' (KBBE) programme. In addition to JPIs and CSAs, 151 FP7 research projects involved the participation of Mediterranean countries (including Mediterranean third countries). JPIs comprise mainly EU Member States. The participation of Mediterranean third countries is very limited. JPI FACCE, JPI Water and JPI Healthy Diet for a Healthy Life all have Turkey and Israel as members, while JPI Oceans has only Turkey as a member. The situation is somewhat different for ERA-NETs, which have a wider geographical coverage. All of these initiatives tend to remain fragmented, however, and have not produced an integrated strategic research agenda, which is illustrated by the wide range of topics covers in an unintegrated manner. Table 1.3 shows that several EU initiatives are addressing to some extent the water and/or food sectors, and/or the cooperation between the Mediterranean countries. However, the level of integration of R&I policy resulting from these EU activities remains limited to the support and organisation of national programmes and activities. Most of the initiatives do not address the interdependency between food and water issues that is specific for the Mediterranean area. Furthermore, the limited representation of stakeholders of Mediterranean countries in the abovementioned JPIs limits the potential level of effectiveness in terms of tackling regional issues. These factors can result in an overlap or even duplication of efforts and put significant strain on critical bottlenecks (expertise, facilities, funding). Uneven public programmes with incompatible national funding rules and procedures result in limited diversity and quality of cooperation partnerships.







Mediterranean Countries INCO-NETs KBBE ERA-NETs MIRA MEDSpring ERANETMED FORESTERRA ARIMNet ARIMNet2 Member States Croatia X X Cyprus X X X X X France X X X X X X Greece X X X X X X Italy X X X X X X Malta X X X X Portugal X X X X X X Slovenia X X Spain X X X X X X Third Country Algeria X X X X X X Egypt X X X X X Israel X X X X Jordan X X X Lebanon X X X Morocco X X X X X X Tunisia X X X X X X Turkey X X X X X X Table 1.2: Participation of Mediterranean countries in previous FP7 ERA-NETs (countries participating in all ERA-NETs are underlined) Initiative Has no explicit focus on Food or Water Water issues only Food and food prod. only Mainly water issues, with some attention to food production Mainly food and food production, with some attention to water Food and Water as part of a broader set of topics Inter-dependency of water and food issues explicitly as key focus of initiative JPI Water X JPI Facce X JPI Healthy Diet X JPI Oceans X MIRA X MEDspring X X ERANETMED X Foresterra X ARIMNet X X ARIMNet2 X X Table 1.3: Thematic overlap of existing initiatives with R&I on water provision and agro-food systems in the Mediterranean In addition to EU level actions, an extensive number of bilateral and transnational programmes are being implemented by the countries involved in the PRIMA Joint Programme. In Annex 4, a non-exhaustive list of the main programmes of scientific and technological collaboration between EU Member states and third countries in areas to be addressed by the PRIMA Joint Programme is provided. The table in this annex shows that: There is no integrated R&I strategy for the Mediterranean in the area of the sustainable management of water provision and food systems, which leads to possible overlaps between research activities and hampers the valorisation and scaling up of research results at European and international level. The identified programmes are scattered across numerous small bilateral agreements, with some privileged partnerships, which does not allow for reaching the scale and scope of R&I efforts required to achieve strategic objectives. The initiatives are of limited duration and/or subject to the yearly (re)definition of topics. Most of them are expiring at the end of 2016, which does not match the need for stable long-term commitments. Policy dialogue, exchange of best practices, and mobility of researchers appear to be the main focus of the identified programmes. R&I projects are also addressed but they do not appear to have size, ambition or scale. There is only a limited presence of large-scale demonstration projects in the identified programmes. Therefore, they do not allow for testing, demonstrating and implementing tailored water-saving and management solutions, smart and sustainable farming systems and innovative food products, novel approaches to reducing the impact of pests and pathogens in farming, and innovative quality-oriented business models in the agro-food sector. Problem driver 3: Lack of long-term strategic R&I agenda and multi-stakeholder governance The involvement of all types of stakeholders is needed to address the complex, cross-sectoral challenge of the sustainable management of water provision and food systems in the Mediterranean area. Stronger cooperation between stakeholders in different economic sectors in the Mediterranean countries leading to the effective coordination and integration of R&I systems is required to develop innovative and integrated solutions for the sustainable management of water provision and food systems. This is needed to tackle and mitigate the expected medium and long term impacts of climate and demographic changes in the Mediterranean area.

However, so far, the coordination achieved between different areas of government policy (e.g. economy and environment, agriculture and energy) is limited. In the same vein, stakeholders from the public and private sector in these countries have limited possibilities to create synergies for R&I activities, e.g. bringing the result of public research to the market. According to a 2012 study by ANIMA Investment Network, most R&D activities in the Mediterranean area (over 90%) is carried out by public universities and research centres (compared to 54% on average in the European Union). This is notwithstanding the fact that cooperation among market-based actors of the Mediterranean food value chains (mainly customers, food retailers and suppliers) is a key aspect for the development of the required innovation. Furthermore, in most of the Mediterranean countries, the existence of sector-specific R&I structures is deeply rooted in the national governance systems and prevents the development and funding of multi-, inter- and trans-disciplinary environmental research and the subsequent uptake of results in innovative solutions and policy changes. 1.3.Who is affected by the problem The problem affects a very wide range of stakeholders both within and outside the Mediterranean area. The population at large in the Mediterranean countries, both EU and third countries, is affected since inadequate water provision and food systems have important downstream effects in society, affecting negatively nutrition, health, livelihoods and standards of living, and levels of wellbeing. This social and economic stress, in turn, constitutes a key cause of instability and becomes a cause of migration in third countries, both internally, leading numerous farm families to move to cities and, externally, driving part of the population to migrate in particular towards Europe. Farmers are affected since they are deprived from innovative solutions and have to keep suffering from inadequate water provision systems, which seriously affect crop yields. Businesses, and in particular SMEs, are affected by the inability of current policies and programmes to adequately address market failures by providing long-term stable support and predictability, thereby being deprived from the opportunity to participate fully in the co-development of innovative integrated solutions and to valorise commercially the new products, processes and services developed. The R&I community (policy-makers, programme managers, funders, R&I organisations (universities, research institutes), individual researchers and innovators) is affected because, as a result of the current cross-border, cross-sectoral and cross-discipline fragmentation of policies and programmes, it is unable to pool resources to develop, disseminate and implement the innovative integrated solutions urgently needed for the sustainable management of water provision and food systems. 1.4.EU dimension of the problem Europe is affected by the large-scale instability close to its borders and by the refugee crisis driven partially by the shortage of water in the region. The PRIMA Joint Programme is of great relevance for a broad range of key EU policies. EU migration policy As outlined in a recent World Bank study, water scarcity and the consequent increase in food prices can induce people to leave their countries and can contribute to igniting civil conflicts. As the same report stresses, "in today's globalized and connected world, such problems are impossible to quarantine. And where large inequities prevail, people move from zones of poverty to regions of prosperity which can lead to increased social tensions" (p. vi). The EU is of course well aware of this, affected as it currently by the largest refugee crisis in recent history. Within this context, and as explained in great detail in the introduction to this impact assessment, the PRIMA Joint Programme fits clearly into the European Agenda on Migration and the 'Communication on establishing a new Partnership Framework with third countries under the European Agenda on Migration' adopted by the Commission on 7 June 2016 (COM(2016)385). In the text of the Communication, research is mentioned explicitly as one of the EU policies that may have a role to play in the wider context of the discussions on migration and in the dedicated agreements that the EU is expected to conclude with the most affected third countries. EU external development policy The PRIMA Joint Programme also fits clearly into the EU's efforts to achieve the post-2015 Development Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and, more specifically, SDG #2 "End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture" and SDG #6 "Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all". EU sustainability policy The implementation of the SDGs directly connects the PRIMA Joint Programme to EU sustainability policy. There are strong links between the content of the PRIMA Joint Programme and that of the Resource-efficient Europe Flagship Initiative, for its environmental dimension, and that of the European Neighbourhood Programme for Agriculture and Rural Development, for its international cooperation dimension.

EU R&I policy Water and food systems cannot be managed effectively and sustainably if innovative solutions are not developed, implemented and shared among countries. This is where the EU R&I policy dimension, and Horizon 2020 in particular, comes into play. Horizon 2020 and the "Open to the world" political priority of Commissioner Moedas have been identified by PRIMA proposers as the most appropriate instruments for tackling the challenges raised by the initiative and allowing PRIMA to achieve impact that goes beyond the single R&I policy dimension. 1.5.How would the problem evolve, all things being equal? Without additional initiatives aimed at increasing R&I investment and collaboration with respect to water provision and food systems in the Mediterranean area, the current R&I initiatives using EU instruments and the current bilateral cooperation will not be sufficient to address the current water and food stress in Mediterranean area. In fact, global competition for access to natural resources will continue to intensify, as will the associated risks: market volatility, geo-political tensions and instability. The large-scale exploitation and extraction of natural resources will still be highly concentrated in a small number of producer countries. According to EuroMed 2030, managing scarcity will be the principal challenge for the food and water supply by 2030. In addition, climate change and demographic trends place additional pressures on the natural resources of the Mediterranean region and on the capacity of countries to provide affordable food and quality drinking water to an increasing population. It can be expected that without additional action, on-going activities to coordinate the programming of R&I policies (e.g. ERA-NETs) related to water provision and food systems in the Mediterranean countries will be finalised before 2018. Funding for R&I projects will likely continue without a specific focus on food water provision and food systems in the Mediterranean area. Overall, even though it is difficult to make projections with respect to future calls, it could be assumed that the level of investment from Horizon 2020 will be comparable to that of FP7. Concerning FP7 (2007-2013), an analysis has been provided in Annex 5 showing the participation of entities from Mediterranean third countries in projects relevant to water provision and food systems. It can be concluded that: Over the course of the seven years of FP7, a total of 151 projects, with a total budget of 408 million EUR, were funded; A budget of 31 million EUR was invested in horizontal projects fostering Euro-Mediterranean Co-operation (ERA-NETs and Coordination Actions); 1 million EUR was invested in mobility actions. Under Horizon 2020, the current EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, 13 out of the 19 countries involved in the PRIMA Joint Programme participate in actions related to water scarcity, irrigation, water saving, sustainable water, sustainable agriculture, agro food, and the food industry. These activities include different kind of instruments foreseen under Horizon 2020, including R&I actions and SME instrument actions. To date, none of the Horizon 2020 actions involving Mediterranean countries cover integrated R&I activities on water provision and food systems, however. Opportunities for R&I topics tackling water provision and agro-food production might continue to be provided under Horizon 2020, mainly under Societal Challenges 2 and 5, but it is unlikely that they would address comprehensively and specifically R&I on water provision and food systems in the Mediterranean countries. Based on the current situation under Horizon 2020 in the first two calls for proposals launched only under SC5 and SC2, the number of Mediterranean Countries covered by R&I food and water EC funding are 8 Member states and 4 third countries. It may be concluded that: In Horizon 2020, the situation of the participation of Third Countries should be improved compared to FP7, and It could be assumed that this trend is likely to persist under the baseline scenario. As for existing transnational initiatives, some activities might be carried out related to water provision and food systems. Few of these initiatives, however, have a strong focus on R&I activities and this is unlikely to change in the future. Some examples are the World Bank's Water Partnership Programs, particularly through IFAD (International Fund of Agriculture and Development); the Water Demand Initiative for the Middle East and North Africa (WaDImena), coordinated by the International Development Research Centre and supported by the International Fund for Agricultural Development; FAO's regional Initiative on Water Scarcity in the Near East and North Africa; the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) and the International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA); and Plan Bleu.

1.6.Fitness check /retrospective evaluation There is no fitness check/retrospective evaluation carried out under the existing policy framework, targeting specifically R&I activities on water provision and food systems in the Mediterranean area.

2.Section 2. Why should the EU act? 2.1.EU right to act The EU's right to act in the area of R&I, including through cooperation with third countries, is set out in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), which also provides instruments that can be used for such cooperation, see Box 1 for details. International cooperation in R&I is a key aspect of the EU's global commitments and has an important role to play in the EU partnership with developing countries, which are often disproportionately affected by global challenges. This cooperation can promote inclusive growth and is essential for the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals as set by the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Horizon 2020 complies with the principle of general openness, while encouraging reciprocal access to third countries' programmes. BOX 1: EU's right to act in the area of R&I and to collaborate with third countries in the TFEU Article 4 point 3 TFEU indicates that in the area of research and technological development, the Union has competence to carry out activities, in particular to define and implement programmes, in parallel with Member States. Article 180 TFEU provides that these activities should complement the activities carried out in the Member States and include implementation of research, technological development and demonstration programmes, by promoting cooperation with and between undertakings, research centres and universities; promotion of cooperation in the field of Union research, technological development and demonstration with third countries and international organisations; dissemination and optimisation of the results of activities in Union research, technological development and demonstration; stimulation of the training and mobility of researchers in the Union. Article 181 TFEU provides that "The Union and the Member States shall coordinate their research and technological development activities so as to ensure that national policies and Union policy are mutually consistent". The Commission may, in close cooperation with Member States, take any useful initiative to promote such coordination. Article 182 TFEU provides the legal basis for a multiannual framework programme (FP) setting out all the activities of the Union in the area of research, technological development and demonstration. Article 185 TFEU provides that "In implementing the multiannual framework programme, the Union may make provision, in agreement with the Member States concerned, for participation in research and development programmes undertaken by several Member States, including participation in the structures created for the execution of those programmes". Article 186 TFEU provides that "In implementing the multiannual framework programme the Union may make provision for cooperation in Union research, technological development and demonstration with third countries or international organisations". The EU right to act also derives from the characteristics of the problem identified (see Box 2). The cross-border dimension of the problem and the links with R&I European policies call for intervention at EU level and beyond. Achieving a resource- and water-efficient economy and society calls for investment in R&I with a long-term vision and strengthened cross-borders cooperation. This is both an EU and a global challenge of particular relevance for EU and non-EU countries in the Mediterranean area, where the adverse effects of climate change and the impacts of a growing population are increasingly putting under stress their resilience to respond to the on-going and foreseen environmental, climate and social changes. BOX 2: Water provision and food systems from a sectorial perspective Article 11 TFEU provides that "environmental protection requirements must be integrated into the definition and implementation of the Union's policies and activities, in particular with a view to promoting sustainable development". Article 191 TFEU defines the objectives of the EU's policy on environment, including "prudent and rational utilisation of natural resources" and "promoting measures at international level to deal with regional or worldwide environmental problems, and in particular combating climate change" (§1). Such policy is guided by the principles of preventive action, precaution, rectification of environmental damage at the source and polluter pays (§2). It must take into account, amongst others "available scientific and technical data" (§3). 2.2.Why could Member States not achieve the objectives of the proposed action sufficiently by themselves? The reference framework for R&I in the water and food sectors at EU level is provided by major EU initiatives, but it does not tackle specifically the problem identified in the Mediterranean area. The national, bilateral and transnational programmes that have been used so far to improve R&I on water provision and food systems have not proved to be sufficient to tackle cross-border issues and attract further public and private investments. At national level, there is no evidence of synchronization between programmes, and alignment only takes place in a few thematic areas covered by Joint Programming activities. Moreover, the focus is on EU-EU alignment, and not on alignment with Mediterranean third countries. Internationalisation and cooperation in R&I are important objectives for Mediterranean countries in general. One commonality of all the national initiatives currently ongoing is that industry is not strongly involved. Three distinct weaknesses emerge at bilateral and transnational level: Uneven R&I resources: Past and present portfolios of bilateral initiatives with non-synchronised timeframes have not been able to leverage national efforts of Mediterranean countries at the required scale. In contrast, EU involvement would have the potential to attract and concentrate additional funding from the R&I community, industry, and other stakeholders. Limited coordination of R&I policy programming: The alignment of R&I Mediterranean programmes cannot be achieved by bilateral programmes alone.

Lack of long-term strategic R&I agenda and multi-stakeholder governance: Bilateral R&I programmes of the Mediterranean countries in the area of water provision and food systems are not leading to the development of shared Mediterranean R&I Agendas. The creation and update of such agendas has been an aim of the EU since the establishment of MoCo in 1995. As previously mentioned, the challenges of water provision and food systems in the Mediterranean area are complex, interrelated, transnational and multi-sectorial. They require trans-disciplinary research and integrated solutions that take into account not only innovation but also other factors, such as the social behaviour of rural communities, economic constraints, or the legal and institutional stable frameworks that may favour the adoption of the most appropriate measures. This shows that one country alone would never be able to cope with the complexity of the challenges to be covered. In addition, the PRIMA Expert Group identified a series of gaps on R&I that need to be addressed in an integrated and coordinated approach in the Mediterranean area. The same analysis also shows the need for actual R&I projects including demonstrators, pilot plants, testing, pre-commercial deployment, and research projects addressing the complete range of Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) that need transnational cooperation (see section 4 for more details). Moreover, to achieve the objectives that will be detailed in the next section, it is essential to develop alignment policy mechanisms not only in research policy but also in agriculture, environment and economy. Finally, the problem addressed requires not only the participation of EU Member States but of non-EU Mediterranean countries on equal footing. 2.3.What would be the added-value of action at EU-level? The added value of EU level action can be described along the three dimensions reported below. 1. Attaining scale and scope and achieving a critical mass of resources Only action at EU level is capable of achieving a well-coordinated and integrated programme with adequate scale and scope. Experience with transnational programmes demonstrates clearly that without EU action and support, the level of ambition and the degree of coordination and integration is significantly lower and does not achieve a critical mass of financial and knowledge resources compared to a partnership approaches between the Member States and the Union. EU action entails in addition a stronger policy dimension as compared to separate Member States activities, which in turn is often a prerequisite for ensuring long-term financial commitments from all Participating States, as clearly demonstrated in the European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP2 Art 185 initiative). 2. Leverage effects and delivery on impacts and broader implications to the EU's external policies and migration Experience from similar initiatives such as BONUS (Joint Baltic Sea research and development programme) demonstrates that action at EU level triggers significant additional public investments from the Participating States, which increasingly shift available national resources to the joint programme. Better coordinated and integrated action at national and EU-level within a joint programme is able to provide significant knowledge gains for all participants but notably for those partners that had so far only limited access to world class knowledge. This, in turn, will improve the impacts stemming from joint efforts, so "the value for money" stemming from joint programmes is significantly higher than that stemming from discreet national activities. In addition, action at EU-level following the Horizon 2020 rules will have significant impacts on the uptake of good practices in R&I policy design and implementation across Europe and beyond. This has been shown by similar initiatives such as EDCTP2, as well as in ERA-NET activities supporting the coordination of national research programmes since FP6. As discussed in the introduction, PRIMA is a key example of a sectorial initiative that will contribute towards addressing some of the root causes of migration by providing innovative solutions to water resources and food systems that will help manage long-term migratory trends more efficiently. 3. International leadership, global cooperation and the European Neighbourhood South A well-coordinated joint programme and thus action at EU-level will strengthen Europe's visibility and global responsibility far beyond what single Member States action would be able to deliver. With respect to the SDGs in the field of water and food, the planned initiative will therefore contribute significantly to the fulfilment of Europe's global responsibilities. On the other hand, joint action proved to be instrumental for similar initiatives to achieve a stronger recognition of Europe as the world's leading knowledge hub for clinical trials on tropical diseases (in the case of EDCTP2) or metrology and related standardization activities (in the case of EMPIR, the European Metrology Programme for Research and Innovation). The approach towards a joint programme based on voluntary participation of countries from the Neighbourhood South on an equal footing as MS reflects the spirit of EU Neighbourhood Policy towards differentiation and greater mutual ownership with neighbourhood partners based on their aspirations to draw their policy formulation closer to the EU. This is a key aspect of science diplomacy within the region, whereby cooperation between nations is essential to addressing the common challenges and conditions in the Mediterranean area that are not confined by the EU's geographical borders. These conditions are more likely to be addressed effectively at EU level than through bilateral action of MS with Southern Neighbourhood Countries.



3.Section 3. What should be achieved? 3.1.Policy Objectives

The general objective is to develop the fully piloted and demonstrated common innovative solutions in the field of water provision and food systems that the Mediterranean region urgently needs. Achieving this general objective will make water provision and food systems in the Mediterranean area more efficient, cost-effective, and sustainable. In this way, R&I can contribute to solving the higher-level problems in the field of nutrition, health and social wellbeing, and ultimately help address mass migration trends. R&I policies can thus be leveraged to the maximum to address the migration challenge, in line with the Communication on a new Partnership Framework with third countries under the European Agenda on Migration. 3.2.Specific Objectives This general objective can only be achieved if, in a structured way, a durable framework for R&I in the field of water provision and food systems is put in place in the Mediterranean area. The following specific objectives need to be achieved in order to reach the scale and scope of R&I efforts required: Common long-term strategic R&I agenda: The formulation of a stable, long-term, common strategic R&I agenda in the field of water provision and food systems; Alignment of national R&I programmes: The orientation of all national R&I programmes towards the implementation of the strategic R&I agenda; Critical mass of actors and resources: The structural involvement of all relevant R&I actors (the public and private sectors) in the implementation of the strategic R&I agenda by pooling knowledge and financial resources so as to achieve the necessary critical mass; Strengthening innovation capabilities: The strengthening of R&I funding and implementation capabilities of all involved actors. The achievement of the identified objectives will rely upon the establishment of long-term cooperation and upon end-user friendly and societally affordable solutions. The intervention logic reported in Figure 3.1 illustrates the links between the general objective, the problem definition, problem drivers and the identified objectives. Synergies and trade-offs can be summarised as follows. Cooperation in R&I can lead to knowledge development and transfer. It increases research capacities quantitatively (i.e. number of researchers or highly qualified workers like engineers or technicians that are supported) and qualitatively, through the exchange of knowledge and experience. Common work between researchers and other highly qualified people may enhance skills and capacities, create knowledge-based job opportunities in opportunities in the Mediterranean countries. The activities linked with the operational objectives ensure proper attention to innovation and to the implementation of the developed solutions. These solutions, if adequately implemented and mainstreamed, would contribute: -To mitigating environmental pressures, such as water stress or pollution derived from over-exploitation of natural resources; -To opportunities for investments and development of new markets. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES PROBLEM DRIVERS STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE PROBLEM DEFINITION

Unsustainable management of water provision and food systems in the Mediterranean area Uneven R&I resources in the Mediterranean countries Common long-term strategic R&I agenda Strengthening innovation capabilities Develop the common innovative solutions in the field of water provision and food systems that the Mediterranean region urgently needs Lack of long-term strategic R&I agenda and multi-stakeholder governance Limited coordination of R&I policy programming between Mediterranean countries Alignment of national R&I programmes lack of common innovative solutions to be fully piloted and demonstrated on the ground, adapted to the realities of the region, and easily transferable across it. Critical mass of actors and resources Figure 3.1: Intervention Logic Addressing the inefficient and unsustainable use of resources through R&I implies new governance approaches (to improve regional R&I governance, structures for the evaluation, funding, management and follow-up of R&I proposals and grants, and water governance), based on integration and cooperation beyond Mediterranean neighbourhood boundaries and between different stakeholders, on equal footing. This is a critical condition to address the main problem and to reach the other operational objectives. R&I can also help shaping future policies in the water and agro-food sectors. 3.3.Consistency with other EU policies The objectives are in line with the problem definition and cover the related R&I challenges ensuring adequate interaction with European, Mediterranean and global policies. As already mentioned in the introduction and in Section 1 of this impact assessment, the objectives to be pursued are fully in line with the recent Communication on establishing a new Partnership Framework with third countries under the European Agenda on Migration (New Migration Partnership Framework), and with the 2011/2012 EU Development Report (ERD) "Confronting scarcity: Managing water, energy and land for inclusive and sustainable growth". In particular the New Migration Partnership Framework calls very concretely for new development cooperation models that involve private investors looking for new investment opportunities in emerging markets, mobilise European private and public resources for investment in third countries of origin thereby contributing to the sustainable development of the local economies, assign an important role to innovative financing mechanisms that can be deployed and developed to leverage limited budget resources, and remove bottlenecks to investment in SMEs and sustainable infrastructure". Indeed, the PRIMA Joint Programme constitutes a concrete example of how research policy can promote effective cooperation by leveraging national budgets and by bringing together Mediterranean countries around long-term common challenges. The R&I objectives concerning water provision and food systems in the Mediterranean area appear to be consistent with and relevant also to the following initiatives:

As highlighted in the Communication "A resource-efficient Europe – Flagship initiative", EU-wide, coordinated public support for R&D and innovation is important to increase the availability and performance of the necessary resource efficient solutions. Horizon 2020 identifies "Climate action, Environment, Resource Efficiency and Raw Materials" and "Food security, sustainable agriculture and forestry, marine, maritime and inland water research, and the bio-economy" as two of the priority societal challenges to be addressed by supporting R&I investments. Moreover, Horizon 2020 recognises that R&I activities for these challenges should be carried out at the Union level and beyond, given the transnational and global nature of the climate and the environment, their scale and complexity, and the international dimension of the food and agricultural supply chain. In the report "Science, Research and Innovation performance of the EU - A contribution to the Open Innovation, Open Science, Open to the World agenda" it is analysed how Europe should be leading the way in developing global research partnerships to address challenges in areas like energy, health, food and water. The report shows how the growing openness of the global R&I system has enhanced the importance of international collaboration, and has become a crucial factor in accessing new sources of knowledge and improving competitiveness. The Post-2015 Development Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals,. The Barcelona Process launched in November 1995 at the initiative of the Euro-Mediterranean Foreign Ministers, and the related Communication "Barcelona Process: Union for the Mediterranean"(COM(2008)319), which was adopted by the Commission on 20 May 2008 and established a multilateral partnership, focusing on regional and trans-national projects. The Communication "Enhancing and focusing EU international cooperation in R&I: a strategic approach" (COM(2012)497final) adopted by the Commission on 14 September 2012, which establishes a focus on fostering integration into – or alignment with – the European Research Area (ERA) for the Neighbourhood. Regarding Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the initiative is consistent with Article 37 on "Environmental protection: "A high level of environmental protection and the improvement of the quality of the environment must be integrated into the policies of the Union and ensured in accordance with the principle of sustainable development".



4.Section 4. What are the different options to achieve the objectives? 4.1.Analysis of the possible options Several policy options are available to meet the objectives identified above. These options differ in terms of scope, geographical coverage and instrument used. As regards the scope of possible actions, the following options were identified: Actions covering R&I activities related to water provision; Actions covering R&I activities related to food systems; Actions covering R&I activities integrating water provision and food systems. As regards the geographical coverage of possible actions, the following options were identified: Actions with EU Member States; Actions with EU Member States and third countries associated to Horizon 2020 ("Associated third countries"); Actions with EU Member States, Associated third countries and non-Associated third counties.

As regards possible approaches, the following options were identified: 1.No dedicated EU action ("Baseline scenario" - No policy change). 2.Support to coordination between Participating States (public-public partnerships) on the basis of specific grant-based support from Horizon 2020 with: ERA-NET Cofund actions, where the Union would co-fund one joint call for proposals leading to the funding of trans-national research and/or innovation projects; European Joint Programme Cofund actions, where the Union would support the implementation of a joint programme of activities of governmental research organisations. 3.Support to integration between Participating States (public-public partnerships) on the basis of Article 185, where the Union participates in programmes undertaken by several EU Member States, and where that participation is justified by the scope of the objectives and the scale of the resources required. 4.Support to Public-Private Partnerships (PPP), set up between the Union and stakeholders from the private sector, in accordance with Article 187 TFEU, where all partners concerned commit to supporting the development and implementation of pre-competitive R&I activities of strategic importance for the Union's competitiveness and industrial leadership or for addressing specific societal challenges. 4.2.Options discarded at an early stage A screening of all these options was undertaken based on Tool #14 of the Better Regulation Toolbox (Annex 6). Many options do not fulfil most key criteria related to legal and political feasibility and relevance. As regards scope, options involving only water provision or only food systems were discarded at an early stage because of considerations related to relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and political feasibility. Options not covering both issues together would not be relevant enough to address a problem that is essentially of a cross-sectoral nature and requires an integrated approach. As regards geographical coverage, options involving only EU Member States were discarded at an early stage due to considerations related to legal and political feasibility as well as relevance, as the problem identified concerns the complete Mediterranean area, which requires the involvement of Mediterranean third countries associated to Horizon 2020 and third countries not associated to Horizon 2020. Without the participation of both associated and non-associated third countries, it would not be possible to achieve critical mass in terms of knowledge and financial resources on both sides of the Mediterranean. The non-EU countries have important R&I capabilities and have made substantial financial commitments. As for possible approaches, some options have been discarded at an early stage on the basis of legal and political feasibility, effectiveness and efficiency, as well as relevance: European Joint Programme Cofund would not allow addressing the full range of stakeholders, as it would be limited to selected governmental research organisations. The political feasibility would be low. EJP Cofund would provide little support to common long-term R&I agendas, little support to National alignment, create only a limited critical mass of actors and resources and would provide no support to Strengthening innovation capabilities, thus not meet the relevance requirements. For Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) the preconditions are not met (Industrial leadership and its strong financial commitment). There is no political support from the Participating States for this approach. Furthermore PPPs would not necessarily provide support to a common long-term R&I agenda of the Participating States, or to the alignment of national activities, thus not meeting the relevance requirements. 4.3.Retained policy options On the basis of the options screening undertaken, the following policy options have been retained: Option 0: No dedicated EU action ("Baseline scenario" - No policy change)

Option 1: ERA-NET Cofund actions Option 2: PRIMA Joint Programme based on Article 185 TFEU Option 0: No dedicated EU action ("Baseline scenario" - No policy change) Under the baseline scenario, which consists of no dedicated EU action under Horizon 2020, usual calls for R&I proposals would continue, and Participating States would continue to implement national activities, mostly in a bottom-up manner with little orientation towards the challenge identified. No support for coordination and collaboration between Participating States at programme level would be ensured. The main elements of this Option 0, as already described in detail in Section 1.4, can be summarised as follows: No dedicated EU action targeting specifically Water and Food in the Mediterranean; Horizon 2020 will continue supporting R&I on Water and Food issues in general and ad-hoc; Projects (indirect actions) will be selected from open calls for proposals, mainly for R&I Actions and Innovation actions, within Horizon 2020, some of which may or may not involve beneficiaries from the Mediterranean area; The beneficiaries would be any legal entity eligible for funding (in accordance with Article 10 of Framework Programme Regulation), typically research organizations and private companies; Individual actions would typically last 3-4 years. Option 1: ERA-NET Cofund actions The EU could intervene through Horizon 2020 ERA-NET Cofund actions, which support the coordination of national research programmes. The main, compulsory activity of ERA-NET Cofund actions under Horizon 2020 is the implementation of a single co-funded joint call for R&I proposals that results in funding for trans-national research and/or innovation projects. In addition, ERA-NET Cofund actions can also support the preparation and implementation of other joint activities (including additional joint calls without EU cofunding) that contribute to the coordination of national research programmes, such as workshops, meetings and studies. Past and ongoing ERA-NETs relevant to water and food in the Mediterranean area (e.g. ARIMNet2, ERANETMED) have been mentioned in previous sections . In an ERA-NET action, all Participating States (EU and Third Countries) have the same rights and obligations as regulated by the Grant Agreement. The cofunding of the Union has a positive impact on proposal evaluation and selection (international peer review, selection according to excellence) but also maximises the number of proposals that can be supported . The implementation of ERA-NETs relies on existing national programmes. The scope of calls for proposals, the nature of eligible activities, and the type of beneficiaries depend on the applicable national funding rules. The result is that in many countries participating in ERA-NETs, predominantly public research organisations participate in calls. In ERA-NETS in the area of water and food, all participants are public research organizations. Also, only in some areas, ERA-NETs have been established that address the innovation dimension, e.g. MANUNET (with 70% SME participation) or the Horizon 2020 energy ERA-NETs (with a focus on demonstration projects and higher Technology Readiness Levels). The total duration of the action should normally not exceed 5 years. Option 1 would consist of a series of ERA-NET Cofund actions, limited to the remainder of Horizon 2020. They would result in calls being launched by Participating States in the years 2018, 2019 and 2020 respectively. On the basis of past experience with ERA-NETs and Participating State commitments, it can be assumed that Participating States would contribute around €20 million to each call, and that consequently the Union would provide support amounting to €10 million (on the basis of the reimbursement rate, which for ERA-NET Cofund actions is set at 33%). This would lead to a total investment from the Participating States of around €60 million and a Union contribution of €30 million. Option 1 would not allow for addressing substantially the innovation dimension, since the national programmes that would collaborate and coordinate their activities during these three years are mainly addressing research activities of public research organisations. Furthermore, Option 1 is not expected to integrate national funding programmes in a common research strategic agenda. Option 2: PRIMA Joint Programme based on Article 185 TFEU Article 185 TFEU enables the EU to make provision for its participation in research and development programmes undertaken by several Member States, including participation in the structures created for the execution of those programmes. Article 26 of the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme Regulation specifies the conditions and criteria for identifying and proposing an initiative pursuant to Article 185 TFEU. Among other criteria, Article 185 initiatives may only be proposed by the Commission in cases where there is a need for a dedicated implementation structure and where there is a high level of commitment of Participating States to integration at scientific, management and financial levels. In order to submit a proposal, all criteria set out in Article 26(2) of the Horizon 2020 Regulation must be met and the Participating States must demonstrate that they are committed to integrating (rather than coordinating) their R&I efforts by defining and committing themselves to a joint programme. This high level of integration requires a new or pre-existing implementation structure - Dedicated Implementation Structure ('DIS') - that is designated by the Participating States, and entrusted under certain conditions, by the Commission with budget implementation tasks for indirect management purposes and with long-term commitment. The EU would provide financial support by matching under certain conditions Participating States contributions up to a ceiling. It deserves emphasis that Article 185 initiatives have a strong track record with respect to the long-term integration of national and European R&I efforts on common challenges, leverage effects and the delivery of impacts, international leadership and global cooperation, and implementation, budget and sound financial management (Box 3).

BOX 3: The track record of past Article 185 initiatives The experience from past and on-going initiatives from FP6 to Horizon 2020 can be summarised as follows: Long-term integration of national and European efforts on common challenges Article185 initiatives are the only legally possible form to address jointly common challenges in a long-term collaboration between R&I programmes of Member States, with clear up-front financial and political commitments; Art 185 initiatives are policy driven programming activities that ensure through their basic acts a high visibility and recognition among national and EU policy makers; They allow a high degree of scientific, management and financial integration within their narrow borders (in the case of EMPIR, the Article185 initiative on Metrology 50% of all related research in Europe) and wider coordination effects beyond; without the need to institutionalise joint efforts or create large new structures; Article185 initiatives operate on the basis of Annual Work Plans that allow flexible programming according to changing needs and coordination with broader Union and Participating States policy objectives; Leverage effects and delivery on impacts They achieve substantial direct and indirect leverage both in terms of financial resources and overall knowledge gains; Article185 initiatives are designed around clearly specified objectives and targets in order to deliver economic and wider societal impacts, e.g. the Active and Assisted Living Programme (AAL2) accelerating innovative ICT-based solutions for active and healthy ageing; or the European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP2) developing new or improved drugs, vaccines and diagnostics against HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria in sub-Saharan Africa; They disseminate the uptake of good practice in R&I policy design and implementation across Europe and beyond, driven by principles and standards of Horizon 2020; International leadership and global cooperation They have demonstrated the potential to set global R&I agendas and increase visibility of joint European efforts. Article185 initiatives on clinical trials (EDCTP2) or metrology (EMPIR) are perceived as internationally leading programmes; The joint partnership in the governance of EDCTP2 demonstrate the EU leadership in paving the way towards a new model for development cooperation; Implementation, budget and sound financial management The efforts for the preparation, set-up and implementation of Article185 initiatives are high and need to be justified in particular by the scale and scope of the initiatives; The implementation of Article185 initiatives is considered efficient and in line with the requirements of the financial regulation for indirect management of Union funds. The frontloading of the commitments from the EU budget – with the actual fulfilment of matching commitments from Participating States being accounted for in later years – applies in principle to all Article185 initiatives. In the case of BONUS this expanded to the next MFF. This has not compromised the sound financial management of the Union contribution. In case the Participating States contribute less, the Union contribution will be reduced proportionally, with the recovery of any amount unduly paid. Third country participation in Article 185 initiatives

In an Article 185 initiative, all Participating States (EU Member States and third countries) have the same rights (e.g. participation in governing structures with decision-making power) and obligations (e.g. financial contribution) under the relevant basic act. Even though Article 185 TFEU refers specifically to the participation of the EU in programmes undertaken by several EU Member States, it does not preclude the participation of third countries in the Programme. However, depending on the status of these third countries in relation to the EU (especially their legal ties), different requirements have to be met to guarantee involvement on an equal footing of all Participating States. Third countries associated to Horizon 2020 are already allowed to participate in Article 185 initiatives. The text of the specific Horizon 2020 Association Agreement expressly foresees the possibility for an associated third country to participate in various Article 185 initiatives. For the participation of third countries not associated to Horizon 2020 , the following requirements must be fulfilled: -The basic act must contain an opening clause for third countries; -International agreements must be concluded with these countries to allow their participation. The purpose of these international agreements is to extend the legal regime from the EU basic act to the third countries. Article 185 initiatives establish obligations that include financial contributions and financial control. Therefore, mutually agreed mechanisms that guarantee the effective enforcement of rights and obligations on each side are required. These international agreements would have a purely bilateral nature regulating the obligations of third countries vis-à-vis the EU, making direct reference to the basic act. As a consequence, no significant subsequent negotiation for the conclusion of these agreements would be needed. Implementation and management of the PRIMA Joint Programme For an Article 185 initiative, the Horizon 2020 Rules for Participation apply by default (Article 1). Article 185 initiatives under Horizon 2020 are implemented in different ways as regards the management of the Union contribution and the way in which Participating States provide their contributions to the programme. A PRIMA Joint Programme on the basis of Article 185 would be implemented taking full account of good practices in on-going initiatives, which have been analysed in detail in Box 4. The implementation would involve a reinforced version of the approach followed in the case of the Article 185 "European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP2)", involving the matching of Union and Participating State contributions at programme level. Building on the strong commitment of cash contributions from Participating States to the PRIMA Joint Programme, and on their commitment to increasing the integration of national programmes into transnational activities, the main elements of the implementation and management are described in the following paragraphs.



BOX 4 – Implementation and management: Lessons learned from earlier Article 185 initiatives and applied to PRIMA Active and Assisted Living Programme (AAL2) and Eurostars2 (for R&D performing SMEs) Both initiatives make use of decentralised grant management on the basis of national funding rules, with national and Union contributions being paid to projects by National Funding Bodies through national grant agreements. The matching of contributions takes place at project level (grant amount is split between national and Union contribution). While this approach works, it has certain drawbacks: It requires significant derogations from the Horizon 2020 Rules for Participation (e.g. Eurostars: funding rules; AAL: IPR and funding rules); The approach works well with national programmes marked by a high degree of similarity, which is not the case for PRIMA, thus not allowing for deploying a wide range of instruments to achieve objectives; Different national funding rules apply. Beneficiaries are familiar with their national rules (an advantage) but would not fully benefit from the simplification under Horizon 2020. EMPIR (European Metrology Programme for Research and Innovation) The initiative and its implementation are based on National Metrology Institutes (NMIs), which are the main beneficiaries of the programme. Grant management is central, on the basis of the Horizon 2020 Model Grant Agreement. The Union contribution is the only cash contribution to the resulting projects. Participating States contribute mainly in-kind. The matching of contributions takes places at project level, where the Participating States' contribution consists of those indirect costs that are not reimbursed by the DIS. The overall approach and central implementation including grant management work very well. The approach for the matching contributions relies on full-cost accounting (additional requirement compared to Horizon 2020). For PRIMA, this is not appropriate and this for the following reasons: The final beneficiaries will be very heterogeneous in terms of type and practices and it is likely that not all of them will have full cost accounting;

The real indirect costs will only be established after some years of implementation of the initiative, which does not allow for establishing an indicative reimbursement rate. The use of the normal Horizon 2020 rates might lead to substantial recovery orders or drawing on guarantees from Participating States in case their contributions are lower. It would reduce the overall budget of the programme for the funding of new projects compared to the initial intention of Participating States to provide Euro 200 million in cash: the cash contribution would be from the Union and Participating States would contribute only in-kind at the level of projects. EDCTP2 (Article 185 European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership) This is the only initiative where the matching of contributions takes place at programme level: The transnational calls for proposals are financed by the Union contribution, with central grant management on the basis of the H2020 MGA; Participating States contribute mainly with in kind-contributions, the so-called Participating States Initiated Activities (PSIAs). These are included in the Annual Work Plan under certain conditions and implemented in accordance with common principles agreed by the Participating States and the Commission. The Annual Work Plan is subject to approval by the Commission. PSIAs are purely national activities; no transnational collaboration at programme level takes place. The costs of these activities have to be determined in accordance with the usual accounting practices and accounting standards of the Participating States concerned and the applicable International Accounting Standards / International Financial Reporting Standards. Important to recall in comparison to PRIMA is that in EDCTP2 the African countries are not Participating States (third countries) in the basic act. They do, however, participate in the governance of the EDCTP association with the same voting rights. This approach works well, in particular concerning the central management of the Union contributions. There are clear advantages, in particular concerning Participating States' commitments: The Participating States' national activities are aligned with the strategic research agenda for EDCTP2 and all activities include collaboration between Participating States and Sub-Saharan countries. A number of calls or joint activities between several Participating States take place. The commitments expressed so far by the Participating States in the Annual Work Plans 2014-2016 are high and exceed by Euro 400 million the amounts that are necessary to justify the Union contribution. Delivering innovative, integrated R&I solutions through the PRIMA Joint Programme The PRIMA Joint Programme will operate on the basis of a jointly formulated strategic R&I agenda comprising (1) operational objectives, (2) R&I gaps identified, and (3) main expected R&I results. A substantial start has already been made with the formulation of this agenda, as reflected in Table 4.1. Operational Objectives Gaps on R&I Main Expected R&I Results 1. Smart and sustainable farming Overexploitation of natural resources and unsustainable farming New plant genotypes New cropping systems New techniques New tools 2. Water-saving solutions On-farm irrigation inefficiencies Improved irrigation strategies and methods 3. Mediterranean food products Changes in food demand and consequences on food supply chains, nutrition and health Feed/food security and safety Innovation and functional foods Innovation in recipes and ingredients Environmentally friendly solutions 4. Food and water efficiency Food and water losses and wastes Reusing and co-using biomass, by-products, waste, water processing Post-harvest processing Water and energy efficiency 5. Pests and pathogens in farming Animal and plant diseases Better knowledge of pest and disease distribution and their drivers Better pest and disease surveillance methods and networks Pest and disease modelling Better preparedness at the national and regional levels to emerging trans-boundary pest and disease events 6. New agro-business models Business food systems unable to create employment and economic growth Identification of best practices in sustainable business models Eco-friendly Mediterranean food industry, integrating safe and quality food production and ecosystem conservation Premium quality Mediterranean products 7. Land and water sustainability Soil erosion and mismanagement of water cycle at the watershed level Anticipation of the impacts of future changes on resources and societies Test of resilience of natural socio-environmental systems to variability and long term trends impacting land and water New strategies for soil management to provide higher sustainable and productive use Mitigation of salinization processes by combining land conservation and efficient water desalinization and water use from farm to watershed scale New vision of the dynamic management of natural resources, considering simultaneously quantity and quality dimensions 8. Water governance systems Inequitable water allocation and un- sustainable water management New models for the governance of water management systems, including: innovative tools/Decision Support Systems for planning, monitoring and forecasting systems, unconventional water resources New methodological approaches to enhance public and stakeholder involvement and the empowerment of civil society Water sanitation and detoxification in food production Table 4.1: Main R&I outcome of PRIMA Joint Programme This strategic joint R&I agenda will be implemented through a succession of Annual Work Programmes. A clear division of labour will guide the formulation and implementation of these Annual Work Programmes. The EU financial contribution and the national financial contributions will essentially be used for different, but fully complementary, purposes. The EU financial contribution will be focused mainly on R&I activities at higher TRLs. The EU Financial contribution will be managed exclusively by the DIS and used for transnational calls for proposals deploying Horizon 2020 instruments. However, not all Horizon 2020 instruments will be deployed. The EU financial contribution will be used in a highly focused manner. As Table 4.2 shows, the achievement of a number of operational objectives included in the strategic joint R&I agenda involves R&I activities at higher Technology Readiness Levels. These activities at higher Technology Readiness Levels are of crucial importance for the achievement of the PRIMA objectives since they are the most promising in terms of the quick delivery of the innovative, integrated and easily transferable solutions urgently needed to address the unsustainable management of water provision and food systems in the Mediterranean area. These activities are also the most demanding in financial terms and the most demanding in terms of complementary knowledge requirements and in terms of public-private stakeholder involvement needed for quick valorisation and dissemination of results. This is why there are most effectively and efficiently supported through the EU financial contribution.

Table 4.2: Technological Readiness Levels (TRLs) Concretely, the EU financial contribution will be mainly used to support pilots and demonstrators. R&I activities at higher Technology Readiness Levels inevitably involve close-to-market pilots and demonstrators that can test adequately real life solutions. The EU financial contribution will therefore be focused on a limited number (5 to 10) of such pilots and demonstrators in strategically identified and carefully assessed areas. On the other hand, national financial contributions will be focused on R&I activities at lower Technology Readiness Levels, on mobility and training actions, on networking activities, etc. The Annual Work Plans (AWP) will ensure the consistency between all activities and their orientat